Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make buying second/third/fourth properties a less enticing proposal. And bring in rent controls similar to Germany. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you think it hard for millennials to buy their first home on a normal salary, GenZ is in for a big shock, huge! Simply because wages haven't gone up in line with house prices. So what's the solution? " Rent Live with mum and dad Multi genereation mortgages Shared ownership What do other countries do? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you think it hard for millennials to buy their first home on a normal salary, GenZ is in for a big shock, huge! Simply because wages haven't gone up in line with house prices. So what's the solution? Rent Live with mum and dad Multi genereation mortgages Shared ownership What do other countries do? " They have social housing and don't allow slimy landlords to charge extortionate rents | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tax private landlords at 75%. Huge amounts of public money go to landlords via benefits paying rent. This money needs to be spent on building social housing. " This will just push up rental prices | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. " Why? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. " But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. Why? " Is that a trick question? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. Why? Is that a trick question? " No | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed" Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Renting a property should never be more expensive than the cost of the mortgage on said property. Private landlords should only be allowed to charge 50% of the cost of the mortgage they're paying for that property as they're still going to have half of that property paid for by the person renting so with how property prices are rising exponentially compared to wages and inflation, they're still going to be making a profit whilst someone who cannot afford to buy through a mortgage gets to live with reasonable rental costs. A renter should never be buying someone else a house and paying an excess for that house too while the landlord often does little or nothing to help yet at the end of thee mortgage they've got a free house plus profit. " Well said. Many years ago I was privately renting an ex council flat on an estate. My rent was more then double the council rent so I was essentially paying their mortgage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. " And what happens to those who already own? Negative equity meaning they can't move which then causes problems in itself. For the market to move freely then everyone from first time buyers up to downsizers need to be able to buy and sell. Far too many issues Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a magic solution. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what happens to those who already own? Negative equity meaning they can't move which then causes problems in itself. For the market to move freely then everyone from first time buyers up to downsizers need to be able to buy and sell. Far too many issues Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a magic solution. " The issue that matters here is that some people don't have homes when other people have shitloads. Resolving that basic inequality is waaay more important than any other consideration. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. " Thank god guts like this aren’t in charge. Can’t see literally 2 feet in front of his face let alone the absolute chaos ideas like that would cause | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"House prices are outstripping wages but it’s not impossible to get on the housing ladder. Discouraging landlords is not the answer, many people choose to rent (not all admittedly), what would happen to students if all private landlords sold up. People who do short term contracts in different locations etc.. A drastic drop in house prices would penalise many many people and inversely could lead to more people needing to rent if it caused them to be in negative equity and unable to upsize their mortgage for a larger home as their family grows. Many gen Z could benefit from house price increases as grandparents downsize and release equity which may get passed onto them. Or through inheritance which could be substantial due to house price growth. My 22yr old son has just bought his first house, he is a prudent saver and also used help to buy He rents out his second room which covers his mortgage and he didn’t have help from me & his Dad. So it’s not impossible.. difficult yes but not unachievable." I think discouraging landlords to some extent is part of the solution. Right now being a landlord is such a profitable thing for the rich to do it’s driving house prices up above what most can afford. It’s a hard balance to achieve and as many have said on here, just driving house prices down isn’t the answer as that could leave millions in negative equity. Part of me thinks the answer lays in less strict mortgage lending, but part of me knows that could lead to another mortgage bubble if interest rates jump up again | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"House prices are outstripping wages but it’s not impossible to get on the housing ladder. Discouraging landlords is not the answer, many people choose to rent (not all admittedly), what would happen to students if all private landlords sold up. People who do short term contracts in different locations etc.. A drastic drop in house prices would penalise many many people and inversely could lead to more people needing to rent if it caused them to be in negative equity and unable to upsize their mortgage for a larger home as their family grows. Many gen Z could benefit from house price increases as grandparents downsize and release equity which may get passed onto them. Or through inheritance which could be substantial due to house price growth. My 22yr old son has just bought his first house, he is a prudent saver and also used help to buy He rents out his second room which covers his mortgage and he didn’t have help from me & his Dad. So it’s not impossible.. difficult yes but not unachievable. I think discouraging landlords to some extent is part of the solution. Right now being a landlord is such a profitable thing for the rich to do it’s driving house prices up above what most can afford. It’s a hard balance to achieve and as many have said on here, just driving house prices down isn’t the answer as that could leave millions in negative equity. Part of me thinks the answer lays in less strict mortgage lending, but part of me knows that could lead to another mortgage bubble if interest rates jump up again " A lot of landlords sold up and left the market when the tax rules changed. Being a landlord isn’t as profitable as many people think (and I’m not a landlord but worked in lettings) in fact landlords selling up is what has increased rent prices as demand has outstripped supply. There will be another exodus of landlords in a few years once they make landlords achieve an EPC rating of C on their properties (cost prohibitive for many older properties) Less strict lending criteria and a return to 100% mortgages is definitely not the answer, the only way is up wrt to interest rates.