UK Affordability still very good

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

The share of that £200 billion is not spread evenly and it is not relevant to affordablity.

I would argue that it is spread wide and far certainly the inheritence data shows that is the case.

And it is extremely relevant to affordability,
As house prices go up so do inheritances and gifts which partly or wholly nullify the increased prices and thus affordability is not harmed as much as would be assumed if you did not take into account the existence of gifted and inherited wealth.

I will say again I think some 2/3rds of uk born kids, maybe more, will get gifted or inherit a property (or the sums to buy a property).

Windofchange

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Whatever he likes.

Remember, if you don't like something, you just make something else up entirely and go with that.

You are being trolled

Yeah, I did think that a while back, and did ask the question. If so, bravo. Troll or not, this level of stupidity does exist in the UK sadly.

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

So, take the FACT that the top 10% of the population take 66% of inheritances.

If there are gifts as well, does it not follow that roughly the same distribution exists there as well? Are you going to say that despite having no wealth to inherit, the bottom 50% of society have magically gifted hundreds of thousands of pounds?

So despite wanting hard facts and analysis you are now basing an argument on experience? Yup, your parents = the rest of the UK.

You're just wrong but you won't admit it of course.

not necessarily. parents can gift whatever they want, in fact some even gift everything to try to claim social care costs but of course this is being stopped. given property prices in London a lot would be planning ahead and gift enough to children so that they remain below the IHT threshold. who wants to pay a single penny in IHT?


yes I don't have the data because I cant find anything. so yes I have no proof at all, but I have a good idea that it is a lot more common then you think, simply by the numbers from my own family. I really don't care if you agree with me or not. so just move on.

Windofchange

greatape wrote: »

i would argue that it is spread wide and far certainly the inheritence data shows that is the case.

And it is extremely relevant to affordability,
as house prices go up so do inheritances and gifts which partly or wholly nullify the increased prices and thus affordability is not harmed as much as would be assumed if you did not take into account the existence of gifted and inherited wealth.

I will say again i think some 2/3rds of uk born kids, maybe more, will get gifted or inherit a property (or the sums to buy a property).

one more time, then i give up.

windofchange wrote: »

you really pay absolutely no attention to anything do you. I'm going to focus then purely on question 5 from the post i made a few pages back that both yourself and economic are yet to provide any sort of answer to.

From the ons 2013:

1.6 million adults (3.6%) had received an inheritance valued at £1,000 or more in the two years preceding being surveyed. Although half of inheritors received less than £10,000, one in ten inherited £125,000 or more.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_333036.pdf

from a 2011 lse report:

"as can be seen from the statistics of this table inheritances are extremely concentrated: The top 1 per cent of inheritors received about 15 per cent of the total inherited wealth, while the top 5 and 10 per cent received 43 and 66 per cent of the total respectively."

http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/casepaper148.pdf

question 5) given the two articles cited above (ons and london school of economics) show that inheritance is concentrated in very small bands, can you expand upon your assertion that millions of people in the uk every year are inheriting significant 'pots of gold'? 1 in 10 people inherit a figure over £125,000. 50% of inheritances are less than £10,000. How does this support your argument that the housing market can be kept afloat in part by this? As i covered at great length on one of your other threads, wealth is concentrated in the upper echelons of society - the top 10%. Your £200 billion a year is not evenly distributed, and therefore for the vast majority of people does not come into play when discussing house purchasing. It might just about cover the wake and a good knees up at the local pub for 50% of the population.

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

Yeah, I did think that a while back, and did ask the question. If so, bravo. Troll or not, this level of stupidity does exist in the UK sadly.

if stupid is someone who has bought his own property and is more or less financially independent, then sure I am stupid

Windofchange

economic wrote: »

if stupid is someone who has bought his own property and is more or less financially independent, then sure I am stupid

Yup born into wealth (Will inherit > £500k), earning 100k a year and brought a property that happens to have tripled in value whilst you scratch your behind. School of hard knocks right there.

Anyway, want to address the question about inheritances or just keep ignoring it?

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

you must have been a big spender or went through a divorce which cost you a lot.

I'm not a big spender I suspect you have no idea of the costs of bringing up children paying a mortgage on an average salary with no help from your parents.

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

I would argue that it is spread wide and far certainly the inheritence data shows that is the case.

And it is extremely relevant to affordability,
As house prices go up so do inheritances and gifts which partly or wholly nullify the increased prices and thus affordability is not harmed as much as would be assumed if you did not take into account the existence of gifted and inherited wealth.

I will say again I think some 2/3rds of uk born kids, maybe more, will get gifted or inherit a property (or the sums to buy a property).

It doesn't the last time you claimed than I showed it wasn't, my children will most likely will inherent but with a bit of luck they will be in thier 60s.

economic

ukcarper wrote: »

I'm not a big spender I suspect you have no idea of the costs of bringing up children paying a mortgage on an average salary with no help from your parents.

my parents did the same as you did but managed to save enough to gift.


how much did you contribute to your private pension?

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

not necessarily. parents can gift whatever they want, in fact some even gift everything to try to claim social care costs but of course this is being stopped. given property prices in London a lot would be planning ahead and gift enough to children so that they remain below the IHT threshold. who wants to pay a single penny in IHT?


yes I don't have the data because I cant find anything. so yes I have no proof at all, but I have a good idea that it is a lot more common then you think, simply by the numbers from my own family. I really don't care if you agree with me or not. so just move on.

I know people who have managed to give thier kids some help but they are in the minority.