Why are property prices so different in the north?

lisyloo

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Come to the West Midlands. It's easy to get to everywhere. Birmingham has all the facilities. Shropshire/Staffordshire/Worcestershire/Warwickshire countryside on your doorstep. Coast a couple of hours away. Peak District/Cotswolds about an hour. Even London (assuming you wish to go) easily done on the train.

Housing much cheaper than London.

Why don’t you want to keep quiet about this and keep it cheap and easy to get everywhere?

if you did have a massive exodus from the SE then prices would go up and you’d start to have congestion, pollution and parking issues.

Yes lots of people do wish Visit London (about 30 million tourists a year).
A little hard to dismiss I think.

I am perfectly happy for there to be a more even split of people and for London to be a bit less crowded. The exodus is 100,000 per year at the moment.

Zero_Sum

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Come to the West Midlands. It's easy to get to everywhere. Birmingham has all the facilities. Shropshire/Staffordshire/Worcestershire/Warwickshire countryside on your doorstep. Coast a couple of hours away. Peak District/Cotswolds about an hour. Even London (assuming you wish to go) easily done on the train.

Housing much cheaper than London.

Which is more than likely the idea for HS2. Keep the jobs in London, whilst expecting people to move out to West Mids.

lisyloo

Zero_Sum wrote: »

The hustle & bustle on the tubes at rush hour (or more like rush 3 hours) is absolutely horrific. I just prefer a more chilled out lifestyle.

There are various ways round this, but the most obvious if you work as part of a team is to shift your hours. On my last team some people started at 7 and some at 10. This was family friendly and also worked well for the business.
Bosses in London tend to be more flexible.

There are options to walk, cycle etc.
Cycle lanes (separates from motor vehicles) have improved massively and you can hire a bike cheaply so no need to have your own.

lisyloo

Zero_Sum wrote: »

For me the trade off just isnt worth it. As you spend the best part of 35-40 years working, to compromise on living standards that long doesnt work for me.

I think people should be able to choose.
But this compromise of which you speak is a double edged sword.

There are downside of living in London - mainly cost, travel and pollution.
Bit a huge number of upsides too.

It’s not a one way sacrifice.

I think I’ll be spending about 7 years in London which is enough to have seen and done everything we want to do, so you don’t have to live there your entire life to get career advantages.

westernpromise

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Come to the West Midlands. It's easy to get to everywhere. Birmingham has all the facilities. Shropshire/Staffordshire/Worcestershire/Warwickshire countryside on your doorstep. Coast a couple of hours away. Peak District/Cotswolds about an hour. Even London (assuming you wish to go) easily done on the train.

Housing much cheaper than London.

Come and live in my goldfish bowl. It's got everything. Plastic plant, sunken pirate ship. Who needs the ocean?

Drawer_full_of_socks

4 Bed Detached NW - I can see the beach from my window - Property Value £220,000.00

2 bed Flat London - I can just about see another stabbing victim through the smog -Property value £950,000.00

:rotfl:

Zero_Sum

I think some of the London lot have derailed my original point somewhat

London is a great city to visit as a tourist.
If you're young free & single, im sure you can have a wonderful experience.

However my original point was for raising a family? It just doesnt work.

Every now & then we have these best places to live surveys, due to housing costs, crime, pollution etc London nearly always comes out badly. I saw one recently that had London rock bottom. Regardless of how much money foreign investors (who dont live there) chuck at the place.

Whats even more bizarre is those claiming living a small flat whilst working then retiring in a nice house later on. Whilst financially that could work, what you're suggesting is raising kids in cramped conditions then when they move out, you then move to a bigger pad in the country.? How selfish?

Ive actually been to London a few times in the last few months & one of the things that struck me was the sheer amount of scruffy houses. And we're talking £500k+ houses here. There'll be the odd one in the street where they clearly have a bit of money, house done up, flash car in drive.
Then next door, garden unkempt, paint flaking off everywhere, dirty net blinds/curtains permamently closed.and its about 75% of the houses that are scruffy.
Even out in the affluent suburbs, theres still about 10% of houses that are like this.

You just dont get this up here. If you buy a house in a reasonable area (we're only talking £150k+) you can pretty much guarentee all the houses are well kept & the area looks smart..

I saw Corbyns house on TV tonight, and the garden was a mess.

Thrugelmir

lisyloo wrote: »

Yes lots of people do wish Visit London (about 30 million tourists a year).
A little hard to dismiss I think.

Hardly ever travel to London these days. Not what it used to be like. At least Ronnie Scotts is still going. Unfortunately most of the old haunts are long gone.

zagubov

Zero_Sum wrote: »

I think some of the London lot have derailed my original point somewhat

London is a great city to visit as a tourist.
If you're young free & single, im sure you can have a wonderful experience.

However my original point was for raising a family? It just doesnt work.

Every now & then we have these best places to live surveys, due to housing costs, crime, pollution etc London nearly always comes out badly. I saw one recently that had London rock bottom. Regardless of how much money foreign investors (who dont live there) chuck at the place.

Whats even more bizarre is those claiming living a small flat whilst working then retiring in a nice house later on. Whilst financially that could work, what you're suggesting is raising kids in cramped conditions then when they move out, you then move to a bigger pad in the country.? How selfish?

Ive actually been to London a few times in the last few months & one of the things that struck me was the sheer amount of scruffy houses. And we're talking £500k+ houses here. There'll be the odd one in the street where they clearly have a bit of money, house done up, flash car in drive.
Then next door, garden unkempt, paint flaking off everywhere, dirty net blinds/curtains permamently closed.and its about 75% of the houses that are scruffy.
Even out in the affluent suburbs, theres still about 10% of houses that are like this.

You just dont get this up here. If you buy a house in a reasonable area (we're only talking £150k+) you can pretty much guarentee all the houses are well kept & the area looks smart..

I saw Corbyns house on TV tonight, and the garden was a mess.

You've hit a nail on its head. London property is pricey but it's not valuable or desirable except as an investment. As accommodation it's pretty underwhelming.

The vast majority of it is useless for families with more than two kids. A lot of it' consists of small houses chopped into tiny flats instead of being purpose-built.

The education and health services are overstretched and heavily reliant on excellent staff from other countries.

When people from the rest of Britain visit they even find the hotel rooms cramped.

We're okay-ish because we bought at the right time in the price zigzag.

I know plenty of people with similar incomes outside London and they're living in much better conditions and with much better quality of life.

I would never recommend this as the best place in Britain to start and bring up a family (the rest of the UK is awash with places good for that).

It's a great place to visit and to come and work for a while, and go out a lot because you haven't a lot to come home to.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Hardly ever travel to London these days. Not what it used to be like. At least Ronnie Scotts is still going. Unfortunately most of the old haunts are long gone.

A lot of entertainment venues and even just local pubs have been re-purposed.

lisyloo

Whats even more bizarre is those claiming living a small flat whilst working then retiring in a nice house later on. Whilst financially that could work, what you're suggesting is raising kids in cramped conditions then when they move out, you then move to a bigger pad in the country.? How selfish?

You’ve got the wrong end of the stick here.
People without kids in tow can live in tiny places (should they choose to) or stay in hotels, air b&b or sofa surf with friends. For some people the rewards are worth it for both them and often when people make personal sacrifices it’s for their kids.
It was never a suggestion to raise a family in a studio flat.
It’s usually a million miles from selfish when someone sofa surfs for the benefit of their family.