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"House prices are outstripping wages but it’s not impossible to get on the housing ladder. Discouraging landlords is not the answer, many people choose to rent (not all admittedly), what would happen to students if all private landlords sold up. People who do short term contracts in different locations etc.. A drastic drop in house prices would penalise many many people and inversely could lead to more people needing to rent if it caused them to be in negative equity and unable to upsize their mortgage for a larger home as their family grows. Many gen Z could benefit from house price increases as grandparents downsize and release equity which may get passed onto them. Or through inheritance which could be substantial due to house price growth. My 22yr old son has just bought his first house, he is a prudent saver and also used help to buy He rents out his second room which covers his mortgage and he didn’t have help from me & his Dad. So it’s not impossible.. difficult yes but not unachievable. I think discouraging landlords to some extent is part of the solution. Right now being a landlord is such a profitable thing for the rich to do it’s driving house prices up above what most can afford. It’s a hard balance to achieve and as many have said on here, just driving house prices down isn’t the answer as that could leave millions in negative equity. Part of me thinks the answer lays in less strict mortgage lending, but part of me knows that could lead to another mortgage bubble if interest rates jump up again A lot of landlords sold up and left the market when the tax rules changed. Being a landlord isn’t as profitable as many people think (and I’m not a landlord but worked in lettings) in fact landlords selling up is what has increased rent prices as demand has outstripped supply. There will be another exodus of landlords in a few years once they make landlords achieve an EPC rating of C on their properties (cost prohibitive for many older properties) Less strict lending criteria and a return to 100% mortgages is definitely not the answer, the only way is up wrt to interest rates.." That’s interesting to hear, I really do wonder what the answer is then. Luckily I’m soon in a position to buy after a long time saving. But I consider myself lucky enough to be self employed and earning well, but even then I’m going to be buying what I can afford, not what I want or like. Maybe a hike in the 4.5x salary lending limit? But that still leaves the huge issue of getting together that 10% deposit. In the south even a pretty standard flat can run you 250k and it’s not easy for most to save up 25k | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This" So you live with your parents until you can buy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? " This isn’t always a viable option for people | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people" Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords " I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them" It kinda is though isn’t it? Renting is a very useful part of the property market. Not everyone wants to buy. It’s literally part of the economy. Outright banning it is ridiculous. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The problem is not people having 2nd properties - most people do this as a pension plan given how crap state pension is and how we are all supposed to have private plans. The issue is only going to be resolved by stopping selling council homes/ending right to by, ending "house for life" and kicking anyone who is earning enough out of council housing (lad i know earns 60k plus a year and has a house for life and soon can by it at a discount). Then you put proviso on new builds that they cannot be rented for 20 years. You could also tax anyone with a letting business earning over 15k a year through the roof and deny mortgage deductions and other expenses on these properties. Will this push rent up? It wont - it'll force a big sell off if done correctly and the market will cool off. Over the next 10 to 15 years,, if the gov raise public sector pay and force the private sector to follow things will improve." I don’t know that making people homeless (your mate on 60k will be ok) is the solution to the housing crisis | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The problem is not people having 2nd properties - most people do this as a pension plan given how crap state pension is and how we are all supposed to have private plans. The issue is only going to be resolved by stopping selling council homes/ending right to by, ending "house for life" and kicking anyone who is earning enough out of council housing (lad i know earns 60k plus a year and has a house for life and soon can by it at a discount). Then you put proviso on new builds that they cannot be rented for 20 years. You could also tax anyone with a letting business earning over 15k a year through the roof and deny mortgage deductions and other expenses on these properties. Will this push rent up? It wont - it'll force a big sell off if done correctly and the market will cool off. Over the next 10 to 15 years,, if the gov raise public sector pay and force the private sector to follow things will improve. I don’t know that making people homeless (your mate on 60k will be ok) is the solution to the housing crisis" Giving council houses to those who can afford the private sector is absurd. Giving 3 bed homes to single people whose kids have flown the nest is absurd. The council housing system was designed for a purpose and when that purpose changed the new purpose failed 2 generations | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them It kinda is though isn’t it? Renting is a very useful part of the property market. Not everyone wants to buy. It’s literally part of the economy. Outright banning it is ridiculous." I’m not talking about banning it. I’m talking about abolishing landlordism. You can still have council housing and social housing. Private landlords are what have absolutely killed the market for lots of areas. People from out of town buying to let forcing local people out of the market | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The problem is not people having 2nd properties - most people do this as a pension plan given how crap state pension is and how we are all supposed to have private plans. The issue is only going to be resolved by stopping selling council homes/ending right to by, ending "house for life" and kicking anyone who is earning enough out of council housing (lad i know earns 60k plus a year and has a house for life and soon can by it at a discount). Then you put proviso on new builds that they cannot be rented for 20 years. You could also tax anyone with a letting business earning over 15k a year through the roof and deny mortgage deductions and other expenses on these properties. Will this push rent up? It wont - it'll force a big sell off if done correctly and the market will cool off. Over the next 10 to 15 years,, if the gov raise public sector pay and force the private sector to follow things will improve. I don’t know that making people homeless (your mate on 60k will be ok) is the solution to the housing crisis Giving council houses to those who can afford the private sector is absurd. Giving 3 bed homes to single people whose kids have flown the nest is absurd. The council housing system was designed for a purpose and when that purpose changed the new purpose failed 2 generations" I agree that the council housing system needs an overhaul, but the idea that people are being “given” 3 bed houses is a fallacy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Still can't believe the average house price is quarter of a million pounds... A QUARTER OF A MILLION FFS! "I’m currently working on very standard spec flats and some of them are half a million. That’s with nothing special or fancy. 