BBC: Where property prices are set by what local people earn

[Deleted User]

MobileSaver said:

[Deleted User] said:

MobileSaver said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

If mortgage is set by 3.5X earnings then house prices need to get back down to there too

Over a million people in the UK manage to buy a property every single year, even in the current climate.

So the obvious answer for those complaining they can't afford to buy is for them to either buy something cheaper or instead better themselves to improve their earnings. Why should the rest of us be brought down to the lowest common denominator?

It's really sad that people think this is acceptable. ... It's not at all wrong to want the same opportunities your parents and grandparents had.

Young people have far more opportunities and a much easier and more comfortable life than their parents and grandparents ever had.

I find it really sad that some people just focus on high house prices and ignore everything else when they could be appreciating all the incredible benefits and improvements introduced by the hard work, tenacity and inventiveness of previous generations.

Up until the age of around 11 our home was one bedroom which was shared by us five children while our parents slept on a sofa bed in the lounge. Today's generation come on to this forum asking how they can get an extra bedroom because they have a newborn on the way, the sense of entitlement is palpable!

Yes yes, I too had to walk to work uphill both ways, 25 hours a day down pit and pay the foreman for the privilege.

This argument that some people had it bad in the past is not a justification for people having it bad now.

In fact, that's one of the biggest problems with the UK. People seem to feel that if they suffered in the past they are entitled to make other people suffer now.

Besides, we know who will be moaning when the population is falling, we need to bring in lots of immigrants to fill jobs, and the tax base is shrinking anyway. We have birth control now, nobody has to have 5 kids if they can't afford it.

MobileSaver

[Deleted User] said:

MobileSaver said:

[Deleted User] said:

MobileSaver said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

If mortgage is set by 3.5X earnings then house prices need to get back down to there too

Over a million people in the UK manage to buy a property every single year, even in the current climate.

So the obvious answer for those complaining they can't afford to buy is for them to either buy something cheaper or instead better themselves to improve their earnings. Why should the rest of us be brought down to the lowest common denominator?

It's really sad that people think this is acceptable. ... It's not at all wrong to want the same opportunities your parents and grandparents had.

Young people have far more opportunities and a much easier and more comfortable life than their parents and grandparents ever had.

I find it really sad that some people just focus on high house prices and ignore everything else when they could be appreciating all the incredible benefits and improvements introduced by the hard work, tenacity and inventiveness of previous generations.

Up until the age of around 11 our home was one bedroom which was shared by us five children while our parents slept on a sofa bed in the lounge. Today's generation come on to this forum asking how they can get an extra bedroom because they have a newborn on the way, the sense of entitlement is palpable!

This argument that some people had it bad in the past is not a justification for people having it bad now.

Thanks for proving my point; the younger generation have a huge number of opportunities and improvements to quality of life that their parents and grandparents couldn't even have dreamed of, yet some just want to whinge and moan about house prices while disregarding all the positive things.

[Deleted User] said:

nobody has to have 5 kids if they can't afford it.

I don't remember going without anything; my parents fed us, clothed us and we had toys to play with.

The difference is that there was no sense of entitlement to brand new clothes, brand new toys or a bedroom each. Clothes and toys (often second-hand already) were handed down to younger siblings while bunk beds allowed us to share a single room.

My parents got married in the local church and the reception was in the local social club, not on a beach in the Maldives costing five figures. They drove an old car bought with cash not a brand new model on HP. Many people we knew lived in old two-up, two-down terraces regardless of how many kids they had, people just made do and didn't expect everything to be brand new and shiny.

The fundamental problem is that the younger generation don't understand or care about any of this, they just see the previous generations living in nice houses in nice areas and want the same, completely overlooking that it took those people decades of earning a living to get where they are now.

grumiofoundation

MobileSaver said:

The fundamental problem is that the younger generation don't understand or care about any of this, they just see the previous generations living in nice houses in nice areas and want the same, completely overlooking that it took those people decades of earning a living to get where they are now.

I think the fundamental problem is actually people making sweeping (and demonstrably inaccurate) statements about whole generations. 

MobileSaver

grumiofoundation said:

MobileSaver said:

The fundamental problem is that the younger generation don't understand or care about any of this, they just see the previous generations living in nice houses in nice areas and want the same, completely overlooking that it took those people decades of earning a living to get where they are now.

I think the fundamental problem is actually people making sweeping (and demonstrably inaccurate) statements about whole generations.

If you really think that's the fundamental problem then what's the solution?

Gavin83

BobT36 said:

housebuyer143 said:

MobileSaver said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

If mortgage is set by 3.5X earnings then house prices need to get back down to there too

Over a million people in the UK manage to buy a property every single year, even in the current climate.

So the obvious answer for those complaining they can't afford to buy is for them to either buy something cheaper or instead better themselves to improve their earnings. Why should the rest of us be brought down to the lowest common denominator?

I do feel that many first time buyers have unrealistic expectations, wanting to purchase a 3 bed semi as thier first house or larger, all done out immaculate etc. 
It's called a ladder for a reason and people need to have realistic expectations when buying their first place if they don't have the money to buy what they are dreaming of. 

If we ignore the south east it is very possible to get on the housing ladder if people set their sights a little smaller initially.

The average age of FTBers is now 34... Most of those will be renting and putting off having kids due to that. Dangerously close to infertility years (especially if not had the first already). 

