House price increases. Is everyone absolutely loaded?

Crashy_Time

eidand said:

FinallyFTB2021 said:

MobileSaver said:

Why don't you and @BikingBud start up a crowdfunding campaign to help "shop workers, bus drivers, catering staff" all get a "four bed house with big garden in that nice area"? How much will you personally donate to this worthy cause?

No-one should be entitled to buy any house, let alone a nice house in a nice area.

Is there anything else you think those stacking shelves should also be entitled to? What about a half-decent car? Surely we can't have them travelling around in an old rusty banger that might let them down one day? How much will you personally donate towards them buying a new BMW or would this be something else you want taxpayers to subsidise rather than you personally? 

 Wow, what a nasty piece of work you are!! Everyone who works hard should be entitled to buy a house. 

That's not how things work in real life. Buying a house clearly is not for everyone  and no one, I repeat no, one is entitled to anything.

Can anyone buy a house? Yes, it's simply a question of saving over a long enough period of time and not being in debt, that's it.

So, for whoever wants to buy a house, go and do what needs done. No one starts with the best house in the best location, some of us worked for decades to get to this point. 

I always find it amusing when I see the complaints. I used to stack shelves, I used to have 2 jobs at the same time. My first property was in one of the worst areas where I was living as this was the only thing I could afford. Took a while, but while others were going on holiday and going to the pub every night, I was working 2 jobs and also studying so I can get in a better profession.

Entitlement? Don't make me laugh, put in the work, it really isn't rocket science.

The property bubble is based on cheap debt and super low interest rates, nothing more nothing less, all the anecdotes about what people did decades ago to buy a house are interesting but ultimately just noise, the reality is that it is deliberately engineered and propped up, and that is probably why more and more people are waking up to the idea that basic shelter should be within the reach of all hardworking people to buy?

MovingForwards

lookstraightahead said:

Lots of different perspectives!


 Everyone seems to want everything new (not just FTB) new car, new furniture, new carpets etc. When I first bought everything was passed down, or from second hand shops.

It wasn't easier then in my opinion. It's just that we view things differently,

I'm always singing the benefits of buying secondhand, seeing what's on FB, gumtree or in charity shops to keep costs down when buying a home.

The last rental I was in was unfurnished, I spent the week on the run up to getting the keys popping in to BHF and adding more items to my delivery to kit the flat out. Looked in the sales for my curtains and was given a couple of spare items by friends. Most of it moved with me, some was disposed of as it served its purpose.

MobileSaver

zagfles said:

MobileSaver said:

My comment was of course tongue in cheek although there is no reason why those who feel strongly enough couldn't leave specific instructions for when they have no further use for their home (e.g. death or care home.)

You really don't get it. Why doesn't that surprise me.

It's no use to my kids if my house in particular sells for 20% less. It's of great benefit to them (and all FTBers) if houses in general are 20% cheaper.

I totally understand what you are saying, I just disagree with your viewpoint.

If enough people think the same as you and you all sell your properties to FTBers with big discounts then that will help the younger generation. It won't help your kids specifically but that wasn't what the discussion was about.

zagfles said:

So I would welcome any policy which would result in a general reduction in house prices.

Most people would be better off with lower or at least stable house prices.

You are moving the goal posts here; the discussion was about lowering house prices but you have now introduced "stable" house prices into the mix. I simply don't believe that artificially lower house prices is good for most people.

• How are most of the 20 million existing homeowners better off in a general reduction in house prices?
• How are most house builders better off if house prices are going down while staff and material costs are going up?
• How are FTBers better off if lenders want bigger deposits and charge higher rates because house prices are falling?
• How are most lenders better off if the main asset their loans are secured on is going down in value?

I simply don't believe that artificially lower house prices is "better" for most people. We live in a market economy so let the market do its stuff and let supply and demand dictate the price.

Crashy_Time

If bond/credit markets dictate higher mortgage rates the thoughts and views of 20 million homeowners in the UK surely don`t mean much? Interesting piece on Property Bubbles being the most dangerous bubbles on Bloomberg today, the view was that CB`s want to deflate the property bubble, but that there is massive risk to the wider economy, I see that as ample proof that making the economy ALL about expensive property being traded back and forth was a massive mistake.

Crashy_Time

MobileSaver said:

zagfles said:

MobileSaver said:

My comment was of course tongue in cheek although there is no reason why those who feel strongly enough couldn't leave specific instructions for when they have no further use for their home (e.g. death or care home.)

You really don't get it. Why doesn't that surprise me.

It's no use to my kids if my house in particular sells for 20% less. It's of great benefit to them (and all FTBers) if houses in general are 20% cheaper.

I totally understand what you are saying, I just disagree with your viewpoint.