1 bedroom. Outside London It’s crazy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them It kinda is though isn’t it? Renting is a very useful part of the property market. Not everyone wants to buy. It’s literally part of the economy. Outright banning it is ridiculous. I’m not talking about banning it. I’m talking about abolishing landlordism. You can still have council housing and social housing. Private landlords are what have absolutely killed the market for lots of areas. People from out of town buying to let forcing local people out of the market" That is true but i dont see how we can ban it in a free market economy - we can regulate it and tax it properly though. And we can ban renting out any new build property for 20 years etc.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The problem is not people having 2nd properties - most people do this as a pension plan given how crap state pension is and how we are all supposed to have private plans. The issue is only going to be resolved by stopping selling council homes/ending right to by, ending "house for life" and kicking anyone who is earning enough out of council housing (lad i know earns 60k plus a year and has a house for life and soon can by it at a discount). Then you put proviso on new builds that they cannot be rented for 20 years. You could also tax anyone with a letting business earning over 15k a year through the roof and deny mortgage deductions and other expenses on these properties. Will this push rent up? It wont - it'll force a big sell off if done correctly and the market will cool off. Over the next 10 to 15 years,, if the gov raise public sector pay and force the private sector to follow things will improve. I don’t know that making people homeless (your mate on 60k will be ok) is the solution to the housing crisis Giving council houses to those who can afford the private sector is absurd. Giving 3 bed homes to single people whose kids have flown the nest is absurd. The council housing system was designed for a purpose and when that purpose changed the new purpose failed 2 generations I agree that the council housing system needs an overhaul, but the idea that people are being “given” 3 bed houses is a fallacy " I can promise you that anyone who is in a 3 bed who has previously had multiple people living there and now lives there alone cannot be made to downsize. You should be able to do this with social housing - make number of full time occupants a factor in occupancy. Bedroom tax attempted this but gov bottled it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them It kinda is though isn’t it? Renting is a very useful part of the property market. Not everyone wants to buy. It’s literally part of the economy. Outright banning it is ridiculous. I’m not talking about banning it. I’m talking about abolishing landlordism. You can still have council housing and social housing. Private landlords are what have absolutely killed the market for lots of areas. People from out of town buying to let forcing local people out of the market That is true but i dont see how we can ban it in a free market economy - we can regulate it and tax it properly though. And we can ban renting out any new build property for 20 years etc...." I say ban it as a means to start the debate. It won’t get banned. I know that. There are lots of ways to make it a fairer system like the ways you mention. Landlords offer very little and get a great deal back. I say this as someone that has had to call environmental health to two rental properties and has had to fight tooth and nail for a deposit back | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Still can't believe the average house price is quarter of a million pounds... A QUARTER OF A MILLION FFS! "£635,000 where I live  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And hardly any social housing. I live in an old ex council estate. A couple of decades back they gave it to a housing association who now rent properties through estate agents slightly below market rents. " And this is why the model is broken. Pushing those that were never really destined for home ownership to compete for high rents. When the average house price is 10x average salary (what’s that about 3x the ratio from 30, 40 years ago) then something is very dysfunctional with the ‘market’ and the gap between the haves and have nots gets ever wider and social mobility grinds to a halt. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Still can't believe the average house price is quarter of a million pounds... A QUARTER OF A MILLION FFS!
£635,000 where I live "For house or flat? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. " And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Still can't believe the average house price is quarter of a million pounds... A QUARTER OF A MILLION FFS!
£635,000 where I live
For house or flat?"Just average price for all property | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them It kinda is though isn’t it? Renting is a very useful part of the property market. Not everyone wants to buy. It’s literally part of the economy. Outright banning it is ridiculous. I’m not talking about banning it. I’m talking about abolishing landlordism. You can still have council housing and social housing. Private landlords are what have absolutely killed the market for lots of areas. People from out of town buying to let forcing local people out of the market That is true but i dont see how we can ban it in a free market economy - we can regulate it and tax it properly though. And we can ban renting out any new build property for 20 years etc...." Landlords lost mortgage interest tax deductions a few years ago and it really is not as profitable as it once was. Many landlords have already left the market. Councils don’t have the cash to buy up loads of properties to fulfill the demand. Housing associations have stepped into the breach but many are actually making big bucks developing and selling on properties.. in theory that’s to be able to fund buying/building more housing association properties but they don’t pile all the money back in and instead stockpile it. Responsible private landlords do fill a need and should not be discouraged. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them It kinda is though isn’t it? Renting is a very useful part of the property market. Not everyone wants to buy. It’s literally part of the economy. Outright banning it is ridiculous. I’m not talking about banning it. I’m talking about abolishing landlordism. You can still have council housing and social housing. Private landlords are what have absolutely killed the market for lots of areas. People from out of town buying to let forcing local people out of the market That is true but i dont see how we can ban it in a free market economy - we can regulate it and tax it properly though. And we can ban renting out any new build property for 20 years etc.... Landlords lost mortgage interest tax deductions a few years ago and it really is not as profitable as it once was. Many landlords have already left the market. Councils don’t have the cash to buy up loads of properties to fulfill the demand. Housing associations have stepped into the breach but many are actually making big bucks developing and selling on properties.. in theory that’s to be able to fund buying/building more housing association properties but they don’t pile all the money back in and instead stockpile it. Responsible private landlords do fill a need and should not be discouraged." Private landlords horde housing for their own gain. No one becomes a landlord to help out | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. " They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. " Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This So you live with your parents until you can buy? This isn’t always a viable option for people Exactly my point. I wasn’t offering it as an idea. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of banning landlords I see your point. It’s not a ridiculous idea if you really think about it. I mean, it absolutely won’t happen whilst we have a parliament and House of Lords absolutely chock full of them It kinda is though isn’t it? Renting is a very useful part of the property market. Not everyone wants to buy. It’s literally part of the economy. Outright banning it is ridiculous. I’m not talking about banning it. I’m talking about abolishing landlordism. You can still have council housing and social housing. Private landlords are what have absolutely killed the market for lots of areas. People from out of town buying to let forcing local people out of the market That is true but i dont see how we can ban it in a free market economy - we can regulate it and tax it properly though. And we can ban renting out any new build property for 20 years etc.... Landlords lost mortgage interest tax deductions a few years ago and it really is not as profitable as it once was. Many landlords have already left the market. Councils don’t have the cash to buy up loads of properties to fulfill the demand. Housing associations have stepped into the breach but many are actually making big bucks developing and selling on properties.. in theory that’s to be able to fund buying/building more housing association properties but they don’t pile all the money back in and instead stockpile it. Responsible private landlords do fill a need and should not be discouraged. Private landlords horde housing for their own gain. No one becomes a landlord to help out" I don’t object to people making money, it’s a free market economy we live in. Supply and demand. Losing landlords will make rental stock scarce & result in rents being pushed up further. Housing associations want market rates nowadays and will follow suit & the people that will be penalised will be renters. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you think it hard for millennials to buy their first home on a normal salary, GenZ is in for a big shock, huge! Simply because wages haven't gone up in line with house prices. So what's the solution? " Don’t be so greedy , rent or share a house until you have worked long and hard enough to buy your own. Abs stop wasting all your pocket money on sweets and mobile phones | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? " Exactly.. a lot of profit from housing investment will filter down to the next generation when they inherit and as such their investments will be redistributed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? Exactly.. a lot of profit from housing investment will filter down to the next generation when they inherit and as such their investments will be redistributed. " Absolutely. My own children. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tax private landlords at 75%. Huge amounts of public money go to landlords via benefits paying rent. This money needs to be spent on building social housing. " So when the landlords being taxed at 75% decide it's not worth it what do you think will happen? I guess they will sell, which will make everyone renting homeless in short order. Councils will have to provide emergency housing in hotels and also buy the houses to put people in. House prices will drop putting millions into negative equity so they won't be able to sell, meaning the housing market grinds to a halt. Building will stop, putting the building trade into a tail spin and exacerbate the housing shortage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? " Never say they should not (invest). Suggested that they should be taxed on gains in the same way as any other investment class. Subtle yet impactful difference. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed" I think they mean that any seized assets go back into public hands..after all landlords are multiple property owners who inflated prices so the actual home owners wouldn't land in neg equity as the greed landlords will pay by seized assets & would maintain equity in home ownership because there would be less of them available to buy...however many would have security of a home by social housing seizures, the rent would be reasonable & the money going into council funds & therefore services...not into private pockets to go hide offshore or invest to avoid taxes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? Never say they should not (invest). Suggested that they should be taxed on gains in the same way as any other investment class. Subtle yet impactful difference. " So when I die my children should pay inheritance tax and gains tax? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? Exactly.. a lot of profit from housing investment will filter down to the next generation when they inherit and as such their investments will be redistributed. Absolutely. My own children. " And morally it correct that they should get such an easy ride when there are many who are not so fortunate to have popped out of such a well funded fanny and have to “work even harder” to catch up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? Exactly.. a lot of profit from housing investment will filter down to the next generation when they inherit and as such their investments will be redistributed. Absolutely. My own children. And morally it correct that they should get such an easy ride when there are many who are not so fortunate to have popped out of such a well funded fanny and have to “work even harder” to catch up. " Wow! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tax private landlords at 75%. Huge amounts of public money go to landlords via benefits paying rent. This money needs to be spent on building social housing. So when the landlords being taxed at 75% decide it's not worth it what do you think will happen? I guess they will sell, which will make everyone renting homeless in short order. Councils will have to provide emergency housing in hotels and also buy the houses to put people in. House prices will drop putting millions into negative equity so they won't be able to sell, meaning the housing market grinds to a halt. Building will stop, putting the building trade into a tail spin and exacerbate the housing shortage. " ^this^ well said! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tax private landlords at 75%. Huge amounts of public money go to landlords via benefits paying rent. This money needs to be spent on building social housing. So when the landlords being taxed at 75% decide it's not worth it what do you think will happen? I guess they will sell, which will make everyone renting homeless in short order. Councils will have to provide emergency housing in hotels and also buy the houses to put people in. House prices will drop putting millions into negative equity so they won't be able to sell, meaning the housing market grinds to a halt. Building will stop, putting the building trade into a tail spin and exacerbate the housing shortage. " Someone talking sense | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? Exactly.. a lot of profit from housing investment will filter down to the next generation when they inherit and as such their investments will be redistributed. Absolutely. My own children. And morally it correct that they should get such an easy ride when there are many who are not so fortunate to have popped out of such a well funded fanny and have to “work even harder” to catch up. " Oh that’s not on! Many have come from nothing and worked hard to get where they are.. pay huge amounts of tax & spend money which benefits the economy & wider society. Why in hell should they not be able to redistribute their hard earned money to their kids. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what about the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgage and then suddenly lose their equity which could be their retirement pension?! Ridiculous idea. They get “taxed” to redistribute some of their gains to help those who have not been in a position to make any gains. The only element of their property value that they’ve “worked hard all their lives” for is the original purchase price. Most of the rest is a bit of luck and inflation. Really?? Some people buy properties for investment! Why shouldn’t they? Exactly.. a lot of profit from housing investment will filter down to the next generation when they inherit and as such their investments will be redistributed. Absolutely. My own children. And morally it correct that they should get such an easy ride when there are many who are not so fortunate to have popped out of such a well funded fanny and have to “work even harder” to catch up. Oh that’s not on! Many have come from nothing and worked hard to get where they are.. pay huge amounts of tax & spend money which benefits the economy & wider society. Why in hell should they not be able to redistribute their hard earned money to their kids." I’m playing devil’s advocate btw. And Dora sorry if it seemed aimed at you. It was not meant to be. It was an analogy - maybe a crude one - as to the dysfunction in the market. Compounded by the capital gains advantages and ability to shelter from IHT that the wealthy can afford which means that those who have no legacy of property are at an even greater disadvantage. Ultimately whatever the answer it will have the impact of depressing gains made my current owners… whether rebalance is brought about by inflation combined with interest principle hikes, increasing supply or other measures to discourage property as an investment asset. One way or another prices will drop or rise slower…… IF gen Z are to be helped. One thing is certain there won’t be a simple answer that pleases all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tax private landlords at 75%. Huge amounts of public money go to landlords via benefits paying rent. This money needs to be spent on building social housing. " And who will then fund that? The tenants, thus exacerbating the problem of exorbitant rents. Also, benefits for rent payments are capped. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you want something expensive you simply have to do without other things and save. It is possible to find a home you can afford if you have sensible expectations, and save up. If you do not earn enough to buy a home then you need to get experience for the jobs that pay enough for you to afford to do so. Being in a couple also helps massively as you can pool your incomes." Whaaaaaat! You mean I can't just click my fingers and have all good things come to me? Fuck that.. Whose fault is it? Come on? Own up? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what happens to those who already own? Negative equity meaning they can't move which then causes problems in itself. For the market to move freely then everyone from first time buyers up to downsizers need to be able to buy and sell. Far too many issues Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a magic solution. The issue that matters here is that some people don't have homes when other people have shitloads. Resolving that basic inequality is waaay more important than any other consideration. " . Is that just not called Communism | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you want something expensive you simply have to do without other things and save. It is possible to find a home you can afford if you have sensible expectations, and save up. If you do not earn enough to buy a home then you need to get experience for the jobs that pay enough for you to afford to do so. Being in a couple also helps massively as you can pool your incomes." Exactly! I’ve never had anything handed to me on a plate. I have an 11 year age gap between my kids. Not ideal. Why? Because I couldn’t afford another one. I’ve worked bloody hard for what I have. And no I didn’t come out of a “well funded fanny”’ and neither did my kids. Getting called lucky and shit like that pisses me off no end. There certainly wasn’t any luck involved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what happens to those who already own? Negative equity meaning they can't move which then causes problems in itself. For the market to move freely then everyone from first time buyers up to downsizers need to be able to buy and sell. Far too many issues Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a magic solution. The issue that matters here is that some people don't have homes when other people have shitloads. Resolving that basic inequality is waaay more important than any other consideration. . Is that just not called Communism "Not really , the government provides every citizen with a basic level of education, health and income even in a capitalist system , there’s a valid argument that if the government fuckup the economy so badly, they could extend that provision to things like heating and housing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make it *seriously* illegal to own any property in which you do not personally live. I don't mean a fine and a waggled finger; I mean decades in jail and stripped of all their assets. But that would only work if there's alternative housing. There are over 4 million households in rented accommodation in the UK. A large portion of those couldn't buy, where do they go? Then there would be the issue of all those houses having to be sold, causing a saturation of stock and would send house prices plummeting, negative equity all over the place. Would never work. A less extreme solution is needed Dropping the prices low enough so that people who currently can only rent can afford to buy is literally the point. And what happens to those who already own? Negative equity meaning they can't move which then causes problems in itself. For the market to move freely then everyone from first time buyers up to downsizers need to be able to buy and sell. Far too many issues Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a magic solution. The issue that matters here is that some people don't have homes when other people have shitloads. Resolving that basic inequality is waaay more important than any other consideration. . Is that just not called Communism "To each according to their needs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its never been as easy to buy a house, the government schemes are fantastic at current. Yes central londons always been a issue so no change there. The problem i see is everyone expects now, rather than going out and grafting. Its more important for youngsters now to have a 35k vw golf on finance than have a house, how many 17 year olds 20 year ago had a brand new car? Hardley any we bought to our means. Now days its different. At 20 i bought my first home, a shit 2 bed £130k i put 20k down that was saved through working then had to renovate it and make it nice. you can now move into a brand new 2 bed home in derby for 190k with just a 10k deposit. Yet back when i saved 20k i was on about 15k per year, the equivalent job now payed 26k per year. Its got nothing to do with governments or landlords to do with affordability its down to young people of today. "More the case that wages for youngsters hasn’t increased properly. I’m 32, almost saved £60K for my first home. The banks however are making it incredibly difficult for me to borrow as they want me to do a 10% deposit and take a higher interest rate, I’m not prepared to do that, I want to do 20% and lower interest, yet the bank turned around and offered me less than someone with 10%. How is that fair!? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its never been as easy to buy a house, the government schemes are fantastic at current. Yes central londons always been a issue so no change there. The problem i see is everyone expects now, rather than going out and grafting. Its more important for youngsters now to have a 35k vw golf on finance than have a house, how many 17 year olds 20 year ago had a brand new car? Hardley any we bought to our means. Now days its different. At 20 i bought my first home, a shit 2 bed £130k i put 20k down that was saved through working then had to renovate it and make it nice. you can now move into a brand new 2 bed home in derby for 190k with just a 10k deposit. Yet back when i saved 20k i was on about 15k per year, the equivalent job now payed 26k per year. Its got nothing to do with governments or landlords to do with affordability its down to young people of today. "20 years ago when you bought got a mortgage you could get mortgages with 0% deposit Fair play for saving 20k by the time you were 20, not easy at all. We’re you living at home rent feee? If not you must have lived like an absolute monk to pay for rent and save for a deposit. You’ve cast an awful lot of aspersions on an awful lot of people. The reality is, money doesn’t travel as far as it used to. Sounds like you’ve been lucky* because you were able to buy when you could and maintain a job working in companies and sectors that haven’t gone bust. Landlords do, wether people want to hear this or not, horde housing. It’s just a fact. *i use the term lucky not to be derogatory, you are probably very good at your job but I hope you see that I mean it in the sense that the firms and sectors you work in have remained afloat. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its never been as easy to buy a house, the government schemes are fantastic at current. Yes central londons always been a issue so no change there. The problem i see is everyone expects now, rather than going out and grafting. Its more important for youngsters now to have a 35k vw golf on finance than have a house, how many 17 year olds 20 year ago had a brand new car? Hardley any we bought to our means. Now days its different. At 20 i bought my first home, a shit 2 bed £130k i put 20k down that was saved through working then had to renovate it and make it nice. you can now move into a brand new 2 bed home in derby for 190k with just a 10k deposit. Yet back when i saved 20k i was on about 15k per year, the equivalent job now payed 26k per year. Its got nothing to do with governments or landlords to do with affordability its down to young people of today.
20 years ago when you bought got a mortgage you could get mortgages with 0% deposit
Fair play for saving 20k by the time you were 20, not easy at all. We’re you living at home rent feee? If not you must have lived like an absolute monk to pay for rent and save for a deposit.
You’ve cast an awful lot of aspersions on an awful lot of people. The reality is, money doesn’t travel as far as it used to. Sounds like you’ve been lucky* because you were able to buy when you could and maintain a job working in companies and sectors that haven’t gone bust.
Landlords do, wether people want to hear this or not, horde housing. It’s just a fact.
*i use the term lucky not to be derogatory, you are probably very good at your job but I hope you see that I mean it in the sense that the firms and sectors you work in have remained afloat.
"I worked 3 jobs saving & drove a 600 quid car and payed my parents board. my mates were in ibiza, going to gigs partying.. i didnt. i saved because i hated living in a council estate and wanted nice things. I had a ferrari 355 at 28 lost everything incl my house at 30 then started again then got everything back by 37 through graft, risks and investment. Its there for the taking if priorities are right, i coach so many young people in business and investment as a side to the job i do. One thing ive noticed and its getting worse is people live for the here and now, young people think nothing to paying 600 quid a month on a car.. but yet 'cant' afford a house yet a house goes up in value... their car doesnt. Priorities | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its never been as easy to buy a house, the government schemes are fantastic at current. Yes central londons always been a issue so no change there. The problem i see is everyone expects now, rather than going out and grafting. Its more important for youngsters now to have a 35k vw golf on finance than have a house, how many 17 year olds 20 year ago had a brand new car? Hardley any we bought to our means. Now days its different. At 20 i bought my first home, a shit 2 bed £130k i put 20k down that was saved through working then had to renovate it and make it nice. you can now move into a brand new 2 bed home in derby for 190k with just a 10k deposit. Yet back when i saved 20k i was on about 15k per year, the equivalent job now payed 26k per year. Its got nothing to do with governments or landlords to do with affordability its down to young people of today. "Sorry to say this doesnt add up in any sense. You also would have been in negative equity having gone through the bubble in 2008. 20k saved whilst earning 15k a year in 2004? 15k back then is about 24k now but wages havent risen with inflation - thats the problem. In derby, a house worth 140k in 2000 has gone up in value to over 260k now. Who lent you 10x your earnings in 2004 anyway?! The most you would have been lent would have been about 70k even with this magical depisit you saved in about 3 years - over 500 a month when your take home pay was about 1k a month (what did you eat? How did you transport yourself? Where did you sleep?) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans" Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them!" Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish  etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back "No need to hate immigrants. Bit we have to acknowledge that an increase in demand adds upward pressure to prices. The renting/buying issue is irrelevant...an occupied house means less supply left on the open market and that adds upward pressure to prices. Basic economics and you can't understand the housing market without understanding economics | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back
No need to hate immigrants.
Bit we have to acknowledge that an increase in demand adds upward pressure to prices.
The renting/buying issue is irrelevant...an occupied house means less supply left on the open market and that adds upward pressure to prices.
Basic economics and you can't understand the housing market without understanding economics"I thought net migration was higher than immigration to the UK but perhaps I am wrong on that. My immigrant comment was tongue n cheek in case that went over your head  but good to see your positive comment! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back
No need to hate immigrants.
Bit we have to acknowledge that an increase in demand adds upward pressure to prices.
The renting/buying issue is irrelevant...an occupied house means less supply left on the open market and that adds upward pressure to prices.
Basic economics and you can't understand the housing market without understanding economics
I thought net migration was higher than immigration to the UK but perhaps I am wrong on that.
My immigrant comment was tongue n cheek in case that went over your head but good to see your positive comment! "Net migration will always be lower than raw immigration because some people leave the country | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back
No need to hate immigrants.
Bit we have to acknowledge that an increase in demand adds upward pressure to prices.
The renting/buying issue is irrelevant...an occupied house means less supply left on the open market and that adds upward pressure to prices.
Basic economics and you can't understand the housing market without understanding economics"The housing market is not sufficiently pressured by net migration to have caused the severe issues we currently face. We have sold off social housing and failed to build enough houses for over 30 years. Without the level of migration we have, the economic impact would stagnate the economy and disrupt and impoverish vital services. "Supply and demand" is a basic issue in terms of upward pressure on prices but the scale of the problem is vastly beyond issues to do with the amount of foreign labour we import. Without them, we still dont have enough houses | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back
No need to hate immigrants.
Bit we have to acknowledge that an increase in demand adds upward pressure to prices.
The renting/buying issue is irrelevant...an occupied house means less supply left on the open market and that adds upward pressure to prices.
Basic economics and you can't understand the housing market without understanding economics
The housing market is not sufficiently pressured by net migration to have caused the severe issues we currently face. We have sold off social housing and failed to build enough houses for over 30 years.
Without the level of migration we have, the economic impact would stagnate the economy and disrupt and impoverish vital services.
"Supply and demand" is a basic issue in terms of upward pressure on prices but the scale of the problem is vastly beyond issues to do with the amount of foreign labour we import. Without them, we still dont have enough houses"I disagree. If we have been having net immigration of 350,000 people per year (anyone have the exact figure?) for the last 15 years it means that is an extra 5,250,000 people needing houses. That is a very strong increase in demand. I can't see how that can't have contributed to rising prices | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back
No need to hate immigrants.
Bit we have to acknowledge that an increase in demand adds upward pressure to prices.
The renting/buying issue is irrelevant...an occupied house means less supply left on the open market and that adds upward pressure to prices.
Basic economics and you can't understand the housing market without understanding economics
The housing market is not sufficiently pressured by net migration to have caused the severe issues we currently face. We have sold off social housing and failed to build enough houses for over 30 years.
Without the level of migration we have, the economic impact would stagnate the economy and disrupt and impoverish vital services.
"Supply and demand" is a basic issue in terms of upward pressure on prices but the scale of the problem is vastly beyond issues to do with the amount of foreign labour we import. Without them, we still dont have enough houses
I disagree.
If we have been having net immigration of 350,000 people per year (anyone have the exact figure?) for the last 15 years it means that is an extra 5,250,000 people needing houses.
That is a very strong increase in demand. I can't see how that can't have contributed to rising prices"They've not fallen, with the exodus of EU citizens though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its never been as easy to buy a house, the government schemes are fantastic at current. Yes central londons always been a issue so no change there. The problem i see is everyone expects now, rather than going out and grafting. Its more important for youngsters now to have a 35k vw golf on finance than have a house, how many 17 year olds 20 year ago had a brand new car? Hardley any we bought to our means. Now days its different. At 20 i bought my first home, a shit 2 bed £130k i put 20k down that was saved through working then had to renovate it and make it nice. you can now move into a brand new 2 bed home in derby for 190k with just a 10k deposit. Yet back when i saved 20k i was on about 15k per year, the equivalent job now payed 26k per year. Its got nothing to do with governments or landlords to do with affordability its down to young people of today.
