We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Can Millenials Buy A House?
Comments
-
We don!!!8217;t need rent controls. The market is self regulating. If a landlord needs to put the rent up he will. If the tenant doesn!!!8217;t like it he can move on.0
-
John_Jones wrote: »The top 1% of earners earn 14% of all wages and pay 30% of all income tax.After years of disappointment with get-rich-quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme...and quick! - Homer Simpson0
-
Frugal_Financial_Freedom wrote: »visited a friend in california recently and learned about rent control - ie a landlord can't put the rent up while a tenant still lives there. It is one of the very few things I wish the UK could learn from over the pond.
Your tenancy states how much the landlord can increase the rent by. Standard is by RPI - inflation... Do you think that's so terribly unfair? If you're looking at a tenancy that includes much higher increases (or no cap), then... DON'T SIGN IT. If that means finding a different property, then so be it.
If you sign a new tenancy, then obviously that replaces the existing one completely, and the landlord can increase by whatever at that point. But you don't have to sign a new tenancy - a statutory periodic simply takes over after the fixed period, with all the terms of the original tenancy (including rent increases) intact.
Of course, that may mean being given notice, but unless you also introduce the landlord being unable to give notice to terminate tenancies, then that's always going to apply, whether there's rent control or not. And stopping landlords giving notice introduces a WHOLE new can of worms...0 -
Worth noting those rent rises are actually LOWER then wage rises this year. In theory rent will be taking up less of a pay packet this year on average.
1.0 rise isn't all that great given both inflation and wage inflation are both decently north of that.0 -
Or maybe we will do what has always happened. The rich and corporations will structure their wealth to pay few or no taxes and everyone else will have to take the low paid and insecure service jobs that are left to pay the same rich and corporations for food, shelter and trinkets.
This is just nonsense
Going back to housing, the world is not building 1 billion homes over the next 20 years for the rich to live in they already have all the housing they want/need. the world is going to build 1 billion new homes over the next 20 years mostly for the poor to live in0 -
Frugal_Financial_Freedom wrote: »visited a friend in california recently and learned about rent control - ie a landlord can't put the rent up while a tenant still lives there. It is one of the very few things I wish the UK could learn from over the pond.
Apparently we have a housing "crisis" though, so artificially restricting the supply of homes is clearly not a good idea.
The US is gigantic and housing supply so exceeds demand that there are entire towns full of empty houses - no such thing as a ghost town in the UK. What applies there won't apply here.0 -
the world is going to build 1 billion new homes over the next 20 years mostly for the poor to live inAfter years of disappointment with get-rich-quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme...and quick! - Homer Simpson0
-
It would be great if they developed more housing for single occupancy. there are a lot of student developments offering studios to rent. Why not do the same thing but for buyers?0
-
shirlgirl2004 wrote: »Try looking at Manchester for example; so many apartments going up it's unbelievable. Believe me it isn't all down south.
I also said 'big city' which manchester very much is.0 -
The problem is there has not been many times when a single person earning below average earnings could buy a 3 bed house. I bought my first house in early 70s I was earning the equivalent of £35k in today's money and had to move 20 miles from where I wanted to be. That was as part of a couple which did not enable you to borrow what you can now but without that extra I would not have been able to buy.
I bought my 1st in 2002. I was earning about £16k in todays money. It was a 3 bed & bought on my own. It was about 12 miles from work.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards