[johnnybgoode83]

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

You work your way up the ladder.

I want to live in this house:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-...-38142164.html

but can't afford it (even on a good salary).

You can't always get what you want!

I don't want to live next or near that monstrosity

I would love a wee country cottage with a bit of character.

[Dan Fortesque]

Originally Posted by johnnybgoode83

I don't want to live next or near that monstrosity

I would love a wee country cottage with a bit of character.

It will certainly keep the owner fit, unless there's a lift.

[johnnybgoode83]

Originally Posted by Dan Fortesque

It will certainly keep the owner fit, unless there's a lift.

I which case substitute the 'i' for 'a'

[andykn]

Originally Posted by reglip

Its even worse than that because most people don't get anywhere close to that. The figure is distorted by wages like they get in the city of London. A few years ago the figure was that 80% of people earned under 25 which was the average at the time. Only something like 20-25% of people earn the average wage

The average property price is equally distorted.

And that's why the median rather than the mean income is more usually quoted nowadays.

[andykn]

Originally Posted by Turnbull2000

Private tenants in this country aren't viewed as young people or families, but rather a source of income to be exploited and evicted on a whim.

Or, as the nice letting man put it, "re-synchronise[d]".

[TheEngineer]

Originally Posted by andykn

The average property price is equally distorted.

And that's why the median rather than the mean income is more usually quoted nowadays.

It makes sense in many circumstances.

"In Britain the average person has less than 2 legs" is true if using the mean average

[trevgo]

Originally Posted by johnnybgoode83

I don't want to live next or near that monstrosity

I would love a wee country cottage with a bit of character.

I would be very happy to live in it, but the neighbours are bound to be ghastly. You might also get mistaken for a Russian oligarch, which can be dangerous.

I am considering a move at the moment, as it happens. D'ya think they'd take 600K for it?

[Aneechik]

The sad fact is that interest rates should have increased by now, triggering a wave of repossessions and a major crash of the market. The state of the economy and the apparent necessity of low interest rates has artificially propogated high house prices and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.

The market is essentially still in the bear trap/rally phase of the bubble and interest rates have kept it there since 2008.

[WindWalker]

Originally Posted by Aneechik

The sad fact is that interest rates should have increased by now, triggering a wave of repossessions and a major crash of the market. The state of the economy and the apparent necessity of low interest rates has artificially propogated high house prices and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.

The market is essentially still in the bear trap/rally phase of the bubble and interest rates have kept it there since 2008.

It should have happened but doing so would put banks on the line as their 'assets' dropped in value and loan defaults would rise. It needs to happen but the government seems to be doing all it can to prevent it.

[Auld Snody]

Originally Posted by Jack1

Another problem with housing is that we don't build on enough land, prices would go down if we built on more green belt land near London.

Rent controls are the answer

[QofSheba]

Originally Posted by YoungAtHeart

Property prices are still overpriced in the UK,

This is because the average salary is around the 27k mark but 3x this salary is nowhere near the average price of a property in the UK.

Only in the Southeast of England, they have fallen drastically everywhere else.

[QofSheba]

Originally Posted by Auld Snody

Rent controls are the answer

Yes, I agree, capping rents is the best option.

[QofSheba]

Originally Posted by Aneechik

The sad fact is that interest rates should have increased by now, triggering a wave of repossessions and a major crash of the market. The state of the economy and the apparent necessity of low interest rates has artificially propogated high house prices and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.

The market is essentially still in the bear trap/rally phase of the bubble and interest rates have kept it there since 2008.

I read somewhere a year or so ago that the banks ha to hold back on putting repossesions on the market, to prevent a crash in prices. They are probably sitting at the BofE as part of the toxic assets we aare holding when the banks were bailed out.

[jjne]

Any attempts to prevent a crash now are only going to make the bang even bigger further down the line.

[Phil 2804]

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

But 3 x Joint Salaries is around the average price.

Obviously it depends where you live as well!

It used to be 3x ONE average salary, and the most a bank would lend you is 3x the highest salary plus the second salary for a couple.

Any measure you want to look at house prices, especially in London, the SE and other major cities with booming economies have gone way past affordable.

This is not lefty speak btw, the IMF has also highlighted housing costs as a major millstone on the economy. After all the more a person has to spend just for a roof over their head the less they have to spend on other things, like cars, clothes and other luxuries.

[missille]

Originally Posted by QofSheba

Only in the Southeast of England, they have fallen drastically everywhere else.

No they haven't,house prices are still vastly inflated even in a mill town like mine...

[Aneechik]

Originally Posted by QofSheba

I read somewhere a year or so ago that the banks ha to hold back on putting repossesions on the market, to prevent a crash in prices. They are probably sitting at the BofE as part of the toxic assets we aare holding when the banks were bailed out.

Well funnily enough I read in one of the papers that in Manchester city centre there are numerous apartment buildings that are mostly empty and the developers were only putting the apartments on the market one at a time to avoid the local market plummetting, so I wouldn't be surprised if the banks aren't also doing the same.

[andykn]

Originally Posted by Aneechik

Well funnily enough I read in one of the papers that in Manchester city centre there are numerous apartment buildings that are mostly empty and the developers were only putting the apartments on the market one at a time to avoid the local market plummetting, so I wouldn't be surprised if the banks aren't also doing the same.

I don't think official repossession figures bear that out.