Guess what happens when no-one is having kids anymore as they can't get anything better than a 1 bed flat in dangerous areas... No more pensions being paid for current retirees! 

That, or even more mass immigration. 

FTBers are no longer 19 year olds wanting to get their first foot on the property ladder and happy with a small 1-2 bed flat/terrace..

People putting off having kids has nothing to do with housing. Even developed countries with lower cost housing have falling birth rates. The main reasons are an increase in female education and improved contraception.

It’s partly a mentality issue too. In the not too distant past people would aim to be married in their teens with kids following soon after. These days people want to “live more” before having children. They want the partying, the holidays, the multiple sexual partners….

Most people don’t even meet the person they have kids with until their late 20s/30s. That’s certainly nothing to do with housing.

There’s also the rise of people who don’t want kids at all. Unusual in the past, these days not so much. Again the question as to why less people want kids is an interesting debate. 

spoovy

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

If mortgage is set by 3.5X earnings then house prices need to get back down to there too

Over a million people in the UK manage to buy a property every single year, even in the current climate.

So the obvious answer for those complaining they can't afford to buy is for them to either buy something cheaper or instead better themselves to improve their earnings. Why should the rest of us be brought down to the lowest common denominator?

 Rising interest rates are designed to bring down prices, all people need to do is wait, they won`t need a wage rise or even to lower their expectations.

Sorry but you're wrong again. Interest rates are a lever used to bring about a target inflation rate of 2%. Note that this is a positive number. Prices will still rise.
Negative inflation is generally regarded as disastrous as it can send an economy into a doom spiral (why buy anything now when it will be cheaper next year?).

spoovy

Many people on here seem to believe that there is a "natural limit" to house prices, as there is with bread or fuel, where society begins to unravel beyond a certain point. But this is not true. Having somewhere to live is a basic human necessity like bread or fuel; but owning property is not.
There is no upper limit to the differential between incomes and house prices for this reason. I see no reason why, say one hundred years from now, owning your own house won't be considered a rare luxury.

[Deleted User]

MobileSaver said:

[Deleted User] said:

MobileSaver said:

[Deleted User] said:

MobileSaver said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

If mortgage is set by 3.5X earnings then house prices need to get back down to there too

Over a million people in the UK manage to buy a property every single year, even in the current climate.

So the obvious answer for those complaining they can't afford to buy is for them to either buy something cheaper or instead better themselves to improve their earnings. Why should the rest of us be brought down to the lowest common denominator?

It's really sad that people think this is acceptable. ... It's not at all wrong to want the same opportunities your parents and grandparents had.

Young people have far more opportunities and a much easier and more comfortable life than their parents and grandparents ever had.

I find it really sad that some people just focus on high house prices and ignore everything else when they could be appreciating all the incredible benefits and improvements introduced by the hard work, tenacity and inventiveness of previous generations.

Up until the age of around 11 our home was one bedroom which was shared by us five children while our parents slept on a sofa bed in the lounge. Today's generation come on to this forum asking how they can get an extra bedroom because they have a newborn on the way, the sense of entitlement is palpable!

This argument that some people had it bad in the past is not a justification for people having it bad now.

Thanks for proving my point; the younger generation have a huge number of opportunities and improvements to quality of life that their parents and grandparents couldn't even have dreamed of, yet some just want to whinge and moan about house prices while disregarding all the positive things.

[Deleted User] said:

nobody has to have 5 kids if they can't afford it.

I don't remember going without anything; my parents fed us, clothed us and we had toys to play with.

The difference is that there was no sense of entitlement to brand new clothes, brand new toys or a bedroom each. Clothes and toys (often second-hand already) were handed down to younger siblings while bunk beds allowed us to share a single room.

My parents got married in the local church and the reception was in the local social club, not on a beach in the Maldives costing five figures. They drove an old car bought with cash not a brand new model on HP. Many people we knew lived in old two-up, two-down terraces regardless of how many kids they had, people just made do and didn't expect everything to be brand new and shiny.

The fundamental problem is that the younger generation don't understand or care about any of this, they just see the previous generations living in nice houses in nice areas and want the same, completely overlooking that it took those people decades of earning a living to get where they are now.

You didn't go without anything, but there were 5 of you to a bedroom?

Let me guess, you got up half and hour before you went to bed, ate rocks for breakfast...

Poverty is bad. You should not expect people to raise children if they can't properly house them. Incredible that has to be said in 2023 but here you are.

[Deleted User]

spoovy said:

Many people on here seem to believe that there is a "natural limit" to house prices, as there is with bread or fuel, where society begins to unravel beyond a certain point. But this is not true. Having somewhere to live is a basic human necessity like bread or fuel; but owning property is not.
There is no upper limit to the differential between incomes and house prices for this reason. I see no reason why, say one hundred years from now, owning your own house won't be considered a rare luxury.

Unaffordable housing creates social problems.

tooldle

You didn't go without anything, but there were 5 of you to a bedroom?

Let me guess, you got up half and hour before you went to bed, ate rocks for breakfast...

Poverty is bad. You should not expect people to raise children if they can't properly house them. Incredible that has to be said in 2023 but here you are.

Different times, and quite normal to have siblings sharing often with large age gaps. 

Quite a few of my classmates lived in flats and shared bedrooms with their siblings. In some family’s the older siblings were adults in employment, yet still they shared.