So there is some aggreement that mostly it takes 2 to by a house instead of the possibility of 1 in the 70s....
So 1 person now probably cannot on average wages buy themselfs a house on 3 times earnings...on their own...
All I am saying is that it takes 2 to buy now instead of 1 ...and the house price costs are now 20 times more ...and the deposit is 10 times more... And the cost can now be up to 70 % of the joint income of 2 people's earnings..
So that is where we are at... And the future no doubt be changed again to 30..40..50. Years or .lifetime mortgages just to keep the mortgage monthly payments down as house price increase further..in years to come.....but never have the luxury of having paid the mortgage off and have loads off money to enjoy in later life...
I still prefere the deal that i took and was more the norm on offer back in 1974...
So we are heading for..... ...
A mortgage driven debt to be sustained in being paid most of our working life .. In the future ......to achieve lower monthly affordable repayments..?.. Over longer periods.... you can see it coming....40 years time the average house will be.......who knows £1 million...?
A very big subject with many points of view....thanks to all of you for your thoughts ... different ages create different emotions regarding house prices...the good and the bad times.... Life and the economy and pensions seem to revolve around house prices... And will no doubt like this debate continue for many decades to come...
no I don't expect a country to have no debt , but debt should always be kept to realistic levels , not done by this or the last government . you could ask what went wrong , well the waste of the money collected from north sea oil was one mistake , should of followed Norway and created a fund . then we could say we entered a war we couldn't win and one that wasn't really our war , an illegal war. what was the cost in , firstly lives then money and has it made the world more secure ? nope but the arms dealers are profiting from that war and the turmoil it has caused , just as the US wanted . printing money to prop up a country is another mistake , when the printing stops the markets will fall and a new crisis will be started . funny old game , history being repeated .
Without being able to take the time to really go through your posts, I think it is worth noting that wages growth and house price increases are comprised of mostly different and divergent economic factors. Obviously, house price increases are primarily related to underlying demand and supply factors. Demand is in turn related to population growth and demography (who is living where), and supply is obviously a factor of new building and maintenance of existing stock. If there is a massive divergence betwen the rate of population growth and the amount of new and existing housing stock, in a free market prices will inevitably rise.
Wages growth is different: factors like productivity, price levels, trade union activity, the kinds of production and services created within the economy all affect the levels of wages, and even then, it isn't a simple relationship. Back in the 1970s, wages growth was into double figures, but it wasn't a good thing because it was part of a terrible cycle of inflation and union wage claims. Now, wgaes growth is provbably negative and yet there are significant productivity benefits to be gained from the process (production becomes cheaper in the long term).
The problem that you are seeing isn't (in my opinion) related to a lack of wages growth but to chronic underinvestment in new housing stock, but this has been a characteristic of the UK economy for more than 60 years. Additionally, too many people want to (or need to) live in the South East and so in that area, prices rise more than anywhere else. The fundamental economic problem however isn't related to either wages or the immediate need to build more houses, but to the geographic distribution of economic activity in Britain; if government services, private companies and government were located significantly away from London and the SE (and ideally in the less wealthy parts of the UK like the NE and NW), then wealth, incomes, and new investment in housing could move into areas where there was both space and capacity and this would create its own positive economic momentum. The problem is that it is a very, very difficult thing in both political and economic terms, to encourage such a movement. Until a government comes along that has the b*lls to do so, these underlying problems will exist and the same distortions will continue to occur.
I do agree with you in some of your points. It does seem harder today than in the past. Also as we have said before, in the past people had the chance to work a lot of overtime so earned quite a bit more than the average wage at the time. My point is, even if generally it takes two today when in the past one could buy on ones own, it is still possible to get on the housing ladder. It's not impossible unless someone or a couple are looking at very expensive areas and then are naturally pricing themselves out of the market.
Quite so..157k for a 2 bed house ..a 3 bed will probably cost 25k more
My point is I was able to buy my 3 house on my own on one person wages ...on 3 times earnings..it now takes in most cases 2 people to fund a current mortgage...on 3 to 5 times earnings...the deposit needed to buy my house now is equal to the cost i paid to the house....the rental I could get for my house in one year is now also equal to what I paid to buy my house..
