In work poverty due to overpriced housing costs

ChrisK....._3

House prices are not set by 'nasty money goblin', they are totally dictated by what people can pay and prices of normal houses are targeting what normal people can pay. If normal people could not afford normal houses then the prices of those houses would go down
OBVIOUSLY!!!!!

AG47 wrote: »

There is so much in work poverty now due to the discrepancy between wages and housing costs.

There can never be an end to help to bubble or other schemes until property comes down to meet wages or wages go up to meet property.

Either way there needs to be a correction or continue to inflate the bubble with housing benefits and schemes to help normal people who can’t afford overvalued property to somehow be able to afford it at inflated levels.

PasturesNew

ChrisK..... wrote: »

House prices are not set by 'nasty money goblin', they are totally dictated by what people can pay and prices of normal houses are targeting what normal people can pay. If normal people could not afford normal houses then the prices of those houses would go down
OBVIOUSLY!!!!!

Ignoring schemes and deposits....

Where I live, a house costing £300k would require an annual income of £60k to buy it (at 5x salary mortgage)

Once bought, that house can be rented out for £1000/month, with a renter requiring an income of £30k to rent it. Or new builds rent at £1200/month, requiring an income of £36k. £36k can easily be proven to an agent/landlord if you've got 2-3 kids and get the top ups.

Those with spare money sloshing about are keeping those £300k houses at £300k as money can be made buying at that price and renting it out.

Rent values underpin a lot of house prices, especially in the lower price brackets in any area. A larger percentage of the cheaper ones get hoovered up by LLs.

AG47

If the situation gets any worse then you are going to get a lot more people giving their notice and going on benefits,

Most people hold be only a little better off in work, and actually have a much easier life not working

AG47

PasturesNew wrote: »

Ignoring schemes and deposits....

Where I live, a house costing £300k would require an annual income of £60k to buy it (at 5x salary mortgage)

Once bought, that house can be rented out for £1000/month, with a renter requiring an income of £30k to rent it. Or new builds rent at £1200/month, requiring an income of £36k. £36k can easily be proven to an agent/landlord if you've got 2-3 kids and get the top ups.

Those with spare money sloshing about are keeping those £300k houses at £300k as money can be made buying at that price and renting it out.

Rent values underpin a lot of house prices, especially in the lower price brackets in any area. A larger percentage of the cheaper ones get hoovered up by LLs.

Currently the rents are propped up by housing benefit.

Take away or cut back on housing benefits Nd rents will fall to what people can afford out of their own pocket

Cakeguts

PasturesNew wrote: »

Ignoring schemes and deposits....

Where I live, a house costing £300k would require an annual income of £60k to buy it (at 5x salary mortgage)

Once bought, that house can be rented out for £1000/month, with a renter requiring an income of £30k to rent it. Or new builds rent at £1200/month, requiring an income of £36k. £36k can easily be proven to an agent/landlord if you've got 2-3 kids and get the top ups.

Those with spare money sloshing about are keeping those £300k houses at £300k as money can be made buying at that price and renting it out.

Rent values underpin a lot of house prices, especially in the lower price brackets in any area. A larger percentage of the cheaper ones get hoovered up by LLs.

In some areas the only market for the cheaper houses is from landlords. First time buyers don't want them because they can afford something better in a nicer area.

triathlon

AG47 wrote: »

The 30% discount for FTBers will he,p, but yes there still, is in work poverty even with both husband and wife working full time after housing costs there is not much left

Housing is overvalued at the moment

Yep it has been overvalued for over two decades now according to some, yet most of us in that time have seen it double and then double again, and in some area even doubled again, and that was from a starting point of being "over valued"

triathlon

AG47 wrote: »

If the situation gets any worse then you are going to get a lot more people giving their notice and going on benefits,

Most people hold be only a little better off in work, and actually have a much easier life not working

What people??

lisyloo

AG47 wrote: »

If the situation gets any worse then you are going to get a lot more people giving their notice and going on benefits,

Most people hold be only a little better off in work, and actually have a much easier life not working

No most people are older and have housing.
Your view is very self centred.

Benefits are hard to survive on and you have to prove job seeking. You’ll get sent for jobs at horrible factories (when I was a student it was a chicken factory and anti social hours).
Living anything but a horrible hungry cold depressing life on benefits is fantasy and do it should be.
Why should we all make you comfortable because you can’t be bothered to move, train, work hard, move in with mum & dad etc.
Make your own sacrifices like everyone else and stop moaning.
Everyone can see through it.

What are you doing to improve your situation?
I’m alright but I’m training to keep myself employable.
What are you doing?

p00hsticks

westernpromise wrote: »

In this country, only 40% of earners are net income tax payers; the top 10% pay 59% of all income tax; and the top 1% pay 25% of it. Most private health care users will come from the 10% or the 1%. Thus it's clear that the majority of users of "free" healthcare are people who pay nothing for it.
.

Only 30% of this country's revenue comes from income tax (and 20% from National Insurance). There are plenty of taxes other than income tax that are paid by those that use the National Heath Service.

kimplus8

MobileSaver wrote: »

One of the problems is that the younger generation often aren't prepared to move to a less desirable area and also want a brand spanking new-build house with shiny, sparkly appliances unlike the doer-upper their grandparents bought with no double glazing, no central heating and second-hand ovens and washing machines.

absolutely this!!! or to have smaller homes. I am saving to buy and i find people shocked that i am only looking at 3 bedrooms for myself and kids and the kids will have to share bedrooms (shock horror).
people look at me like im forcing my kids into the workhouse or something at the mere suggestion that my 4 smaller girls will be sharing a huge bedroom with two bunks.
And by moving to a less desirable area i can get a much larger (albeit older) property that i can 'fix up' and make my own.