Homes in the UK still very cheap/affordable

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

Very much more.
I've posted links in the past about how London-headquartered parties have deliberately suppressed the growth of rival centres such as Birmingham. Policies like this need to stop, and the sooner the better.

so basically the labour party seriously damaged Birmingham

steampowered

CLAPTON wrote: »

so basically the labour party seriously damaged Birmingham

Do you want to abolish the greenbelt, then? Because stopping factories from building on green belt land is essentially what the article is complaining about.

The rest of the article is a bit ridiculous to be honest. It seems to be trying to suggest that the 1964 government was responsible for crap architecture in Birmingham. Crap architecture is hardly unique to Birmingham (ever seen the 1960s towerblocks in London?) and hardly the responsibility of Westminster politicians who aren't architects designing buildings.

MobileSaver

CLAPTON wrote: »

I think that we should, in practice, treat people who are UK citizens differently from the other 7,940,000,000 people of the world.

don't you agree?

No, I don't agree at all.

I don't believe we should treat all UK citizens the same and don't believe we should necessarily treat the other 7,940,000,000 people of the world differently.

If I'm hiring someone to run one of my businesses then I will base that on who is best suited for the job; only a fool or a racist would discriminate between two otherwise similarly-suitable people based solely on the country they happened to have been born in.

CLAPTON

MobileSaver wrote: »

No, I don't agree at all.

I don't believe we should treat all UK citizens the same and don't believe we should necessarily treat the other 7,940,000,000 people of the world differently.

If I'm hiring someone to run one of my businesses then I will base that on who is best suited for the job; only a fool or a racist would discriminate between two otherwise similarly-suitable people based solely on the country they happened to have been born in.

well, firstly every single country in the world, without exception treats their own citizens differently from all the others.
Distinguishing between people who are citizens of a country from those who are not, is indeed discrimination, but it is NOT based on race.
Only a moments reflection will show the madness of treating all people equally.


I am not suggesting that your personal selfish interest may well diverge from those of the welfare of the majority.

GreatApe

cells wrote: »

:T

bump for the crazies that call this a housing crisis

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

:T

bump for the crazies that call this a housing crisis

How much could a single person on average earnings in south east borrow, not enough.

Windofchange

Ok, so to get your nice affordable numbers you have had to take a 30 year mortgage rather than the standard 25. Assuming that the figures are correct and not fiddled otherwise, the author has also used the median as opposed to average. This in effect takes out all the very high and more importantly here, very low earners from the equation. This gives a very skewed version of affordability as for instance who here thinks that the average male in the North East takes home £28,116 per annum before tax? Ditto with Scotland - who thinks the average Scot takes home a shade under £30,000 per annum pre tax? And even in London, we reckon the average Londoner is earning £38,028 per year?

I'm not sure what you are hoping to achieve by digging up this old thread, but delve a bit deeper into that table and you're not proving the point you think you are about affordability.

ukcarper

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok, so to get your nice affordable numbers you have had to take a 30 year mortgage rather than the standard 25. Assuming that the figures are correct and not fiddled otherwise, the author has also used the median as opposed to average. This in effect takes out all the very high and more importantly here, very low earners from the equation. This gives a very skewed version of affordability as for instance who here thinks that the average male in the North East takes home £28,116 per annum before tax? Ditto with Scotland - who thinks the average Scot takes home a shade under £30,000 per annum pre tax? And even in London, we reckon the average Londoner is earning £38,028 per year?

I'm not sure what you are hoping to achieve by digging up this old thread, but delve a bit deeper into that table and you're not proving the point you think you are about affordability.

I believe he used median earnings from ONS it which case if his figures are correct 50% of male full time earners in the north east earn more than £2343 a month.

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok, so to get your nice affordable numbers you have had to take a 30 year mortgage rather than the standard 25. Assuming that the figures are correct and not fiddled otherwise, the author has also used the median as opposed to average. This in effect takes out all the very high and more importantly here, very low earners from the equation. This gives a very skewed version of affordability as for instance who here thinks that the average male in the North East takes home £28,116 per annum before tax? Ditto with Scotland - who thinks the average Scot takes home a shade under £30,000 per annum pre tax? And even in London, we reckon the average Londoner is earning £38,028 per year?

I'm not sure what you are hoping to achieve by digging up this old thread, but delve a bit deeper into that table and you're not proving the point you think you are about affordability.

you are thinking of it the wrong way which is why you are always baffled why YOU think prices are too high. its about the marginal buyer who can afford to buy. so average is meaningless. even median is meaningless and you should only look at those who are in the market to buy.

GDB2222

A single person in London is paying nearly 75% of take-home pay on his mortgage. That leaves him around £600 per month to pay his council tax (roughly £200) + travel card (£200) + running the house (£200), and nothing for anything else.

Labelling this as "expensive" must count as the understatement of the year. Still, if you can't afford food, it won't be expensive for long.

Someone in the South East, ie outside London, has lower housing costs but is likely to have much higher travel costs. So, labelling this 'moderate' is also extremely over-optimistic.

And the figures allow for mortgage interest of 2.5%. What happens if it goes up to 4.5%?

I can't speak for most of the rest of the country. If earnings really are as stated, then I agree that house prices are affordable.