You may well say that houses are affordable now.. But it takes 2 to buy when in was possible for 1 to buy on 3 times my earnings back in 1974.....Only a small part of a wife's earnings was excepted then ..restricting the amount of mortgage debt... And it worked... It was called stability ... And we had mortgage tax relief to help us every year... And fixed term mortgage on 25 years... All far different now....
I could not afford my house now on double my earnings....
What pay in a months food bill now.....paid my mortgage back then
Bottom line is it now in most cases takes 2 to buy a house compared to 1 40 years ago ... Add to that fact .. It' takes up to 3 to 6 times joint earnings now .......against 3 times a single earnings back then....that is the one main difference...when my wife worked we were quids in as it was not calculated as part of the mortgage budget... Which was affordable on my one income.....infact we lived on my income alone ..for 3 years paying all the bills as the children were born... The wife looking after them at home...and I earned below the average wage... Is was all so much possible compared today...
Boy how things have changed... That is also a fact....history often tell how things have got harder even of some MPs still think things are still affordable..and that makes it all ok..... Even if it takes upto 70% of peoples joint income to buy a house... Compared to my 50% on 1 wage...40 years ago.....
It still remains the question..... why only house prices have increased 20 times plus the price they were 40 years ago ... And nothing else has increased anywhere near that amount during that same period ...including wages..
If a boom in house selling is starting... A bust will surely follow... Ground hog day all over again.. In 10 years time..?
Surveyors are seeing house prices rise at their fastest pace since their 2006 peak as the market revival spreads across the country.
The number of would-be buyers looking to enter the market in July also saw the strongest growth in four years, in further signs that a recovery is "round the corner", the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (Rics) said.
The West Midlands and the North East, areas which Rics said have "suffered more than most" since the market crash, experienced the biggest increases in buyer activity in July, according to the latest Rics UK housing market report.
Growth in buyer numbers was seen across the UK as the upswing in activity, which has been particularly concentrated in London and the South East, spread outwards and a balance of 53% more surveyors reported increases rather than falls in demand.
As buyer numbers strengthened, prices rose across the country for the fourth month in a row, growing at their fastest rate since the market peak of November 2006, Rics said.
Looking ahead, a balance of 35% more surveyors expect prices to continue their increase rather than fall, while 53% more surveyors expect sales to rise over the next three months.
Peter Bolton King, Rics global residential director, said: "It looks like at long last a recovery could be around the corner.
"Growth in buyer numbers and prices have been happening in some parts of the country since the beginning of the year but this is the first time that everywhere has experienced some improvement.
"It is clearly good news that those parts of the property market that were struggling are at last showing some signs of life."
Lenders, estate agents and property websites have been reporting big uplifts in activity this year following the launch of various Government schemes to unblock the housing market.
More first-time buyers have been seen entering the market and sellers also appear to be more confident about sticking close to their asking prices amid improved mortgage availability.
But fears have been raised that the initiatives must not lead to a property bubble. Particular concerns have been raised about a Government scheme called Help to Buy, which will underwrite £130 billion of low-deposit mortgage lending with state guarantees from next year.
A study released by Halifax last month found that the typical house price paid by a first-time buyer is 4.26 times their annual earnings, well above an average of 3.23 over the last 30 years.
Rics said that alongside improved buyer confidence, more potential sellers are looking to test the market. Last month saw 15% more surveyors reporting rises rather than falls in new instructions.
Seller numbers have been on the rise for the last six months - but in each of these months this has been outstripped by the rise in new buyer enquiries.
Cheers mate ..... , all done and dusted moved in three weeks ago . Lots to do but couldn't be more pleased .Small village , friendly people nice area not much time to post but it seems to be the same discussions as a few weeks ago........haven't missed much by the looks of it , lol.
yes really good for the banks , just think how many times those mortgages can be re-hypothecated :-) , on the other side , that's what got us in the pickle we are in , the way to get out of debt is to pay it , not to take on more debt . so how is there a recovery ? UK more in debt now than before the crisis and same in the US and Europe . plastering over the cracks doesn't stop a house from falling , it just looks better till it falls.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NETbuilder and Interactive Data.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk!
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.