In work poverty due to overpriced housing costs

Planet_Switzerland

Short answer to the question is yes.


For the vast majority of people, rent/mortgage is the biggest outgoing each month, so that's going to have the biggest impact if it goes up.


After I finished uni I was getting barely more than the minimum wage but didn't feel especially poor because rent wasn't that expensive. I probably didn't feel the effects of increasing rent as much as I could because fortunately I started climbing the career ladder so my salary was going up too.


In my last rental property before I bought, I was there for 6 years and the rent for the new tenants was 55% more than it was when I first moved in. If your salary stayed the same during that period they'd you'd likely be struggling by then.

Zero_Sum

Malthusian wrote: »

No, I mean rent a bedroom with shared facilities. As many people in their 20s or 30s who have not yet reached the stage of moving in with a long-term partner always have done.

Until economic growth and rising prosperity made it possible for more people to rent a self-contained property as a singleton. The unfortunate side-effect of which is silly entitlement complexes.

The context was the question "how does a single person save up while spending x hundred per month on a studio flat plus £900 every so often to buy a posh sofa to sit on all by yourself" and the obvious answer is "don't".

Unless you place a premium on living alone. Which is a perfectly sensible decision, it just means you either have to sacrifice in other areas, or wait longer to afford a house deposit, or never buy a house at all. Just make a decision.



The quality of everything varies considerably, especially at the mass-market end, which is what someone who earns below median income but wants to save up for a house deposit in addition to all their other expenses is looking for.

You're looking at that from a very Londoncentric/SE position which is part of the problem.

Renting a bedroom in a HMO in 20's/30's in my area just isnt done as property is affordable

A half decent 3 bed family home can be rented for betweem £400 - £500 a month in the north

triathlon

AG47 wrote: »

Until the house price correction comes there will be more multi occupancy homes, sometimes a couple of families in one house sharing

In my whole lifetime and with the huge people I know I have never seen that happen once.

triathlon

Cakeguts wrote: »

Actually I think the entitled to be housed only applies to under 18s who have no control over housing themselves.



You are not entitled to be housed by someone else. You are expected to arrange your housing yourself.



I think much of the housing problems in the UK at the moment are being caused by this expectation that you are entitled to be housed by someone else. No one is entitled to be housed by someone else they are all entitled to arrange their own housing.



No one is entitled to be housed by any local authority or housing association or private landlord. Adults are expected to make their own arrangements unless they are vulnerable adults but many of the people who expect someone else to house them aren't.

Here here

The endless tripe I read about what value house prices "should be", it's this sense of injustice in these people that have held them back for decades now and given me a fantastic income.

This illusion that a massive house price correction would make property as cheap as cheap as chips where they could just turf out the evil homeowners who worked, sweated and sacrificed for their homes and at discomfort to them. This illusion all started when the internet was in it's infancy still back in the late 1990's and the first property crash advocate was Professor Oswald, who has since hid away from that daft statement. It was the early days when large groups of nutters formed on the internet and preached their daft message with the comfort of being in a large group, so of course they must be right.

They preached on Motley Fool, they then created housepricecrash two decades ago, all those years and decades and they are still hanging out for the home that they are "ENTITLED TO", What wasted lives and one of the first bits of evidence of that rubbish you would later find on social media from people who had a chip on their shoulder

seven-day-weekend

lisyloo wrote: »

No some (many) of us do jobs that only exist in London.
Central government, investment banking, some airport jobs etc.

Yes if you’re a hairdresser or a bus driver, no if you have a job as an air traffic controller or government department or hedge fund manager.

There are loads of jobs around the London airports from the pilots, air traffic controllers, baggage handlers that cannot be reproduced (in numbers) elsewhere.

There is a reason prices are higher where the numbers of jobs and pay are better.

What’s the mathematical point of getting a much lower paid job so you can get a lower price on a house?
Surely you are better off getting better jobs and a higher priced asset and then you can free up equity when you retire?

There are airports outside London, you know, including some bigger ones like Birmingham International!

seven-day-weekend

Arklight wrote: »

Completely agree. The UK is a small country where most of the high value enterprise is located in and around one place.

It's very easy to tell someone to just leave the entire of the South East, and move to Wolverhampton, but are there jobs there?

Not the highest paid...

https://www.indeed.co.uk/Full-Time-jobs-in-Wolverhampton

but you can buy a new house for peanuts :
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/new-homes-for-sale/find.html?locationIdentifier=REGION%5E1476&sortType=1&propertyTypes=&includeSSTC=false&mustHave=&dontShow=&furnishTypes=&keywords=


And if you travel the twelve miles to Birmingham there are far better-paid jobs.

seven-day-weekend

Malthusian wrote: »

Sofas cost anything down to £0 if you are a single person because you can get a tatty one from Freecycle and nobody is going to question your decision.

If you are the social type and regularly have friends come round and thus need a decent sofa for them to sit on, then you will probably houseshare.

My son has just acquired a bookcase and table from a 'free to good home' put outside someone's house, and a (very smart) sofa from freecycle.

chucknorris

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

My son has just acquired a bookcase and table from a 'free to good home' put outside someone's house, and a (very smart) sofa from freecycle.

When we sell a property, we usually offer free to the buyer all the furniture, white goods and miscellaneous things (kettles, crockery etc.) for free. It just saves the hassle of getting rid of it.

I've just accepted an offer on a 3 bed flat (offer was made on the day that the flat was due to go on the market, by someone already registered with the agent), and I'm going to do the same. They are first time buyers, so I am hoping they take it all (its an all or nothing offer, leaving them to get rid of anything that they don't want).

Kim_kim

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Not the highest paid...

https://www.indeed.co.uk/Full-Time-jobs-in-Wolverhampton

but you can buy a new house for peanuts :
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/new-homes-for-sale/find.html?locationIdentifier=REGION%5E1476&sortType=1&propertyTypes=&includeSSTC=false&mustHave=&dontShow=&furnishTypes=&keywords=


And if you travel the twelve miles to Birmingham there are far better-paid jobs.

As cheap as that house is (I live in Surrey that house would cost 4 times that in our cheapest areas!), I wonder how many jobs in that area enable people to get a mortgage of 200K

missile

"The rich have got their channels in the bedrooms of the poor" >

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JWiPFT0v2c