And I remember the last crash, you get to hear about it personally when repossessions increase. I don't think the figures can be fiddled.

Even arrears figures haven't gone up to suggest a hidden tranche of repossessions waiting to happen.

Whatever the merits of keeping interest rates low, it seems to be working in keeping people in houses.

I think the best we can hope for is for interest rates to rise slowly as inflation reduces the size of payments.

[blue85]

Originally Posted by starman700

The bubble will burst soon,it can not carry on much further like this.

Why on earth not? House building at an all-time low, and we are faced with this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15461579

Prices are far, far more likely to carry on increasing disproportionately in the long term!

[MARTYM8]

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

You work your way up the ladder.

I want to live in this house:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-...-38142164.html

but can't afford it (even on a good salary).

You can't always get what you want!

There obviously speaks someone over 35 or 40 - and that ridiculous comment 'the ladder'. The problem is the over 40s have climbed the ladder - and pulled it up behind them.

The average age of a first time buyer is now 37 - by which age most people have reached their maximum earning potential. So the first property they are likely to buy may well be their last - because they won't earn any more to 'move up the ladder'

Its very sad we are obsessed with 'climbing up the ladder' and rising house prices - instead of just ensuring we all have somewhere decent to live. Cos in the end all rising house prices are is intergenerational theft - an older generation basically stealing from their kids and grandkids.

But hey - carry on up the ladder. Just hope you don't fall off!

[andykn]

Originally Posted by MARTYM8

There obviously speaks someone over 35 or 40 - and that ridiculous comment 'the ladder'. The problem is the over 40s have climbed the ladder - and pulled it up behind them.

The average age of a first time buyer is now 37 - by which age most people have reached their maximum earning potential. So the first property they are likely to buy may well be their last - because they won't earn any more to 'move up the ladder'

Its very sad we are obsessed with 'climbing up the ladder' and rising house prices - instead of just ensuring we all have somewhere decent to live. Cos in the end all rising house prices are is intergenerational theft - an older generation basically stealing from their kids and grandkids.

But hey - carry on up the ladder. Just hope you don't fall off!

One of the big reasons the "average" age of first time buyers (FTB) has gone up is divorce and separation, each half of a couple can count as a FTB.

Having a housing "ladder" is no different to cars. Very few people's first car is a brand new Ford Mondeo.

[PLAN9FAN]

New builds near where I live are still going for minimum of £125,000 - £130,000.

This is for a 2 bedroom house with tiny rooms, virtually no gardens and built in an area where they don't really belong compared to the rest of the housing. And this is in an area that never really recovered from the 1980s!

I don't know how people can still afford these prices. Most wages are either static or have reduced whilst living costs keep going up. How much longer can this go on? How much longer can the can be kicked down the road?!

Housing needs a correction of 30% otherwise the younger end will never get a mortgage.

[andykn]

Originally Posted by PLAN9FAN

New builds near where I live are still going for minimum of £125,000 - £130,000.

This is for a 2 bedroom house with tiny rooms, virtually no gardens and built in an area where they don't really belong compared to the rest of the housing. And this is in an area that never really recovered from the 1980s!

I don't know how people can still afford these prices. Most wages are either static or have reduced whilst living costs keep going up. How much longer can this go on? How much longer can the can be kicked down the road?!

Housing needs a correction of 30% otherwise the younger end will never get a mortgage.

Two people on 20k 2 1/2 times joint plus deposit.

[hume]

Originally Posted by gulliverfoyle

under normal circumstances we would be out the other side of the crash

the normal rules are not in effect

with 0.5% interest rates people can afford there massive mortgages

if they hadnt cut so far the supply and demand rules would have applied

and the prices would have dropped and we would have got back to fair value

but the banks and govt colluded to socialise the debt so the whole sorry mess can continue

and the plebs can pay

its coming to a end no amount of printing will solve it

debt is not wealth


buy gold

I agree to some extent, but what you're failing to realise is QE could go on indefinitely. Japan has printed 30 trillion yen since the financial crisis of the 90's. There won't be an end to QE and physical gold prices will be manipulated through ETFs. I agree, buy gold but don't expect it to be worth anything in fiat currency.

[MARTYM8]

Originally Posted by andykn

One of the big reasons the "average" age of first time buyers (FTB) has gone up is divorce and separation, each half of a couple can count as a FTB.

Having a housing "ladder" is no different to cars. Very few people's first car is a brand new Ford Mondeo.

Really - did people only start getting divorced and separated in the last 10 years then. Cos the average age of FTBs was much lower then.

Of course we didn't have buy to let then - people buying up multiple houses of the type that first time buyers used to buy and pushing up the prices. And then we spend £20bn on housing benefit - much of it going to pay buy to let landlords mortgages.

Far from being a good thing high house prices are destroying this country - but we are too brainwashed to see it. When food, gas or electricity or council tax rises its a bad thing - but when the cost of shelter rises its wonderful. When in reality its not good for society if families cannot have long term stability in housing because they are unable to buy and have to live in private rentals with the risk of being evicted with a few weeks notice.

Buying a home used to be something most aspired to - for many now it is out of their reach for ever (and renting isn't cheap either). This has the potential to lead to social division - and growing alienation. And we saw last August what that can lead to.

PS iF the price of a Ford Mondeo had trebled in the last decade they wouldn't be able to sell them - but then of course the market for cars isn't rigged like the housing market.