If enough people think the same as you and you all sell your properties to FTBers with big discounts then that will help the younger generation. It won't help your kids specifically but that wasn't what the discussion was about.

zagfles said:

So I would welcome any policy which would result in a general reduction in house prices.

Most people would be better off with lower or at least stable house prices.

You are moving the goal posts here; the discussion was about lowering house prices but you have now introduced "stable" house prices into the mix. I simply don't believe that artificially lower house prices is good for most people.

• How are most of the 20 million existing homeowners better off in a general reduction in house prices?
• How are most house builders better off if house prices are going down while staff and material costs are going up?
• How are FTBers better off if lenders want bigger deposits and charge higher rates because house prices are falling?
• How are most lenders better off if the main asset their loans are secured on is going down in value?

I simply don't believe that artificially lower house prices is "better" for most people. We live in a market economy so let the market do its stuff and let supply and demand dictate the price.

So as I suspected you prefer artificially high prices! Please say you are not going to argue that this is a properly functioning market economy as I won`t be able to read your posts any more after that, sorry! On the subject of cost, timber costs have started falling....

https://newyorklatestnews.com/timber-prices-are-falling-rapidly-turning-hoarding-into-sellers/203698/

MobileSaver

Grumpy_chap said:

MobileSaver said:

Do you really think over 20 million homeowners will tolerate a deliberate attempt to downvalue their main assets just so the younger generation can buy a cheap house?!?!

Well, why is that a problem?
What difference will it be when I wake up in the morning whether the house is worth £1.25m, £250k, £5m, or £25m?
Absolutely none whatsoever!

It's a problem because, knowingly or not, most people are selfish. In my opinion the vast majority of those 20 million homeowners will simply not tolerate a deliberate attempt to down-value their main asset.

If you think I'm wrong then why not start a Gov.uk petition demanding that legislation be introduced so "the financial services industry simply applied a maximum salary multiple of 3x salary", how many signatures do you think you'll get? Let's see if there's enough to get the matter debated in Parliament let alone enough to get the legislation pushed through... 

london21

The estate agents and all services linked to property are thriving at present. I was very reluctant to buy due to seeing the prices rise in front of my eyes. The stamp duty savings are been wipes away with going prices. I do feel like a lot of people have been able to save a lot of money during the lockdown, working from home etc. 
The government syimulus has really kept the housing market together.
I wonder what happens going forward because the price increases might not be sustainable.

MobileSaver

Crashy_Time said:

eidand said:

Entitlement? Don't make me laugh, put in the work, it really isn't rocket science.

The property bubble is based on cheap debt and super low interest rates, nothing more nothing less,

That's a silly thing to say...

• The change in lifestyle that has resulted in more people than ever living alone rather than as a couple has had absolutely no impact on house prices?
• The change in expectations/entitlements meaning more people want nice houses in nice areas with gardens and nice shiny new appliances has had absolutely no impact on house prices?
• The population growing faster than the housing supply has had absolutely no impact on house prices?The ever-increasing cost of building staff and materials has had absolutely no impact on house prices?
• The ever more stringent new-build housing standards (better insulation/eco-friendly/safer-electrics etc.) has had absolutely no impact on house prices?

Property prices are based on supply and demand; cheap debt and super low interest rates are a factor on the the demand side but it's just nonsense to suggest they are the only factors. Of course, there's also the slightly inconvenient truth that "cheap debt and super low interest rates" also help out on the supply side!

Crashy_Time

MobileSaver said:

Crashy_Time said:

eidand said:

Entitlement? Don't make me laugh, put in the work, it really isn't rocket science.

The property bubble is based on cheap debt and super low interest rates, nothing more nothing less,

That's a silly thing to say...

• The change in lifestyle that has resulted in more people than ever living alone rather than as a couple has had absolutely no impact on house prices?
• The change in expectations/entitlements meaning more people want nice houses in nice areas with gardens and nice shiny new appliances has had absolutely no impact on house prices?
• The population growing faster than the housing supply has had absolutely no impact on house prices?The ever-increasing cost of building staff and materials has had absolutely no impact on house prices?
• The ever more stringent new-build housing standards (better insulation/eco-friendly/safer-electrics etc.) has had absolutely no impact on house prices?

Property prices are based on supply and demand; cheap debt and super low interest rates are a factor on the the demand side but it's just nonsense to suggest they are the only factors. Of course, there's also the slightly inconvenient truth that "cheap debt and super low interest rates" also help out on the supply side!

Brexit more than mitigates your first one IMO, but even if all your points are true and set in stone, if the bond/credit markets decide tonight that mortgage rates are going up then house prices will drop regardless of the demand or otherwise for property. London, the most populous city is rammed with empty property that can`t be sold (because it is too expensive is only part of the reason) so I don`t know why you persist in trying to link property prices to "demand"? (well I do really. LOL)

Getting_greyer

Crashy,  interest rates are a non-price factor that determine the slope of the demand curve.