To think it's depressing that everyone seems to think after this recession we should just return to exactly how things were?

[kake]

Does anyone else get this sense? What I mean is that everybody is lamenting this recession, quite rightly as it's awful, and I feel for everyone who has lost their job or is struggling.

But on the other hand there doesn't seem to be an acceptance that in some ways this has been at least a little bit caused by complete over-consumption in the good times and that we need to change our ways a little bit. Or a lot. When people talk about house prices especially, the consensus always seems to be that if there's any talk about a recovery that must be a positive thing, with the implication that we should be getting back to stupidly inflated house prices as soon as possible.

I find it depressing, as someone who didn't buy partly because we couldn't really afford it but also because we were really cautious and didn't want to overstretch ourselves. But now we're seeing a lot of friends who did somehow being rewarded as their mortgages have been slashed.

I'm also someone who wishes that taxes had been much higher for what I consider to be well paid people (and that would include my DH!) during the boom, so that there hadn't been such a disparity in income in this country then. It's a shame that higher tax levels in future will have to pay off debt not contribute to the national benefit! If I mention this to (well paid) friends they look at me as if I'm mad, although they are people who in principle I think sort of do believe in equality, just not if it affects their/our pockets. My view is that as satisfaction with income is largely relative (ie it matters more to people apparently that they get paid more than their neighbour than their absolute wealth), then if everybody is taxed more at higher income levels, then we'd all be in the same boat and it wouldn't make much difference.

But I feel like I'm STILL swimming against the tide, just when I would have thought more people would begin to feel like this. We have lots of friends who work in the banking sector for example who've been through a bit of a rocky time but now seem to be out the other side and better off than ever and sort of with no lessons learned!

It just seems ... so wrong! Or maybe I just got out of bed on the wrong side. And this post isn't as articulate as I would have hoped!

You got out at the right time (both of you). You sound happy too and that really is worth a million dollars.

Y
A
N
B
U
!

I think the thing that winds me up most of all is the so-called "credit crunch" being used as a new marketing tool. If you were relying on credit, which you now can't get, to buy this stuff that you don't need, then here's a radical thought - don't buy it!!

2 points:

1. There is NO housing shortage. There are 1 million plus empty homes. We do not have an out of control homeless situation. During the boom of the last decade some areas of the UK have actually seem their populations declice, but house prices have still gone mad. This is one of the biggest lies perpetrated over the last few years. Believe it at your peril!

1. I like the matrix anaolgy. I just don't care about the latest tech/blah blah. I also feel inner rage when people bring this subject (housing) up and they say stupid cliches like "we'll wait for the market to recover to sell." People who I think are clever, that I like etc. Why don't they question anything? Why does everyone believe the media/gov? Another (ANOTHER!) thing that really annoys me is that every time I open my mouth about this subject you just sound so defensive because you are renting (and are ergo thick).

More than two points. Sorry.

There is a housing shortage. The fact that there are 1 million empty houses does not mean that homeless people can access them. Homelessness does not need to be out of control for there to be a housing shortage.

Possibly the Government could sort out homelessness by sorting out the problem of empty houses, but it isn't doing. Doing so would be exactly the kind of sustainable solution that people on this thread would like to see happen.

The conservative government started it with selling off council properties and then labour kept it going by allowing BTL mortgages, they've basically washed their hands of public housing and any responsibility for keeping the population in their homes.
How many buy to let properties do you think the Daily Mail editorial team have ? Or the The Times.
People should question everything they are told, everything, but most are too busy watching XFactor so they get shafted, maybe that's what the masses deserve.

No there is an affordable housing shortage, people who become homeless generally have other issues, handing them a house wouldn't solve their problems.
However there is a massive problem with affordability for the generation below me 30-25 age group. And the real danger is that if the prices of houses do not drop dramatically then the 30-25 year olds won't feel secure enough to have babies and then we will have a real crisis on our hands.

yanbu

Sorrento, I know that homeless people have other problems. I used to work in homelessness, for Crisis, on a scheme that paid their deposit and helps with rent top ups and gave them a support worker so that they could manage the tenancy. But we could not house all of the people because there are not enough houses! This is replicated in many parts of the country and is well known by Housing Advice Centres. They have many families who do not need support waiting in temporary accommodation at massive expense because there are not enough houses. It is not just about affordable housing; it is about actual numbers of houses.

Well I wouldn't worry there will be plenty of new build flats practically given away shortly, unfortunately some poor sods will have paid £250k for one whilst next door houses the local hobo.

YANBU I feel the same and often feel the only one out my friends who feels this way. Many seem so caught up in this competitive materialism.

The fact that you would refer to a homeless person a hobo when most homeless people are not, and never have been, street homeless, and have often become homeless for perfectly ordinary reasons such as leaving the army or relationship breakdown shows your unfamiliarity with the issues.

