The 1960s house

meanmachine_2

as you saying, people in the sixties were having to draw on both wages to buy a property, so the notion that this new massively inflated average price we've arrived at is just a sign of the times is, quite frankly, garbage.

And yes, in the 60s there werent many houses to buy, but the prices weren't through the roof, because property wasn't seen as a way to get rich quick.

Bring on the crash. Maybe people will get real jobs then.

Ian_W

Lush W wrote: Ok you all disagree, so what do you all women worked forever thinkers feel is the major factor in affordability of housing in the 1960s and now? Women working more now is just my opinion, it would be interesting to hear what you all think as to what has happened.

Sorry, Lush but my family background exactly mirrors Pennywise but probably pre-dates hers by 20/30yrs. I think both experiences are correct but relate to class - prof middle class wives stopped work to have families then stayed at home, working class wives didn't have maternity leave but only stopped work for a few years to have a family then went back. Generalisation I know, but overall certainly my experience.
Nurseries & "creches" [always thought that was 2 cars colliding in Knightsbridge!] aren't new, lots of factories & mills had them in the 50's, 60's & 70's - until we de-industialised. But my "child-care" and "after school club" were provided by Granma.
Affordability, several reason IMV. Women's work tended to be seen as "unskilled" & far less well paid, not saying it's right but you still see it to-day in occupations that are traditionally female, like nursing, catering etc. So there wasn't 2 wages, more like 1.5 - though both worked very hard.
Most working people were paid weekly/fortnightly in cash and had limited involvement with banks, maybe some savings in the Post Office or BS but few had current accounts. Lenders were far stricter, my 1st mortgage, well into in the 70's BTW, with Halifax BS [not Bank] was, from memory, 2.5x earnings max and you had to have saved with them for 2 yrs to apply.
As Maisie says, there wasn't the expectation to buy for most workiung people so not the same market in 1960 for buying & selling houses. People lived in digs, private rented or had council houses in large swaithes of the country. Prof's could get money from their bank, many others found it much more difficult to get a mortgage, so the demand to buy wasn't as it is to-day - despite the fact there was a massive post-war shortage of housing even beyond 1960.
I think you'll find ONS figures show owner occupiers in the 50's at 30%, to-day over 70%. So MM is right on strict pay to price affordability, but if large numbers had no expectation of owning and wouldn't have got the finance to buy anyway - there wasn't really the MASS market to push up prices that there is now.
Bit like comparing different era's in sport really - lots of opinions, bit of bile [behave MM] but in the end a bit futile simply because things are so different!

rozeepozee

meanmachine wrote:

Bring on the crash. Maybe people will get real jobs then.

Now, now, MM. What constitues a real job? People do need landlords, y'know. Some people would chose/need to rent rather than buy.

lush_walrus

Its interesting to read that something I have always thought of as a changing thing actually isnt!

Perhaps Ian W, you may have hit the nail on the head. I hate to think of life in classes in any shape or form, but as I said earlier all of the females in my family were well educated in the formal sense, most practicing law only to abandon their career for the sake of having children (meant in the nicest posible way of course). It has always amazed me that these women who had strived until children abandoned all, and it sounds as if I wrongly assumed this was the norm. It definately a question that goes around my head on the topic of children personally I dont feel as if I am ready to abandon my career, or feel as if I want my children to be brought up by someone else, but thats a whole other topic!.

meanmachine_2

rozeepozee wrote:

Now, now, MM. What constitues a real job? People do need landlords, y'know. Some people would chose/need to rent rather than buy.

Dont get defensive, I was merely referring to "flippers" and Tv-inspired property developers.

Although the BTL brigade with their temporary pension fillip should also wither and die now that there's no more capital gains to be had - at least for the next few years.

rozeepozee

meanmachine wrote:

Dont get defensive, I was merely referring to "flippers" and Tv-inspired property developers.

Although the BTL brigade with their temporary pension fillip should also wither and die now that there's no more capital gains to be had - at least for the next few years.

Not defensive, I just like to tease you about your negativism. I'm convinced you're a big softie really.

Back to your original post and from the replies, it would seem it's always been hard to buy a home, but with fewer marrying/living together as young couples, it's especially hard for those increasing numbers of people wanting or needing to buy on their own as it's nigh on impossible to afford a property with only one income?

meanmachine_2

True and the other social factor we have to consider is that of marriage breakdown.

I honestly wouldn't take a joint mortgage, as I'm not confident that the relationship would survive the full 25 years.

Isn't that sad?

So I can only buy based on a sole income.

Ian_W

lush w wrote: I hate to think of life in classes in any shape or form

I didn't like to put it in terms of class but that's why your perception was different to Pennywise & Maisie's. People don't really understand that now - when you mention council houses these days people think of sink estates, drugs and crime but then council houses were occupied by ordinary decent people who weren't in a position to buy. My primary school headmaster lived in a council house, not job related, he wasn't conditioned to buy - did later though.
As the 60's went on and thro' the 70's & 80's more people had incomes and access to lending that allowed them to better themselves by owning their own homes, not as investments, but to bring up their families in somewhere they owned. Their kids took that for granted, so in a bit over a generation the 70/30 split between renting and owning reversed - no wonder prices have risen.
So MM if the working class hadn't got upperty you could have still had your 3 to 1 affordability. They did, now you can't, so tough sh*t, live with it!!
BTW when you mention "proper jobs" the doyen of apprenticeships when I left school was as an engineering draftsman - v.v. good money without the dirt & sweat. Bumped into a former schoolmate who'd got one of these, clever lad - only one I knew who could make a sliderule talk. Now a product advisor at B&Q -no engineering, no need for draftsmen!! Big regret is most of his pension went with the company so he'll be working for a long time yet - but he did buy his own home, just to cheer you up.
Edit: Reason: Spealling mishtake!

John_M_Business

In any case, I wouldn't pay a premium for a 1960's house...

* Brown shag pile carpets
* Brown furniture
* Olive green bathroom suites
* Orange lampshades
* Fall apart chipboard kitchen units
* Laminated floors

In all seriousness, the points I made right at the beginning still stand true and are the main reasons behind the increase... topped up by consumer madness, of course ;-)

lush_walrus

meanmachine wrote:

True and the other social factor we have to consider is that of marriage breakdown.

I honestly wouldn't take a joint mortgage, as I'm not confident that the relationship would survive the full 25 years.

Isn't that sad?

So I can only buy based on a sole income.

MM, that is sad happy relationships are still out there, same as they always was. The only difference now to then is that only the truely happy ones survive as divorce is an option.

Anyway, Im sure once you are on that ladder you will whip away at that mortgage and pay it off well before the 25 years!

Your time will come MM for all of it, just don't keep letting the situation as it is wind you up.