Will there really be a crash?

Malthusian

GreatApe's position is essentially that everybody is the average and therefore everybody can buy a house.

The position of Labourites, HPinCels and assorted other Generation X snowflakes is that everybody is the bottom and therefore nobody can buy a house.

Neither model is very useful but GreatApe's at least floats slightly closer to reality.

You can start at the bottom of our society with absolutely no assets either financial or intellectual, and we will pay for you to receive free education after which you can complete a PGCE and secure a guaranteed comfortable middle class income available to literally anyone. Save 10% of your net teacher earnings (which will still leave you with more disposable income than many people in this country could dream of) and within 10 years you will have more than enough to partner up with another teacher and buy the average priced house with a mortgage. If you don't have the wherewithal for all of this stuff, you can join the council housing list and someone else will pay for a flat or house for you and be responsible for the upkeep. As GreatApe would say, life is terrific everything is awesome cheers cheers cheers.

Malthusian

BikingBud wrote: »

It pays for the old peeps home costs or has been blown on round the world cruises after kicking the !!!! out of the equity release scheme, go party grandma

We know for a fact that isn't true, as only a small minority of people use equity release and the average stay in a care home is less than two years.

GreatApe

Malthusian wrote: »

GreatApe's position is essentially that everybody is the average and therefore everybody can buy a house.

The position of Labourites, HPinCels and assorted other Generation X snowflakes is that everybody is the bottom and therefore nobody can buy a house.

Neither model is very useful but GreatApe's at least floats slightly closer to reality.

Almost everyone either buys a house or gets free social housing. Only a very minority rent long term. Private renting is a transitional tenure with a lot of turnover.

Its like the headline unemployment figure. It isnt really a figure of unemployment but a figure of churn. 1 million unemployed.... no not really because if you look at the unemployed today vs 6 months ago some 75% who were unemployed 6 months ago are no longer unemployed

You can start at the bottom of our society with absolutely no assets either financial or intellectual, and we will pay for you to receive free education after which you can complete a PGCE and secure a guaranteed comfortable middle class income available to literally anyone. Save 10% of your net teacher earnings (which will still leave you with more disposable income than many people in this country could dream of) and within 10 years you will have more than enough to partner up with another teacher and buy the average priced house with a mortgage. If you don't have the wherewithal for all of this stuff, you can join the council housing list and someone else will pay for a flat or house for you and be responsible for the upkeep. As GreatApe would say, life is terrific everything is awesome cheers cheers cheers.

:beer:

Much better than most of human history and lessor developed countries.

There are problems in the UK but they stem mostly from dysfunctional people and families not the economic system or taxes or lack of opportunities for a decent life/work

Herzlos

I don't think anyones been saying that everyone is at the bottom. We've (or I've) just been pointing out that not everyone is average, and average can be skewed quite badly by some large percentage (20-30%) inheriting £0, whilst some small percentage (<5%) are inheriting 7+ digits. Maybe they cancel each other out, I'm not sure.

GreatApe wrote: »

The bottom 20% get free social housing.
The 80% on top of that mostly get gifted free housing (or other capital) thanks to the nations grandmas

Sure, if you're stating that "of those who can comfortably afford to buy a house, most will inherit another house" I'd agree with you, it's fairly obvious. Your initial claim was that "everyone" would inherit a house, which ain't true.

If you skim off the bottom who don't own and don't inherit, then your statement becomes about as useful as saying that "almost all people with pilots licenses are allowed to fly planes".




For social housing, it's usually not actually free. Some people get rent paid for them (in part of whole) but many pay rent to the council (who should be making a profit on it).
It's certainly true that it's possible to move from the bottom 20%, get a degree (with funding), get a good job and then move up to the middle somewhere, being able to buy an average house in an average area with an average partner. The studies all show, however, that the deck is stacked against them at every point. Lower income usually means more stress, more worry about money, less time to study, less access to resources, poorer diet and so on, meaning poorer grades and less likelihood of getting onto a course and a higher likelihood of having to drop out for non-academic reasons.


Bursaries, grants and scholarships go some way to addressing this but it's still never going to be fair. That's a huge tangent from the point here though.

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

Almost everyone either buys a house or gets free social housing. Only a very minority rent long term. Private renting is a transitional tenure with a lot of turnover.

k

The max home ownership got to is 69% it's now falling. The market is changing and just because private renting was transitory doesnt mean it is now, I know people renting now who would have been able to buy in the past.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

The max home ownership got to is 69% it's now falling

It is not falling anymore. 2017 the private rental sector shrank the the ownership sector increased by some ~0.2 million units. I suspect 2018 will be the same with the private rental sector shrinking and ownership up another ~0.2 million

The market is changing and just because private renting was transitory doesnt mean it is now

It will always be transitory and it currently is you can look at the data the ONS actually has data on who renters are etc and the flow of tenures. Simply put most renters are not long term renters they are only short term renters before they buy or get given social housing.

I know people renting now who would have been able to buy in the past.

Your one friend does not provide much data for us to use
Ownership levels for uk born brits is close to all time highs
Recent migrants who tend to overwhelmingly rent privately are the primary reason why headline ownership fell 2004-2016 the rate for uk born did not fall as much.

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

It is not falling anymore. 2017 the private rental sector shrank the the ownership sector increased by some ~0.2 million units. I suspect 2018 will be the same with the private rental sector shrinking and ownership up another ~0.2 million



It will always be transitory and it currently is you can look at the data the ONS actually has data on who renters are etc and the flow of tenures. Simply put most renters are not long term renters they are only short term renters before they buy or get given social housing.



Your one friend does not provide much data for us to use
Ownership levels for uk born brits is close to all time highs
Recent migrants who tend to overwhelmingly rent privately are the primary reason why headline ownership fell 2004-2016 the rate for uk born did not fall as much.

I didn't say one and if I was in same position as when I first bought (that was at a time of high prices in relation to earnings) I would not be able to buy now.

GreatApe

Herzlos wrote: »

I don't think anyones been saying that everyone is at the bottom. We've (or I've) just been pointing out that not everyone is average, and average can be skewed quite badly by some large percentage (20-30%) inheriting £0, whilst some small percentage (<5%) are inheriting 7+ digits. Maybe they cancel each other out, I'm not sure.

Sure, if you're stating that "of those who can comfortably afford to buy a house, most will inherit another house" I'd agree with you, it's fairly obvious. Your initial claim was that "everyone" would inherit a house, which ain't true.

If you skim off the bottom who don't own and don't inherit, then your statement becomes about as useful as saying that "almost all people with pilots licenses are allowed to fly planes".

For social housing, it's usually not actually free. Some people get rent paid for them (in part of whole) but many pay rent to the council (who should be making a profit on it).
It's certainly true that it's possible to move from the bottom 20%, get a degree (with funding), get a good job and then move up to the middle somewhere, being able to buy an average house in an average area with an average partner. The studies all show, however, that the deck is stacked against them at every point. Lower income usually means more stress, more worry about money, less time to study, less access to resources, poorer diet and so on, meaning poorer grades and less likelihood of getting onto a course and a higher likelihood of having to drop out for non-academic reasons.

Bursaries, grants and scholarships go some way to addressing this but it's still never going to be fair. That's a huge tangent from the point here though.

People are born unequal its not just money but all sorts height weight attractiveness intelligence temperament and a lot more so why do you expect everyone to be equal at everything and why do you even assume that money and wealth are everyones primary goal?

Anyway i did not say EVERYONE is going to get free housing, I said the MAJORITY will get free housing (or the capital equivalent) via gifts and inheritances and I also went on to say even you you dont there is a good chance your partner will. Only some ~1/6ths of uk born households wont get significant gifted/inherited wealth while 5/6ths will

There is also a easy way to make sure even more people get inherited wealth. Gift the 5 million council homes to the sitting tenants for free. There you go you've just helped five million households and their kids and their kids kids but for some reason the left seem to hate the poor and not want to help this group by giving them a free house

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

I didn't say one and if I was in same position as when I first bought (that was at a time of high prices in relation to earnings) I would not be able to buy now.

And I have explained to you as time goes on people do not stay in the same position not least the size and scale of capital is so much greater such that inherited/gifted wealth plays a bigger part in everything.

At first glance this sounds like a negative but it is actually a huge positive because it means we are less poor. more grandmas are able to gift their grand kids a portion of a free house.

And despite your protests of unaffordability the locals still have higher ownership rates than almost all of the last 100 years with only a handful of years having marginally higher ownership and those were primarily the 2000-2005 period when was a period of much more lax finance and specially I think one of the rasons for slightly lower ownership rates among uk born bits is that pre 2008 the black market workers could get finance and post 2008 they couldn't

And what do you make of the fact that 2017 saw ownership rates increase and most likely imo 2018/2019/2020 will also see ownership levels increase which will disprove clearly the notion that property is unaffordable. like most people you are behind the curve we already have close to 2 years of increasing ownership levels

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

And I have explained to you as time goes on people do not stay in the same position not least the size and scale of capital is so much greater such that inherited/gifted wealth plays a bigger part in everything.

At first glance this sounds like a negative but it is actually a huge positive because it means we are less poor. more grandmas are able to gift their grand kids a portion of a free house.

And despite your protests of unaffordability the locals still have higher ownership rates than almost all of the last 100 years with only a handful of years having marginally higher ownership and those were primarily the 2000-2005 period when was a period of much more lax finance and specially I think one of the rasons for slightly lower ownership rates among uk born bits is that pre 2008 the black market workers could get finance and post 2008 they couldn't

And what do you make of the fact that 2017 saw ownership rates increase and most likely imo 2018/2019/2020 will also see ownership levels increase which will disprove clearly the notion that property is unaffordable. like most people you are behind the curve we already have close to 2 years of increasing ownership levels

We gone though all this before and that is not how it works in real world. The increase was small and we do not know if it will be maintained. Average life expectancy 83 average age to have first child 80 years ago 23 so thier children are 60.