We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Should we listen to the Nordics?
Comments
-
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »...You never learn.....:o
in fairness i wouldn't be overly surprised if a couple of estate agents on an internet forum endlessly rehashing the same old highly biased, unbalanced, distorted, over-emotive set of arguments ad nauseam didn't make for ideal "learn"-ing conditions.FACT.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Maybe. But you are comparing a one off, extreme point in time, which, I must add, led to a massive amount of reposessions and concluding it should therefore be normal today to be sailing that close to the wind.
.
when did we have a massive amount (sic) of repossessions?0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Secondly, who does it benefit really to have such a large proprtion of incomes going directly on mortgage payments? Surely it would be better for everyone, families, business etc to have some money left over to spend on other goods and services, benefitting the whole of the economy rather than just one aspect.
Preventing people obtaining a mortgage won't make them better off. They'll just pay the same amount to a landlord, but forever rather than 25 years.If I don't reply to your post,
you're probably on my ignore list.0 -
Preventing people obtaining a mortgage won't make them better off. They'll just pay the same amount to a landlord, but forever rather than 25 years.
And allowing prices to get higher and higher simply means they will pay more to landlords and the benefit bill will forever increase. It's doubled in just the last 10 years to £25-26bn a year now.
It's a very bad argument.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »allowing prices to get higher and higher
Prices are getting higher and higher primarily because of the failure to build enough houses.
As the article about Norway notes....
"the fundamental problem is not to do with mortgages but is one of supply of housing.
There simply isn’t enough to accommodate a growing population - a very familiar problem here in the UK."
Yet still you want to implement mortgage rationing policies that have been proven to worsen the shortage of housing.
We repeatedly warned you this would happen.
That credit rationing was just "kicking the can", and worsening the housing shortage that is the root cause of high prices.
But now you want to repeat the same mistakes all over again....:(“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »And allowing prices to get higher and higher simply means they will pay more to landlords and the benefit bill will forever increase. It's doubled in just the last 10 years to £25-26bn a year now.
It's a very bad argument.
There is currently a limited supply of houses.
The cost of buying is the same for both landlord or prospective owner. But if you rent you pay the cost of the house plus the landlord's profit.
If you restrict mortgages you'll just allow rich landlords to buy up houses young people would have bought.
Frankly you'd be better off directing your energies to the real problem, not enough houses.If I don't reply to your post,
you're probably on my ignore list.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »It's yet more pressure to do something about the housing market, but I ask if we should listen as they speak from experience not only of the issues, but putting policy to address the issues in place.
Unlike other countries the UK still appears to live a world where there's a money tree at the bottom of the garden. Despite the coalitions stated aims in 2010. Rebalancing of the economy is still a long way off.0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »Unlike other countries the UK still appears to live a world where there's a money tree at the bottom of the garden. Despite the coalitions stated aims in 2010. Rebalancing of the economy is still a long way off.
what has a money tree have to do with rebalancing the economy?0 -
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »Do we really want to be going around in circles?
You're constantly trying to treat symptoms rather than the disease.
We could, say, cut mortgage lending to 2x income and 60% LTV's.
Who would benefit from these lower prices?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards