To wonder how people are going to actually buy houses?

[slatternlymother]

There's going to be a whole generation that can't, isn't there?

What about those people who rented due to circumstances/not knowing if they wanted to live there long term/work commitments etc, and then hit the wrong end of the financial crisis?

We rent, and have (luckily) really well paid jobs for our age. We are 25, and between running a car, putting DS through nursery, and just living, I doubt we'll have enough of a deposit to buy anything reasonable before we're 30. 28/29 at an absolute push. And that will be pressuring us to make a choice on where we're going to be living, but we won't be able to leave it much later because otherwise we'll be tied up in a mortgage forever.

But we are so, so lucky. Actually, it was blind luck that got us here.

And if we're struggling, how the hell is everyone else coping? Tbh, I'd happily rent all my life, but I worry about retirement age and no longer being able to pull in a decent wage.

AIBU to think that long term, more and more elderly people will have been in rented accommodation their whole lives, so when they do retire; they're going to have to fall back on the state, aren't they? To put them up in council accommodation?

Isn't this just a massive time bomb for the future?

Sorry for rambling thoughts, I just have been thinking about this quite a lot recently

[Mosman]

YOUng people don't vote so actually no it won't be a vote winner at all. The biggest demographic did very well under the Conservatives last time and are home owners so I should get packing if I were you and start making a dent in that mortgage because no matter what the other conditions the biggest factor in accumulating wealth is time.

[mondaytuesday]

There will never be a house price crash while interest rates are so low. That's exactly why they're keeping interest rates low!

it won't be a vote winner at all

Do pay attention at the back, these points have been addressed and this WILL be in the exam.

The base rate is low in an attempt to keep the plates spinning for as long as possible. Despite the same low base rate mortgage rates are going up and will continue to do so.

QE and low base rate have bought time, nothing more. And at the cost of general inflation. Propping up these stupid prices are why your fuel bills and food bills are going up. Mortgage rates are what matter and they are going up. The real economy can only be sacrificed for so long just to keep a minority in houses they can't afford.

Older people do vote more than young people. They also want grandchildren. They want their own children to afford to leave home and have lives of their own like they did. Also this issue will soon become the reason why younger people will start voting again, it is an obvious target for politicians to gain the votes of a huge segment of the population for whom this issue is their number 1 concern.

It doesn't matter if you deny it, it's happening anyway. You should be pleased.

[Mosman]

so long just to keep a minority in houses they can't afford

7 years so far that's a quarter of my mortgage term by the time this so called crash occurs i'll have 80% equity as will the majority of my peers who are over paying their mortgages month on month and then it won't matter to them what buyers can afford the house simply won't be for sale at a loss and you can buy it at the price they decide or rent it at the price they decide.

[mondaytuesday]

so called crash

I never called it a crash, it is a correction, and it has been in progress since 2007.

you can buy it at the price they decide or rent it at the price they decide

If it's unaffordable it won't sell or rent. This isn't a difficult concept, I won't be repeating it again.

Anyone holding out for an unachievable price will die in their house before it sells. Whoever inherits will have to sell it for an affordable price too, or it won't ever sell. Such properties at silly asking prices are not really on the market.

i'll have 80% equity

You would have paid a sum of money in exchange for a proportion of a house and paid interest to a lender. When you sell no-one will be along to pay more than the market value just so you can break even.

Until you sell your house you won't know what it cost you. If you never sell and are happy with what you paid what does it matter.

I wouldn't count on making a profit! Good luck.

[mizu]

This is an interesting thread and relevant to us. I am nearly 40 and my DH a few years younger. We rent and have done for a long time.

We are lucky in that the landlord wants someone in his (one of many) house longterm. Unlucky in the fact that there is no central heating and the house is pretty shabby.

Lucky in the fact that it is cheap(ish) in comparison to other rented properties in this sought after area.

We both earn under £20,000 a year and save £500 a month. It is taking a long time to get together a decent deposit.

Neither of us will earn much more than we do now. We do not have holidays, sky TV, go out for meals and all that stuff that some on here seem to think people who rent do regularly.

[Mosman]

You spectacularly miss the point over and over the house isn't a vehicle to make money/profit it's about getting rid of the liability as fast as possible and living rent/debt free.

Don't talk at me like I am a small child I've heard the arguments over and over since 2004. We are no closer to the "correction" than we were 9 years ago.

[MakingAnotherList]

It's not so much owning a house that concerns me, it's the thought of having to pay rent in retirement and the cost of moving when we're no longer young and fit enough to do it ourselves.

[mondaytuesday]

Don't talk at me like I am a small child I've heard the arguments over and over since 2004. We are no closer to the "correction" than we were 9 years ago.

Until you demonstrate an ability to reason beyond that of a small child I have no intention of treating you in any other manner.