And I will continue to worry about homelessness, and find it laughable that anyone could believe that recession will reduce the problem, when previous recessions have led to more clients and a strain on homelessness services.

Article on housing shortage...

www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/business/183181/more-bad-news-no-housing-shor tage.thtml

Oh Milly piss off, plenty are exactly that, they want to be on the streets and if you gave them a three bed semi with all the responsibilities that go with that property tomorrow they would run a mile.

However there are also many families stuffed in B & B's and unsuitable accommodation, that is where my sympathies lies.

That's unkind, sorrento.

How do you know? I take it you must have spent time working with and speaking to a multitude of homeless people to be able to generalise about what "they" would do if given a three bed semi.

Is anyone ni this matrix though? perhaps it's just an invention of the newspapers. I'm ostensibly very well off but I'm not materialistic. I have a lovely house, children at private schools, skiing holidays etc but I drink tap water, buy value chickens, wear clothes until they wear out, don't waste money , prefer to go to the library or for a walk than to go shopping, indeed rarely step inside a shop. I don't even watch TV but from the outside looking in we probably look like an "in matrix" family.

It will be interesting how things do change. The 1920s crash led to 10 years of depression only solved by a world war. I'm not sure in the UK we will get things anything like as bad as that. One my great aunts lost her business then and never worked again. 4 of my great uncles had to move to Canada to get work. People didn't have food or clothes.

I wonder about how to prepare my children to face the changes, both economic and environmental. My DH tends towards thinking they should be taught smallholding skills and the ability to shoot to kill. I tend to think they should be trained in a skill that is marketable worldwide, like medicine, in case they do have to move to Canada or wherever.

Just an aside, but why in heaven's name would you not drink tap water? We've spent over a year drinking bottled water and believe me we can't wait until we can just turn on the tap!

The fact is, it's inevitable that people will have this attitude after seeing the makers of the mess being bailed out. The message is clear that nobody has to live with the consequences of their actions any more. That kind of hardship is reserved for the innocent members of society.

'The fact is, it's inevitable that people will have this attitude after seeing the makers of the mess being bailed out. The message is clear that nobody has to live with the consequences of their actions any more. That kind of hardship is reserved for the innocent members of society. '

That's basically it in a nutshell.

Bravo, Twinkle. Spot on.

YANBU. I feel the same.

Indeed. I have a loan of over £1m and virtually no savings. I am being rewarded hugely now with 2% mortgage interest rates. nothing would improve my financial position as much as low interest rates and all those people who have carefully saved are being penalised. The message is clear.... (although in my case it's only because my ex husband wanted so much of my money on the divorce etc). It's still an unfair scenario.

I think those of us with parents who remembered post war rationing are already prepared and probably have passed that on to our children. People a bit younger than I am won't have that shared past history.

On the other hand we've no idea if it's going to be a quick recession or 10 years of a slump so I wouldn't take any irrevocable decisions based on our all becoming survivalist.

Vince Cable did a presentation yesterday and made the very valid point that the top 20% of earners are benefiting from deflation but the bottom 80% are still facing inflation.

The top 20% with big mortgages will benefit most while the bottom 80% lose their jobs. It is big problem for the Treasury and Bank of England to solve. Not easy.

I'm loving this thread! We are long term renters, and for years have been considered MAD by friends/family for not 'getting on the ladder'.

We nearly did buy a couple of years ago (thank god we didn't!) and at that point we could have afforded to borrow £120ishK (to reflect what we pay a month in rent) - what could we buy for that? Nothing.

My DH earns more/at parity than many of our friends/family - and we wonder how can they afford fancy clothes, big nights out, big weddings, big TV's, new cars. The only answer is that it's driven by equity - which isn't real money!!!

As unemployment kicks in and the new lending criteria feeds through the system I can't see how house prices can do anything but fall.

We need to see our houses as homes, not as big cash machines. And there's a poverty of intellect and aspiration out there... it's all part of the reality TV, fake tans, cosmetic surgery, fast food, alcopops, don't talk to the neighbours, game consoles dystopia that we've fallen into.

I too think that things will get harder - but in the long run it will be good for society as a whole. We'll look back at the corpulent, bloated, greed filled noughties and be disgusted!!!!

Cor, ranting this early in the morning really sets you up for the day!

I am confused by the implications of
this

On the one hand it is seems to be tapping into the kneejerk mainstream highpropertyprices = good idea, but on the other it is talking about increasing the house supply and social housing. Is not the latter at odds with the former - ie if we continue to artificially prop up house prices to the advantage of those who already own them, must it not be to the disadvantage of those who need somewhere to live or might buy somewhere for the first time?

Or is Darling just deliberately fudging and trying to make it sound like he can please everyone?

Or maybe it is envisaged that these new houses will somehow retain parity with the high prices of recent years, to the advantage of those selling them - but where will the money come from for people to buy them?