'We've reached a tipping point' Signs of house price weakness

Rota

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Yawn, if you read the thread. Nobody has cheered on unsustainable HPI, If you read the thread again you may notice that crashy has cheered on a housing crash...... P.S I wouldn't call it rudeness either, I would call it an adequate response to trolling from crashy.

Crashy got off real light.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Blooloo wrote: »

As I said upstream, it is stupid to ascertain buying is always the right path for every individual at all times.

It clearly isnt, and some people have no choice.

Money is not at the heart of most peoples thinking, but some of the greedy so and sos here see that profit is the goal for everyone, and woe betide people who talk of losses as a fact of life...which they are for some.

Good luck to you all.

1, do you agree if deciding so stay in the same property for a sustained period of time I.e over 10yrs buying is always the better option financially?

2, I would imagine most posters would think it's rude to call people greedy so &so's...... Thought I would point out your hypocritical stance.

Blooloo

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Yawn, if you read the thread. Nobody has cheered on unsustainable HPI, If you read the thread again you may notice that crashy has cheered on a housing crash...... P.S I wouldn't call it rudeness either, I would call it an adequate response to trolling from crashy.

I didnt say they had cheered...(then again calling people losers is a form of cheering I suppose)...I did say there has been an assignment of state of mind...and worse, namecalling of, who it would appear, are sincere posters.

and yet when evidence of an insincere poster is brought to light, it is seen as gloating and even the consideration of banning the offender is suddenly a sign ruthless control.

I wouldnt want to enter into debate with a known fabricator of fact..it is pointless as all he has to do is lie to "prove" his point. better to halt posting as it can bring frustration to posters unaware of the status. Personally, I would assign Troll Status rather than ban, but then again, its not my website.

Blooloo

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

1, do you agree if deciding so stay in the same property for a sustained period of time I.e over 10yrs buying is always the better option financially?

2, I would imagine most posters would think it's rude to call people greedy so &so's...... Thought I would point out your hypocritical stance.

are you denying some people arent greedy so and sos, that needed legislation to force them to hand over the service renters were paying for?

Your first point is not making any addition to the debate as you either deliberately miss, or simply cant see, that the point I make is that the individual circumstance is what would decide which way to go is most likely to satisfy the needs of the individual case.

yes, it could be better to buy, and yes it could be better to rent. There is no black and white answer, although posters on this thread continue to insist there is.

As for Hypocracy, name the posters I have labelled greedy so and sos.

gbsilp

wotsthat wrote: »

I assumed you were downsizing because you want a smaller place/ release equity rather than entering a house price gamble with a partial hedge against the upside?

I popped over to HPC earlier - the crash has been postponed until after the school holidays now. As long as you can get yours away before the kids go back you'll be laughing.

I'm downsizing mainly because we don't need the space (family of 3 and a dog). I could buy another house the same size or larger in the hope of leveraging further HPI nominal gains, but as I am on the cusp of a stamp duty threshold, I see limited gains for my type of property.

Also, downsizing to lock in some hpi gains at these prices doesn't seem unreasonable to me, I can still ride hpi up again if it continues. If prices go down, that doesn't really matter to me either as housing equity does not play a role in my retirement.

Also, extracting some equity allows me to pay less income tax as I won't have to extract dividends above the 40% threshold from my company to live off for the next few years. There's all sorts of tax asymmetries to consider when you look at house prices in real terms.

Blooloo

mystic_trev wrote: »

There are far more 'loons' on HPC than any other site that discuss House Prices. I see the Moderators have kicked the posting into the long grass and PPR'd the poster. Nothing like an 'open forum' :rotfl:

so, in one breath they have far more loons, and yet kick one off and they are a closed forum?

which is it? either there arent many loons because they are removed, or its really open and loons are allowed to thrive.

What fine line would you like to see?

Blooloo

gbsilp wrote: »

I'm downsizing mainly because we don't need the space (family of 3 and a dog). I could buy another house the same size or larger in the hope of leveraging further HPI nominal gains, but as I am on the cusp of a stamp duty threshold, I see limited gains for my type of property.

Also, downsizing to lock in some hpi gains at these prices doesn't seem unreasonable to me, I can still ride hpi up again if it continues. If prices go down, that doesn't really matter to me either as housing equity does not play a role in my retirement.

Also, extracting some equity allows me to pay less income tax as I won't have to extract dividends above the 40% threshold from my company to live off for the next few years. There's all sorts of tax asymmetries to consider when you look at house prices in real terms.

you will get gains downsizing whichever way the market turns.

gbsilp

Blooloo wrote: »

you will get gains downsizing whichever way the market turns.

I believe so. It's all about the positive convexity.....

wotsthat

Blooloo wrote: »

you will get gains downsizing whichever way the market turns.

The gains are from not paying rent and chunk of (tax free) HPI landing in the bank meaning bills can be paid from tax free income rather than income on which 40% tax has been paid.

Bet he wishes he'd rented

carslet

Blooloo wrote: »

In all fairness, he claimed to be a first time buyer when a previous posting he made claims he wasnt..he was a seller before the FTB purchase he was posting about.

So, he is either a loon posting random posts or just liar trying to make a VI case. Certainly a poster not to get into debate with.

from what i read he was posting about selling a car not a house he was taking the p***

but the loons on there did not read it all just started shouting :rotfl: