Is it really that hard?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That's clearly not what I said.

You were going on about giving up on living in a darkened room to save 6 months on a 10 year deposit saving plan. How do people give up on something they weren't doing anyway?

If someone is mad keen on buying and willing to live like a monk in a darkened room they'll be sorted in short order. If you really want to buy a house and it'll take 10 years to save a deposit you're not trying.

BTW iphone jibes are a metaphor - they shouldn't be taken too literally.

Samsonite1

wotsthat wrote: »

BTW iphone jibes are a metaphor - they shouldn't be taken too literally.

Exactly, thank you!

princeofpounds

You know the ironic thing is that for all the talk of aspiring for the 'ragged crusts' of housing, there is a simple truth that rarely gets considered.

Governments (both Tory and Labour, local and national) and the voting population that backs them, are the ones that, through nimby policies, have ensured that only ragged crusts are left.

Most working young people could easily afford to build a family home. It only costs 150k or so. They can afford to buy plenty of land too. The only thing they are not permitted to do is build on the damn stuff.

Those who bought up the cake and wholesome loaves years ago are now quite happy to deny young people the right to bake flour and water. It's pretty disgusting really, when you stop to reflect on it.

Things are changing though. The coalition was the first government to try to slightly loosen the padlock on the oven door (to push the metaphor). Unless something changes I think the pressure will build and build as the disenfranchised realise that it is only the stroke of a planner's pen that stops them from being able to raise a family in adequate housing.

ukcarper

princeofpounds wrote: »

You know the ironic thing is that for all the talk of aspiring for the 'ragged crusts' of housing, there is a simple truth that rarely gets considered.

Governments (both Tory and Labour, local and national) and the voting population that backs them, are the ones that, through nimby policies, have ensured that only ragged crusts are left.

Most working young people could easily afford to build a family home. It only costs 150k or so. They can afford to buy plenty of land too. The only thing they are not permitted to do is build on the damn stuff.

Those who bought up the cake and wholesome loaves years ago are now quite happy to deny young people the right to bake flour and water. It's pretty disgusting really, when you stop to reflect on it.

Things are changing though. The coalition was the first government to try to slightly loosen the padlock on the oven door (to push the metaphor). Unless something changes I think the pressure will build and build as the disenfranchised realise that it is only the stroke of a planner's pen that stops them from being able to raise a family in adequate housing.

How many existing homeowners live in places where nimbys are rife I think you might be surprised to find that most of us live in very built up areas and I can't remember any nimby polices in any manifestos.

princeofpounds

Nimbyism isn't just about building large estates in the green shires you know.

Built up areas are probably even more of a problem. Very basic planning policies, such as not being allowed to subdivide buildings, demanding every property is 'in keeping' with its neighbour (thereby freezing rooflines and density forever), rules against so-called garden grabbing etc.

No, this stuff hasn't been in national manifestos much, though it has often been the absolute foundation stone of many local election campaigns.

I'm not singling anyone out for blame as such, it is the fault of the country as a whole.

ukcarper

princeofpounds wrote: »

Nimbyism isn't just about building large estates in the green shires you know.

Built up areas are probably even more of a problem. Very basic planning policies, such as not being allowed to subdivide buildings, demanding every property is 'in keeping' with its neighbour (thereby freezing rooflines and density forever), rules against so-called garden grabbing etc.

No, this stuff hasn't been in national manifestos much, though it has often been the absolute foundation stone of many local election campaigns.

I'm not singling anyone out for blame as such, it is the fault of the country as a whole.

You seem to be, I don't know where you live but where I live now and where I was bought up has had a lot of garden grabbing building on every bit of available land and family houses pulled down to build flats.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

You seem to be, I don't know where you live but where I live now and where I was bought up has had a lot of garden grabbing building on every bit of available land and family houses pulled down to build flats.

is this a half full story
or a half empty story?

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

is this a half full story
or a half empty story?

I'd say totally full mind you there is a fairly large commercial property that's has been empty for 2 years that could be demolished and replaces with housing it's adjacent to a large estate.

ess0two

Cornucopia wrote: »

I don't think anyone is trying to "ridicule the youth for their supposed failures".

What we are saying (some of us) is:-

a) There are ways to afford to buy property by being more flexible. Being unrealistic doesn't help.

b) It isn't the fault of previous generations, and it is unfair to say it is.

c) As a general rule of life, it is better to act positively than to waste time and effort whinging.

Speak to anyone aspiring to get on the ladder now,they want what their parents took years to achieve straight from the start.


Long faces also if they can't afford a holiday,new furniture or change the car every few years.

MARTYM8`

ess0two wrote: »

Speak to anyone aspiring to get on the ladder now,they want what their parents took years to achieve straight from the start.


Long faces also if they can't afford a holiday,new furniture or change the car every few years.

If only they didn't spend all their money on ipads they could afford that 4 bedroom detached house they want immediately. Yes - we know!

My parents bought their house in London on one and a half times an average London salary mortgage in the early 1970s - their house now costs 16 times the average London salary and its hardly in that glamorous an area but just standard suburban zone 4.

I spoke to my mum recently about this - and she wondered how much deposit you would need to buy their home now. She thought maybe £5k - when I told her more like £50k+ plus a combined salary of probably £80k+ she nearly fell off her chair. That I think perhaps illustrates the lack of perception - which is not uncommon.


But carry on with the delusion - no one says it was easy in the past but at least there was the chance to aspire to a 4 bed detached house on an average salary rather than spend years scrapping a deposit together to buy a one bed flat!