House Prices Up....

p1212

ukcarper wrote: »

100 year mortgages and 20x earnings haven't and won't happen. Student debt is written off and not all cities have high price to wage ratios.

Ahh, so you want to deport all poor young people to the less desirable areas hundreds of miles away from London, so they don't interfere with the wealth... They don't deserve to live in London as they are not willing to work 4 times harder to pay the nice profit for the ones being already there. So they all need to be deported to Wales. Nice plan, I am sure they will all move there just like that.

Or will they just change regulations so they can build their houses? Or will they just say what Vancouver just said, 15% tax on foreign purchases?

So many questions...

ukcarper

p1212 wrote: »

Ahh, so you want to deport all poor young people to the less desirable areas hundreds of miles away from London, so they don't interfere with the wealth... They don't deserve to live in London as they are not willing to work 4 times harder to pay the nice profit for the ones being already there. So they all need to be deported to Wales. Nice plan, I am sure they will all move there just like that.

Or will they just change regulations so they can build their houses? Or will they just say what Vancouver just said, 15% tax on foreign purchases?

So many questions...

If you have as much money as you say you could easily buy my house and commute. It's not 4x more expensive only compared to the low in mid 90s.

It's you that say that's what I want just because I don't agree with your conspiracy theory's doesn't mean I'm happy for prices have increased so much in London.

mwpt

p1212 wrote: »

Ahh, so you want to deport all poor young people to the less desirable areas hundreds of miles away from London, so they don't interfere with the wealth... They don't deserve to live in London as they are not willing to work 4 times harder to pay the nice profit for the ones being already there. So they all need to be deported to Wales. Nice plan, I am sure they will all move there just like that.

This is a really bizarre post. The only thing we can deal with is reality, not some fairytale story where everything we wish for is true. Do you expect to be able to live in a penthouse in Mayfair? I doubt it and not many people do expect that because there are only so many penthouses in Mayfair and people with lots of money want them. The same thing applies at every level. I can't afford to buy a house in Wimbledon village (I could afford to rent there though) so I had to buy in a less desirable area. If someone can't afford to buy in my current area, then they will have to buy in an even lower priced area, until you get to the point where certain people would be better off just working in a cheaper city where wages are not quite as good but they could afford to buy a house.

This is all just the way the world works, it isn't anything about social cleansing policies or something.

p1212

ukcarper wrote: »

If you have as much money as you say you could easily buy my house and commute. It's not 4x more expensive only compared to the low in mid 90s.

It's you that say that's what I want just because I don't agree with your conspiracy theory's doesn't mean I'm happy for prices have increased so much in London.

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's not a secret, even Carney and Osborne identified BTL as a risk to financial stability multiple times and started the tightening.

I suppose they actually did not want this to happen, they just wanted a bit more transactions, a bit more construction so GDP goes up, but they underestimated the stupidity and greed of people, hence they managed to create the biggest bubble ever in London.

AnotherJoe

pop_gun wrote: »

You take the facts regarding property being a financial investment and offer an opinion to counter it. No amount of opinion will override the fact properties are viewed as investment vehicles.

If house prices are rising faster in my area than they are in yours. Then providing I wanted to move to your area, I could sell up and do so.

Those with mortgages who have either secured credit against their property or remortgaged and have little to no equity and are struggling to make repayments are the norm. Not the exception.
House repossessions are at record low levels. But the fact there are repossessions in this environment of forebearance and easy credit is a cause for concern. It highlights the unaffordability issue and the rush to buy mind set of those who don't want to get left behind.

I don't know where you get your stats from to prove that, sounds very unlikely to me or there would be very high, not low, repos.

But all the above anyway equally applies to people renting who haven't even got the ability to take some equity out when their house is repossessed.

And since round here anyway, rent is more than mortgages,so renting would put you in a worse position.

There are glass half full, glass half empty types, you are a empty glass and haven't even got a glass type I can see. Bending every spurious argument you can think of to prove buying a house is a bad idea, presumably to justify your own bad decision not to buy ten or twenty years ago,,

p1212

mwpt wrote: »

This is a really bizarre post. The only thing we can deal with is reality, not some fairytale story where everything we wish for is true. Do you expect to be able to live in a penthouse in Mayfair? I doubt it and not many people do expect that because there are only so many penthouses in Mayfair and people with lots of money want them. The same thing applies at every level. I can't afford to buy a house in Wimbledon village (I could afford to rent there though) so I had to buy in a less desirable area. If someone can't afford to buy in my current area, then they will have to buy in an even lower priced area, until you get to the point where certain people would be better off just working in a cheaper city where wages are not quite as good but they could afford to buy a house.

This is all just the way the world works, it isn't anything about social cleansing policies or something.

So if population is increasing in London why exactly cannot we build on the vast agricultural areas within and around the M25?

What use we have from having agricultural fields right next to millions of jobs, instead of building houses there and letting people live where jobs are and do the agriculture thing a bit further out?

MobileSaver

p1212 wrote: »

Ahh, so you want to deport all poor young people to the less desirable areas hundreds of miles away from London, so they don't interfere with the wealth...

Life is so unfair isn't it. Of course poor young people should be entitled to a nice cheap four bed detached house with large garden in central London, it's their human right innit.

When my girlfriend and I were poor and young, for our first house we had to make do with a two up two down terrace in a not very nice town centre with no central heating, no double glazing and indeed no cooker. The yoof of today would probably complain such a place wasn't fit for human habitation.

What is it with this sense of entitlement in so many people today?!?!?

AnotherJoe

p1212 wrote: »

So if population is increasing in London why exactly cannot we build on the vast agricultural areas within and around the M25?

What use we have from having agricultural fields right next to millions of jobs, instead of building houses there and letting people live where jobs are and do the agriculture thing a bit further out?

How about moving the jobs out instead? Make use of existing housing stock and brownfield sites, revitalise poorer areas, avoid contributing to the vicious spiral of congestion and increasing prices in London that so concerns you.

p1212

AnotherJoe wrote: »

How about moving the jobs out instead? Make use of existing housing stock and brownfield sites, revitalise poorer areas, avoid contributing to the vicious spiral of congestion and increasing prices in London that so concerns you.

Making it possible to build on agricultural areas is very easy, you can do it overnight, but how exactly do you "move the jobs"?

p1212

MobileSaver wrote: »

Life is so unfair isn't it. Of course poor young people should be entitled to a nice cheap four bed detached house with large garden in central London, it's their human right innit.

When my girlfriend and I were poor and young, for our first house we had to make do with a two up two down terrace in a not very nice town centre with no central heating, no double glazing and indeed no cooker. The yoof of today would probably complain such a place wasn't fit for human habitation.

What is it with this sense of entitlement in so many people today?!?!?

Yes, exactly as the boomers.

Today you have no chance doing that with the same jobs you had at that time.