Homes in the UK still very cheap/affordable

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

I've asked you three questions. As per usual you have gone off on a tangent. I'm not commenting on whether you are right or wrong, whether house prices will rise or fall, I have asked you to reply to three questions. Will you do so?

lol you and your questions :rotfl:

ukcarper

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok, yup, I get you. You are right in saying that 50% must be above - I've had some beers after a long day.

Have a look at the following link for what I am on about - the skew of the dataset.

http://davidmlane.com/hyperstat/A92403.html

I suspect that UK (and regional) wages are negatively skewed i.e. the median value will give a higher number than the mean. This is my point in relation to the original table and it's data.

The ONS publish both mean and median and the median is always lower than mean. It doesn't really matter if the median is higher than the mean it's still the mid point.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

Did you look at his links it's quite interesting it shows the median for 30-34 years olds is higher than median for all.

no I didnt have a look as it was clear he didnt know what he was talking about, having looked now its no surprise to me I have said often that the median and mean is skewed down by children and part time workers who should not be included when talking about house prices, however I should now also say that it looks like it is also skewed down by the retired who earn less too

So all the figures I've posted, which do not strip out the retired or children and kidaults, would look even better even more affordable if you did strip them out

Windofchange

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Hahaha. He just doesn't get it.... no millionaire parents oop North I'm afraid most came from council estates others from the avg working class family. None got a gifted deposit but they all made sacrifices like living at home longer or keeping an older car. Only we took out a 30 yr mortgage so we could get a better property, but we've overpaid by £400pcm. The term length at 30 was decided because if we fall on hard times our minimum payment is lower. It's not rocket science. Why anyone would take out a short term mortgage is beyond me.

Which is why I have said forget all that - I'm not suggesting there are millionaires in every high street, stop imagining things. I am trying to make a point regarding the original table and the fact that it is pretty easy to pick holes with regards to the data.

As another example, why not use single females as opposed to males in the original table? Is that because single females earn less due to socio-economic circumstances, and therefore it doesn't fit the affordability argument?

I'm simply asking for some critical debate of what is presented. I'm not pushing an agenda.

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok, yup, I get you. You are right in saying that 50% must be above - I've had some beers after a long day.

Have a look at the following link for what I am on about - the skew of the dataset.

http://davidmlane.com/hyperstat/A92403.html

I suspect that UK (and regional) wages are negatively skewed i.e. the median value will give a higher number than the mean. This is my point in relation to the original table and it's data.

you would be wrong again. The mean will be higher in all the regions than the median. This is obvious if you actually knew what the two meant rather than spend half a dozen posts proving you dont

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

does anyone think its a good idea to raise multiples one can borrow given that rates are so low and expected to stay low for a while? times have changed any maybe multiples should change too?

I don't think we should use earning multiples at all we need a better system. The problem I see with allowing people to borrow more is that prices will increase to the level where still the same people can buy. The pnly real solution is more property.

Windofchange

GreatApe wrote: »

no I didnt have a look as it was clear he didnt know what he was talking about...

And this pretty much sums up why it is not possible to have an intellectual conversation with you. You present a table, I have a look at it, read your side of the argument and present three questions to you in order to further my understanding of where you are coming from. I am prepared to be wrong - see previous reply to UK carper.

You - I'm not bothering to read anything that opposes my view, I'm just right, he's an idiot.

One more time, can you answer the three questions I put to you?

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

And this pretty much sums up why it is not possible to have an intellectual conversation with you. You present a table, I have a look at it, read your side of the argument and present three questions to you in order to further my understanding of where you are coming from. I am prepared to be wrong - see previous reply to UK carper.

You - I'm not bothering to read anything that opposes my view, I'm just right, he's an idiot.

One more time, can you answer the three questions I put to you?

post the questions you want answered and I will attempt to answer them.

Windofchange

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=72233754&postcount=146

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

I don't think we should use earning multiples at all we need a better system. The problem I see with allowing people to borrow more is that prices will increase to the level where still the same people can buy. The pnly real solution is more property.

Believe me five years ago I would be singing from the same sheet as you

However I now realize there is no real housing crisis or shortage, property is very affordable as shown by the data and debate in this thread. The only exception is London and then only inner London and inner London is what perhaps 6% of the country? There does need to be mass redevelopment of inner London to make it a lot more dense knock most the estates down and rebuild at 3x the density it is happening but it can only go so fast.

the 'problem' is that there has been a great expansion in private renting, however this has happened up and down the country from everywhere like inner London where prices have boomed and so has population but also in middlesborough where population has fallen house prices have fallen and renting has despite this not fallen but risen. So it is not a price problem the problem is two main parts on is a mortgage availibity problem primarily the removal of self cert kicking the balck and grey market out of owning and the second 'problem' (PS its not a problem in my view its an explanation) is the sheer growth in the number of EU citizen over the last decade. 3-4 million more EU citizens and I suspect most of them at least for a time will have to rent so that means 1-1.5 million more rentals were needed for them and thats part of the reason renting has increased.