Ownership amongst the young

Crashy_Time

economic wrote: »

ridiculous = crazy = bubble territory

we are nowhere close to a bubble in london IMO.

Ok, on that note you are duly outed as a pure wind-up :rotfl:


Go and do something sensible with your time for Gawds sake.

economic

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Ok, on that note you are duly outed as a pure wind-up :rotfl:


Go and do something sensible with your time for Gawds sake.

you should also stop posting on here and concentrate how you will pay next months rent i.e. making your landlord richer month by month. in fact i bet your landlord is someone who posts on here and has already told you how much of a fool you really are for renting all these years.

Crashy = FOOL

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

It has gotten worse and many more can't afford to buy. I agree it is what it is and I think changing it will be extremely difficult. What is needed is more property but the infrastructure in many parts of Home Counties is at breaking point.

I used to think we needed more property that there was a shortage all over the country, how wrong I was! My view now is that Zone 1 and 2 London need a lot more homes or more likely high density flats. Most other areas have sufficient housing

If we look at Germany we find that although rents are cheaper people rent a lot less densely (I believe there are 8 million single person rentals in germany, less than 2 million in the UK). So it looks like people will spend about 1/3rd of their income on housing almost irrespective of rent prices. So in Germany lots of people rent a whole flat to themselves while in the UK people tend to couple up and rent or rent in shared houses so the overall amount they spend is about the same (actually iirc the Germans spend more on housing which is counter-intuitive as they have lower prices and rents but since they rent more sqm of property per person it makes sense)

The conclusion I come to is that housing costs are not likely to go down, even if we built a lot of additional homes and flats. Instead we will just get a lot more single person rentals (like the Germans and the nordic countries and Switzerland etc) and part of the result of that looks like the birth rate will go down even further. Its interesting how so many seemingly unrelated things are linked. Most crash wishers think high rents mean people put off getting married and having children yet the germans have a much worse fertility rate and I think one of the reasons is that so many of them rent and live all by themselves one person per flat.

economic

GreatApe wrote: »

I used to think we needed more property that there was a shortage all over the country, how wrong I was! My view now is that Zone 1 and 2 London need a lot more homes or more likely high density flats. Most other areas have sufficient housing

If we look at Germany we find that although rents are cheaper people rent a lot less densely (I believe there are 8 million single person rentals in germany, less than 2 million in the UK). So it looks like people will spend about 1/3rd of their income on housing almost irrespective of rent prices. So in Germany lots of people rent a whole flat to themselves while in the UK people tend to couple up and rent or rent in shared houses so the overall amount they spend is about the same (actually iirc the Germans spend more on housing which is counter-intuitive as they have lower prices and rents but since they rent more sqm of property per person it makes sense)

The conclusion I come to is that housing costs are not likely to go down, even if we built a lot of additional homes and flats. Instead we will just get a lot more single person rentals (like the Germans and the nordic countries and Switzerland etc) and part of the result of that looks like the birth rate will go down even further. Its interesting how so many seemingly unrelated things are linked. Most crash wishers think high rents mean people put off getting married and having children yet the germans have a much worse fertility rate and I think one of the reasons is that so many of them rent and live all by themselves one person per flat.

why do germans do this? out of choice not to have a family?

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

I used to think we needed more property that there was a shortage all over the country, how wrong I was! My view now is that Zone 1 and 2 London need a lot more homes or more likely high density flats. Most other areas have sufficient housing

If we look at Germany we find that although rents are cheaper people rent a lot less densely (I believe there are 8 million single person rentals in germany, less than 2 million in the UK). So it looks like people will spend about 1/3rd of their income on housing almost irrespective of rent prices. So in Germany lots of people rent a whole flat to themselves while in the UK people tend to couple up and rent or rent in shared houses so the overall amount they spend is about the same (actually iirc the Germans spend more on housing which is counter-intuitive as they have lower prices and rents but since they rent more sqm of property per person it makes sense)

The conclusion I come to is that housing costs are not likely to go down, even if we built a lot of additional homes and flats. Instead we will just get a lot more single person rentals (like the Germans and the nordic countries and Switzerland etc) and part of the result of that looks like the birth rate will go down even further. Its interesting how so many seemingly unrelated things are linked. Most crash wishers think high rents mean people put off getting married and having children yet the germans have a much worse fertility rate and I think one of the reasons is that so many of them rent and live all by themselves one person per flat.

Can't agree it's just zones 1 and 2 in extends much further out. Higher density housing in zones 1 and 2 would be good but don't see it anytime soon and if the building is going to be built in the outtside the infrastructure need improving.

As for population density effecting birth rate in case you don't know the vast majority if people have a very strong need to be with someone else and will put that above anything else.

Windofchange

ukcarper wrote: »

As for population density effecting birth rate in case you don't know rate the vast majority if people have a very strong need to be with someone else and will put that above anything else.

Jesus man don't try and lecture Great Ape on the thoughts of women. He's already covered what young women think and a brief primer on the Great Ape guide to dating - sit down, introduce yourself, find out how rich the parents are, enquire about salary and then find out how long it is until the potential in laws croak it and you can get your hands on all those millions. Failing that, head to the local care home and find a rich 80 year old.

GreatApe

economic wrote: »

why do germans do this? out of choice not to have a family?

no I dont think they rent whole properties to themselves to avoid having a family. I think they rent whole properties to themselves because they can afford to rent whole properties for themselves

I think perhaps once they rent a whole property for themselves they then have less contact with the opposite sex and also less pressure from friends and also less pressure generally to share costs of life.

Its just conjecture on my part. Certainly it does not follow that lower prices = more people getting married and having kids.

economic

GreatApe wrote: »

no I dont think they rent whole properties to themselves to avoid having a family. I think they rent whole properties to themselves because they can afford to rent whole properties for themselves

I think perhaps once they rent a whole property for themselves they then have less contact with the opposite sex and also less pressure from friends and also less pressure generally to share costs of life.

Its just conjecture on my part. Certainly it does not follow that lower prices = more people getting married and having kids.

i see what you are saying and i tend to agree.

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

i see what you are saying and i tend to agree.

I think your and GreatApes last couple of posts say more about you than you realise.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

Can't agree it's just zones 1 and 2 in extends much further out. Higher density housing in zones 1 and 2 would be good but don't see it anytime soon and if the building is going to be built in the outtside the infrastructure need improving.

A lot of the actual demand for properties is in Zone 1 and 2 but becuase there are not enough properties in Zone 1 and 2 people are pushed out to zone 3 4 and 5. If there was a lot more housing in zone 1 and 2 then many people in Z3-6 could move to zone 1-2 and free up space in Z3-6 without needing to build much there.

in case you don't know the vast majority of people have a very strong need to be with someone else and will put that above anything else.

Yet the German total fertility rate is just 1.4 children per women and I suspect like in the UK the figure for the natives is actually lower and the headline figure is boosted by migrants.