Is investing in property still the best long term option?

short_butt_sweet

kidmugsy wrote: »

And yet there was a twit who posted just above you who seems to think that the idea of a government confiscating property rights (as the old Rent Act did) is inconceivable.

i fully agree with your substantive point that the reintroduction of rent controls is a risk that potential landlords should consider.

my snide remark was directed at your misuse of terminology. rent controls aren't trokskyism. nor are they confiscation of property. you idiot. and merry xmas to you too.

kidmugsy

short_butt_sweet wrote: »

rent controls aren't trokskyism. nor are they confiscation of property. you idiot. and merry xmas to you too.

I didn't define rent control as Trotskyism: do master Reading Comprehension.

Rent controls are of course a confiscation of property rights. Gosh you are thick.

short_butt_sweet

kidmugsy wrote: »

I didn't define rent control as Trotskyism: do master Reading Comprehension.

true. you just implied that corbyn's labour was trotskyist. which is also false.

incidentally, nor are rent controls part of labour party policy. though hopefully that will change.

Rent controls are of course a confiscation of property rights. Gosh you are thick.

next you'll be saying that taxation is confiscation of property rights. or the minimum wage, or child labour laws.

property rights are part of the legal system, which is always subject to amendments, which may enhance or detract from the value of existing rights. confiscation is completely taking away existing rights without compensation. (e.g. nationalism without compensation would be confiscation, but with compensation it isn't.)

without a legal system, there would be no enforceable property rights at all. you ninny.

Retireby40

Ok so there's been numerous debates about the best option and the ins and outs.

For those that opted for property over the last 10-20 years why did you choose it over say stocks and shares etc.

fiisch

I don't know what you guys are talking about. Not sure what he has to do with property investment, but I am fairly certain Trotsky is the inventor of Dioralyte.....


(Thank God Google is around to check the spelling).

ManofLeisure_2

Retireby40 wrote: »

For those that opted for property over the last 10-20 years why did you choose it over say stocks and shares etc.

During this period of time I invested in both residential/commercial property, simply because my understanding (as an Architect) of this sector was much greater than my understanding of stocks and shares. Times have changed though, and the decisions I made then, would not apply today.
Do remember that when investing in buy-to-let, you are running a business .

Fatbritabroad

MaxiRobriguez wrote: »

Buying a £120k house may have implications if you want to move from where you currently live. Even if you fashioned a £20k deposit fairly pronto you'd still be left with a 4x salary mortgage.

If you wanted then to move out of where you currently are for whatever reason, you're going to be restricted by lenders because you've already used your leverage on the rental property.

You might need to sell it therefore in order to free up capital to move, and as previously pointed out, you might not get all your money back.

Assess all the risks before allocating all your investment into one area.

Actually amazingly that's not how it works as I understand it. The lenders don't take into account mortgages on btl unless not covered by the mortgage when calculating what you can borrow on your main residence. Not that I've done it but I was very surprised when I was told this by a mortgage lender

fifeken

Retireby40 wrote: »

. . . but the inherited house has had no significant problems in the 15 years it has/had been owned.

That reads as if you think it's a good thing, but it really means all the issues are being stored up and could happen at once.
What will you do when you need a new roof that will take care of all your cash savings and more? Double that if you buy another one.
What if you need to redecorate and replace all white goods at the same time, and you've no tenants for a few months? Again potentially double that.
BTL just isn't that good a choice for most.

Retireby40

Again thanks for some interesting points. While I thought of most of them there are a few I didn't think off.

I will have to think all avenues. Sticking money into 1% interest isn't gaining anything. Having to open 4 or 5 different bank accounts and having 3 direct debits coming out of each is impossible.

I don't understand stocks and shares enough and as some would debate that's just a gamble as well. So if house prices aren't sure to rise in value they aren't either.

You only have to look at man United a manager change increased shares by 170m after considerable drops. Lol

AnotherJoe

Retireby40 wrote: »

I know it's taxable but like I said. If I buy a 100k house and someone even pays 50% of that it's a good thing for me.

All in trying to do is use my money to better my future of if I kick the bucket my future family's. 20k at 1% is not worth a Donald duck at the moment. Nor will it be in 10 years.

I don't know about equities and investments etc but surely with those I could put 20k in and in 10 years it be worth less? However if someone else's money is working for me then for me sounds like less risk.

Vanguard seems to be the one that some people use for equities. Or what I've read or YouTubed. Any other good reviews or experience?

People in N Ireland who put money into housing would have lost up to half of it over the past few years. So yes equities can fall, they are doing so right now, do you really believe houses cant? Anyone who bought in London say two years ago is likely sitting on a decent paper loss now.

Nothing is risk free.