The Tin Can Millionaire

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

It is more complicated than that, London 30 years ago was cheap but was it desirable was it nice did it have a future?

Back then the talk was of how to manage London decline




no, you said all you had to do was save a tenner a day and buy a terrace house outright and wait to 2015 to be a millionaire but now that option is gone thanks to the immigrants. I said well if there was no immigrants that option would not have been there anyway as the million pound terrace would probably be half the price

my original response was just a light hearted response to a light hearted post but which did implicited illustrated that £10 a day, in 1975 was actually a lot of money.
Thereafter the discussion changed somewhat to the undesirability of high London houses prices (for the young) and their cause.

CKhalvashi

CLAPTON wrote: »

many ideas and points of view are conceivable but there can be no debate if you simply see the issue as one of racism.

I posted something reasonable and (IMO) constuctive in the 3rd and 4th paragraph.

CLAPTON wrote: »

my original response was just a light hearted response to a light hearted post but which did implicited illustrated that £10 a day, in 1975 was actually a lot of money.
Thereafter the discussion changed somewhat to the undesirability of high London houses prices (for the young) and their cause.

£10 a day to someone on NMW is a lot of money now.

The main issue with London house prices are that parts of London even 10 years ago I wouldn't have touched with a barge pole are now seen as desirable.

I used to live in Ealing, which in the last few years has seemed to have deteriorated, despite house prices going through the roof. My old house sold for £875000 in 2013, and £995000 earlier this year, which for a 3 bedroom mid-terrace is unaffordable for anyone not on a £100k/year joint income. We paid £325k for it on a £40k-ish joint income in 2004, showing that in the space of 10 years house prices in London have approximately trebled, whilst incomes certainly haven't.

cells

CKhalvashi wrote: »

I posted something reasonable and (IMO) constuctive in the 3rd and 4th paragraph.



£10 a day to someone on NMW is a lot of money now.

The main issue with London house prices are that parts of London even 10 years ago I wouldn't have touched with a barge pole are now seen as desirable.

I used to live in Ealing, which in the last few years has seemed to have deteriorated, despite house prices going through the roof. My old house sold for £875000 in 2013, and £995000 earlier this year, which for a 3 bedroom mid-terrace is unaffordable for anyone not on a £100k/year joint income. We paid £325k for it on a £40k-ish joint income in 2004, showing that in the space of 10 years house prices in London have approximately trebled, whilst incomes certainly haven't.

They are up 81% over the last 10 years according to the land registry data.

Some places will be more some places less. Generally inner London has done better than outer London. Eg hackney is up 130% over the decade while Enfield is up 56%

Personally I feel London was under priced in 2000. Eg in Jan 2000 the average house price in Waltham Forest was just £107k which effectively valued the land of that borough at zero or close to it.

Today 16 years on with prices closer to £400k in that borough prices are maybe too high but they were too low in 2000

PasturesNew

CLAPTON wrote: »

.... £10 a day, in 1975 was actually a lot of money....

I think my earnings in about that year (certainly in 1976) were £27/week takehome. 84p/hour. Role: Temporary/Agency Shorthand Secretary.

The bus cost 50p return to get to/from town.

Rent as a lodger was £15 for a tiny/single room in a 2-up-2-down terraced house that you found in the local newspaper small ads column.