Government should help those without bank of mum and dad

antrobus

Am I reading this right?

Devenomics asserts that HTB1 is failing to show value for money and that HTB2 is pushing house prices to absurd levels, but wants to see the government launch HTB3?

Graham_Devon

antrobus wrote: »

Am I reading this right?

No.

I haven't asserted anything...... yet, just thrown a question out and then explained in more detail to those who have asked for it.

duchy

Extending any kind of artifical deposit scheme will continue to push house prices higher as prices rely on supply and demand. Do we really need a scheme that will push prices even higher ?

Graham_Devon

CLAPTON wrote: »

so if average terrace is 188,000 what would one reasonably expect a young FTB couple to target? 120,000 say?
how many years is it reasonable to expect a couple to save for a deposit 2, 3, 4, 5 years?

I'm a little confused by what you mean by "what should they be expected to target".

A terrace is about as low as you can go for a family type home. Usuaully consisting of two bedrooms, small lounge, kitchen and bathroom.

So if you are suggesting they target something 30% less than a terraced home, what are you expecting them to target? A studio flat?

You appear to be missing the key issue here. You are going to calculate average wage (possibly 2 average wages) and then suggest they can afford the bsolute lowest property out there.

So where does that leave everyone else in a couple earning slightly less than average wage? Take a family with one earner full time and one part time.

You've diverged from the initial issue massively.

marlot

CLAPTON wrote: »

so if average terrace is 188,000 what would one reasonably expect a young FTB couple to target? 120,000 say?
how many years is it reasonable to expect a couple to save for a deposit 2, 3, 4, 5 years?

I saved three years for the deposit on my first home back in 1989.

Everyone assumes that its all much worse now. Yes, prices were lower relative to earnings, but interest rates (and therefore mortgages) were much higher too. The whole of my wage went on the mortgage; we lived on my wife's (modest) wage.

I can remember similar stories back then - "how will the young be able to buy a house" etc. Be careful what you wish for - there was a house price crash shortly after I bought, which wiped me out completely - I had to sell due to a change of job, and my 2-bed terrace house had lost 33% of its value.

As I said in another thread, we got used to being thrifty. I still take sandwiches to work, make my own coffee, etc. Some of the youngsters I work with spend easily £10-15 on coffee and lunch through the day. That's up to £3k a year. Double that if they both do it. Plus they often arrive in new-ish cars, latest phones, have nights on the town etc. When we first bought a house we had an old second hand TV, no video recorder, no cable TV, mobile phone etc. We didn't eat out for the first few years, no holidays, etc. You had to make sacrifices even then. (1989) - and we were on OK money for the time - me as a software developer, my wife as a teacher.

I've coached some of my young colleagues at work, and it is possible for most of them to save a deposit if they really want to.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm a little confused by what you mean by "what should they be expected to target".

A terrace is about as low as you can go for a family type home. Usuaully consisting of two bedrooms, small lounge, kitchen and bathroom.

So if you are suggesting they target something 30% less than a terraced home, what are you expecting them to target? A studio flat?

Maybe target a terrace that costs 30% less than the average terrace?

CLAPTON

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm a little confused by what you mean by "what should they be expected to target".

A terrace is about as low as you can go for a family type home. Usuaully consisting of two bedrooms, small lounge, kitchen and bathroom.

So if you are suggesting they target something 30% less than a terraced home, what are you expecting them to target? A studio flat?

You appear to be missing the key issue here. You are going to calculate average wage (possibly 2 average wages) and then suggest they can afford the bsolute lowest property out there.

So where does that leave everyone else in a couple earning slightly less than average wage? Take a family with one earner full time and one part time.

You've diverged from the initial issue massively.

A terrace house in London can cost 2 million or more

all terrace houses are not equal : some indeed are 2 small bed, some are 7 bed large houses

one would expect a FTB to target a small terrace house rather than a large terrace house

so if the average terrace in SW is 180,00 one would expect a first time buyer to start with some-one at the bottom end of the market

one doesn't expect the 'average' person to be a FTB: the average person already has a property and so would have equity in their house

one wouldn't expect a FTB to target a family house but a modest starter home;


is that unreasonable?

antrobus

Graham_Devon wrote: »

No.

I haven't asserted anything...... yet, just thrown a question out and then explained in more detail to those who have asked for it.

I see.

So when you say Government should help those without bank of mum and dad you don't mean that the government should help those without bank of mum and dad.

That's good to know.

Idiophreak

If the government were just to butt out and let rich people be rich and poor people be poor, we could all pay so much less tax - we'd all be (relatively) rich!

Seabee42

So are you saying that if the rich owned all the houses they would not "take" every last penny the poor could afford as rent?

Anyways it would be back to the days when the poor children couldn't get an education (since that costs money) and had to work.

Of course the poor would be in their place with no way out. (Not that there is much chance of escaping today).