Again, the peak was 2007 ! Did you miss the financial crisis coming to a head in 2008? It was in some of the papers.

You waste my time, I won't respond further, my points are there for those with the eyes to see.

[Mosman]

It's not so much owning a house that concerns me, it's the thought of having to pay rent in retirement and the cost of moving when we're no longer young and fit enough to do it ourselves.

That's everyone's motivation no doubt and it's why owning will attract a premium.

As for those with eyes, people see what they want to see and believe what suits their own belief system. But you have been wrong so far and everyone who can buy will do because the alternative as described above is too awful to contemplate.

[noddyholder]

You need to pay to advertise!

[mondaytuesday]

people see what they want to see and believe what suits their own belief system

I should say so! Wow! Nothing happened in 2008 then? Prices haven't been falling since 2007? No-one now is having any problem selling and having to reduce the price? You're in a parallel universe!

you have been wrong so far

About what? The correction is happening now and started in 2007.

It's sad for you that you made the biggest purchase of your life in an overheated market, particularly one financed by borrowed money charged at interest. I feel sad for you, you've demonstrated you don't really understand what is going on, but it's the bankers and cowardly politicians you should be angry at, they are the ones that took advantage of you, they bought this situation about. Don't shoot the messenger. But for your own sake at least look at the reality of the situation, or your financial future could look even worse.

I wish you the best of luck.

[Orwellian]

It will change once the renter class outvote the property class. At the moment the property class has more voters, more money and more power. I think it is all going to change over the next 10-20 years as there are going to be a lot of 30-40 year old with no home of their own and no stability all paying for the "haves" to have their cake and eat it.

[jajwhite]

Mosman must be to some extent a troll doing this for effect. I was going to ignore it, but I must speak.

(S)he wilfully ignores the fact that while wages have risen by at most double, and property prices by 5-10 times in many areas, that there is any problem, and like far too many people, believes that compassion is limited only to "the deserving".

With people like Mosman, often people with diseases are also separated into the deserving and non-deserving, because (s)he is terrified to give any compassion or sympathy away when (s)he needs it all hirself. It comes across as selfish, nasty, vitriolic and sniping. There is no such thing as bad AIDS and good AIDS, Mosman - just fyi. But one can have unlimited compassion for those not as lucky as onesself. Compassion doesn't run dry if you use it, you know.

(S)he also hates the idea that anyone might have a nice telly or a phone, assuming that everyone buys the most expensive models and aren't as intelligent as (s)he was. Which is an insulting attitude usually held by middle class people who aren't as intelligent as they like to think. I think (s)he cannot imagine how anyone else can be clever. Certainly those who aren't as well off must be stupider. Circumstances and luck have nothing to do with it. In fact, Mosman, you sound exactly like the people I used to go to Church with. Judging others is not an attractive trait.

I came out as gay at 19, and was chucked out of home. I couldn't get work as I dropped out of my Maths degree, and ended up homeless for a few years in my 20s. I was unable to save, and living on the streets. I didn't have iPhones and TVs. I still don't have a TV, cos I broke the addiction to the idiot box, but I don't judge those who like a distraction in the evenings (Although I'd rather not hear about the X Factor and Big Brother so much). Different strokes for different folks - which you might like to consider. Not everyone different from you is automatically wrong or stupid. Wake up and stop being such a spoiled child. You come across as the sort of person who believes libraries should only have one book. And that's true stupidity.

I now have a house. It didn't cost me a penny. I was left it in a distant sympathetic relative's will and now have a low paid job, but a life indescribably better than I could have imagined in 1997 when I lived in Kensington Gardens. I was lucky. I also worked hard, but chance played a huge part, and neither my failures nor my successes were down to me - I was never the master of my own destiny.

I have no kids, but I will pass on my good fortune and help people out where I can, and yet I still have sympathy and compassion for those who aren't as lucky as me, and I don't begrudge anyone their phones or TVs or nice clothes. You advocate surviving, not living. There has to be a balance between the two, or you might as well already be under a bridge, or dead. If you have good luck, rather than looking down and judging, try paying it forward a bit and helping out. It's cheap too - a kind word on here wouldn't hurt anyone.

I note you say that, "under a bridge" rather dismissively, as someone who has never slept under a bridge and is terrified of doing so. It's not actually as bad as you think. The worst part of sleeping rough isn't the lack of a roof, but the people who judge you and kick you while you sleep there. Usually churchgoers after a drink. And that's the real evil which should be judged - unkindness and judgmentalism. Look in a mirror.

JW

[Mosman]

Well if you must speak you must at least get your facts right.

"under a bridge" please show me where I have suggested that is an option.
"good aids, bad aids" WTF ?

I have no idea what on earth you are talking about but more importantly it would seem you haven't either.