Are the property bears relieving themselves in the woods ?

gbsilp

padington wrote: »

If the price halved across the land , the nation would lose the best 50% of its equity, have you any idea what the implications of that would be ?

Hence why a law halving property prices is as rare as a bear with a clean bum.

If property prices doubled over night on the other hand, the nation would enjoy a welcome spike of prosperity creating many jobs which would also help pay down the national debt.

We are still massively in the red dont forget. We don't have the option of waving magic wands. There is no free lunch nor will there be.

Invest occordingly.

I guess one implication is that people would have to save up for retirement instead of relying on downsizing and youngsters can get on the ladder whilst having disposable income to save for their own retirement.....

padington

gbsilp wrote: »

I guess one implication is that people would have to save up for retirement instead of relying on downsizing and youngsters can get on the ladder whilst having disposable income to save for their own retirement.....

They wouldn't have a disposable income or be able to enjoy a notion such as retirement because they wouldn't have a job and their government would be broke.

Trick is to increase the price of the cake and ensure a good slice of earned tax goes towards supporting innovation and make more cakes.

gbsilp

padington wrote: »

They wouldn't have a disposable income or be able to enjoy a notion such as retirement because they wouldn't have a job and their government would be broke.

Trick is to increase the price of the cake and ensure a good slice of earned tax goes towards supporting innovation and make more cakes.

How did we cope [x] years ago when house prices were 50% of what they were today?

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

gbsilp wrote: »

How did we cope [x] years ago when house prices were 50% of what they were today?

They didn't drop to that price though, you can't be serious?

Jason74

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

They didn't drop to that price though, you can't be serious?

Right, so the trick is to stop them rising too much in the first place. That makes sense. shame we have a government seemingly determined to do whatever it can to avoid that outcome.

gbsilp

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

They didn't drop to that price though, you can't be serious?

In 2000, they were a 1/3 of the current price......

Jason74

padington wrote: »

If the price halved across the land , the nation would lose the best 50% of its equity, have you any idea what the implications of that would be ?

Hence why a law halving property prices is as rare as a bear with a clean bum.

If property prices doubled over night on the other hand, the nation would enjoy a welcome spike of prosperity creating many jobs which would also help pay down the national debt.

We are still massively in the red dont forget. We don't have the option of waving magic wands. There is no free lunch nor will there be.

Invest occordingly.

You're right about the issue around falls, if only from the perspective of the banking sector. For most individuals, "losing" half of their equity (and of course if they have a mortgage of more than 50% of the value of their home, they actually "lose" all of it) would actually be pretty minimal. They'd still be paying the same amount of money to live in the same place. It's only those who want to move who would actually be worse off. For the banking sector, it's potentially another matter, and for that reason alone those kind of falls would be bad news.


But if property prices doubled overnight, that would be the worst possible scenario imho. Worse even than the 50% drop, with all that went with it. You'd be looking at much more effective homelessness, far more people poorly housed, and those who were able to buy (or rent for that matter) largely taken out of any other meaningful economic activity due to high housing costs.


I agree with you that the price of housing is likely to continue to rise. Where I disagree with you is on the desirability of that outcome. Housing is already frighteningly expensive in the UK, and is creating potentially highly damaging long term distortions in the economy. A key priority for any government should be stopping that in its tracks. But here in the UK, we prefer the easy option of creating some free "wealth" and not being too worried about the social consequences.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

gbsilp wrote: »

In 2000, they were a 1/3 of the current price......

Again, are you that stupid? did you not understand the single sentence answer?

padington

Jason74 wrote: »

You're right about the issue around falls, if only from the perspective of the banking sector. For most individuals, "losing" half of their equity (and of course if they have a mortgage of more than 50% of the value of their home, they actually "lose" all of it) would actually be pretty minimal. They'd still be paying the same amount of money to live in the same place. It's only those who want to move who would actually be worse off. For the banking sector, it's potentially another matter, and for that reason alone those kind of falls would be bad news.


But if property prices doubled overnight, that would be the worst possible scenario imho. Worse even than the 50% drop, with all that went with it. You'd be looking at much more effective homelessness, far more people poorly housed, and those who were able to buy (or rent for that matter) largely taken out of any other meaningful economic activity due to high housing costs.


I agree with you that the price of housing is likely to continue to rise. Where I disagree with you is on the desirability of that outcome. Housing is already frighteningly expensive in the UK, and is creating potentially highly damaging long term distortions in the economy. A key priority for any government should be stopping that in its tracks. But here in the UK, we prefer the easy option of creating some free "wealth" and not being too worried about the social consequences.

If my equity disappears, so does my attic conversion. One less bedroom is made and one possible new building job disappears and my mortgage interest rate would shoot up and I would probably sack off my cleaner because of that. The tax man would also receive less money so there would be less money to spend on benefits.

That's just me, imagine if every property owner followed suit ... The adventurous and canny would head overseas to look for work and we will be left with a massive ageing population and no one to wipe their backside or clever enough to fix the mess caused.

Look at it another way ...

Housing is not expensive in Liverpool or Cornwall

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/liverpool/?include_retirement_homes=true&include_shared_ownership=true&new_homes=include&price_max=150000&q=Liverpool&radius=0&results_sort=newest_listings&search_source=refine

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/cornwall/?include_retirement_homes=true&include_shared_ownership=true&new_homes=include&price_max=150000&q=Cornwall&radius=0&results_sort=newest_listings&search_source=refine

Could the real problem be not the price of houses in London but the lack of good jobs and cultural infrastructure elsewhere ?

If London isn't the international money pit helping to turbine elsewhere in the uK what else will ?

There is no easy answer. This is capitalism 1.0 eating itself. There will be an ever growing gap between the rich and the poor.

Land in desirable area's with growing populations will always be increasingly sought after.

High tax states (without a temporary abundance of something hugely desirable) fail. The only solution is global centrally planned capitalism (or global centrally planned Marxism) but we are a long way from either.

It is all f*cked. London property prices will become more like Singapore.

Invest accordingly.

ukcarper

Jason74 wrote: »

You're right about the issue around falls, if only from the perspective of the banking sector. For most individuals, "losing" half of their equity (and of course if they have a mortgage of more than 50% of the value of their home, they actually "lose" all of it) would actually be pretty minimal. They'd still be paying the same amount of money to live in the same place. It's only those who want to move who would actually be worse off. For the banking sector, it's potentially another matter, and for that reason alone those kind of falls would be bad news.


But if property prices doubled overnight, that would be the worst possible scenario imho. Worse even than the 50% drop, with all that went with it. You'd be looking at much more effective homelessness, far more people poorly housed, and those who were able to buy (or rent for that matter) largely taken out of any other meaningful economic activity due to high housing costs.


I agree with you that the price of housing is likely to continue to rise. Where I disagree with you is on the desirability of that outcome. Housing is already frighteningly expensive in the UK, and is creating potentially highly damaging long term distortions in the economy. A key priority for any government should be stopping that in its tracks. But here in the UK, we prefer the easy option of creating some free "wealth" and not being too worried about the social consequences.

Do you really believe your first paragraph.