Sorry to say this doesnt add up in any sense. You also would have been in negative equity having gone through the bubble in 2008. 20k saved whilst earning 15k a year in 2004? 15k back then is about 24k now but wages havent risen with inflation - thats the problem. In derby, a house worth 140k in 2000 has gone up in value to over 260k now. Who lent you 10x your earnings in 2004 anyway?! The most you would have been lent would have been about 70k even with this magical depisit you saved in about 3 years - over 500 a month when your take home pay was about 1k a month (what did you eat? How did you transport yourself? Where did you sleep?)"15k a year? I was earning 28k + a year at a local car factory & delivering poultry at the weekend + odd jobbing. In the area i bought 'sinfin' it was the cheapest area in derby and still only around 10-20k more than they were in those days. Many many borrowers will lend that amount. The problem is many are blind sighted when taking a mortgage out and go to the main banks which typically offer the worst % deals. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Make buying second/third/fourth properties a less enticing proposal. And bring in rent controls similar to Germany. " . I was looking for a comment on rent controls similar to Germany's, which I agree with. However, I disagree on making further properties 'less enticing' as such. If landlords didn't buy those properties, the onus would fall on the state to provide the housing. The point is to put controls in place to manage rental prices. That alone will entice landlords to invest in properties to let or decide to invest elsewhere. Many countries also prohibit non-citizens from buying, limit what types of properties they can purchase or simply make it far more expensive for them to do so. The UK began doing this with extra measures specifically for foreign buyers a few years ago. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you think it hard for millennials to buy their first home on a normal salary, GenZ is in for a big shock, huge! Simply because wages haven't gone up in line with house prices. So what's the solution? " Really, you think thats the biggest problem they face? Climate change is going to fuck them totally, irrespective of wether they pay rent or mortgage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its never been as easy to buy a house, the government schemes are fantastic at current. Yes central londons always been a issue so no change there. The problem i see is everyone expects now, rather than going out and grafting. Its more important for youngsters now to have a 35k vw golf on finance than have a house, how many 17 year olds 20 year ago had a brand new car? Hardley any we bought to our means. Now days its different. At 20 i bought my first home, a shit 2 bed £130k i put 20k down that was saved through working then had to renovate it and make it nice. you can now move into a brand new 2 bed home in derby for 190k with just a 10k deposit. Yet back when i saved 20k i was on about 15k per year, the equivalent job now payed 26k per year. Its got nothing to do with governments or landlords to do with affordability its down to young people of today.
Sorry to say this doesnt add up in any sense. You also would have been in negative equity having gone through the bubble in 2008. 20k saved whilst earning 15k a year in 2004? 15k back then is about 24k now but wages havent risen with inflation - thats the problem. In derby, a house worth 140k in 2000 has gone up in value to over 260k now. Who lent you 10x your earnings in 2004 anyway?! The most you would have been lent would have been about 70k even with this magical depisit you saved in about 3 years - over 500 a month when your take home pay was about 1k a month (what did you eat? How did you transport yourself? Where did you sleep?)
15k a year? I was earning 28k + a year at a local car factory & delivering poultry at the weekend + odd jobbing.
In the area i bought 'sinfin' it was the cheapest area in derby and still only around 10-20k more than they were in those days.
Many many borrowers will lend that amount. The problem is many are blind sighted when taking a mortgage out and go to the main banks which typically offer the worst % deals. "It used to be very easy to get mortgages as long as you could pay the payments everyone turned a blind eye, prices we’re rising so fast and many people took multiple mortgages out. I was temping in 1997 while a full time student and took out two mortgages at around 30x my annual income , if you couldn’t keep the payment you could just flip the property | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you think it hard for millennials to buy their first home on a normal salary, GenZ is in for a big shock, huge! Simply because wages haven't gone up in line with house prices. So what's the solution? Really, you think thats the biggest problem they face? Climate change is going to fuck them totally, irrespective of wether they pay rent or mortgage. " 'Climate change' won't fuck anyone. Government responses to climate change will fuck them though. They won't be able to afford cars, houses or flights because of the green nonsense. Possibly the biggest thing to hurt their life chances will be the forthcoming upgrade to the national grid, made necessary by the green crap It's going to cost £100,000 for each family! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you think it hard for millennials to buy their first home on a normal salary, GenZ is in for a big shock, huge! Simply because wages haven't gone up in line with house prices. So what's the solution? Really, you think thats the biggest problem they face? Climate change is going to fuck them totally, irrespective of wether they pay rent or mortgage. 'Climate change' won't fuck anyone. Government responses to climate change will fuck them though. They won't be able to afford cars, houses or flights because of the green nonsense. Possibly the biggest thing to hurt their life chances will be the forthcoming upgrade to the national grid, made necessary by the green crap It's going to cost £100,000 for each family!" Amen | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords!" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! This" So get rid of the rental market? That would create even more heat in the sales market, pushing prices up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ban landlords! "Maybe ban people being allowed to borrow to buy second homes. Too easy to get buy to let mortgages. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Land should never have been allowed to be private owned for making profit and accumulating wealth. Everyone should have a roof over their head as a right. You can’t achieve this with widespread private land ownership. All land should belong to the state and the state should take responsibility for efficient provision of housing and roof over every head. Everyone effectively “rents” from the state. If you really think about it, why do you need to buy a house. It’s to have security of having somewhere to stay. Owning a house outright is just one way of achieving this. We all pay tax and in return we have the NHS that provides healthcare. You don’t need to “own” a doctor like you own a house because of this. " Yeah not sure that's the best analogy... Perhaps if people felt a bit more ownership of the nhs they might be a bit more respectful of it and not take it for granted because its "free". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's all about supply and demand. You can't keep prices stable ..or even reduce them ..when a net annual 500,000 immigrants have to be housed. Young people would also be helped by a reduction in tax and the abolition of student loans Well...those spurious figures are much higher than the reality of 270-300k but let's say 331k (the peak number)- how many rented housing? About 90%. Across the uk, 300,000 people is less than 0.4% population growth from migration. The average figure over 10 years is closer to 220,000. So no - migration is not a significant driving force of house prices! They rent and there arent many of them! Gotta hate those immigrants though, Afghans, Somalians, Spanish etc etc
Bloody immigrants coming over taking our jobs, our woman and now are houses send the buggers back
No need to hate immigrants.
Bit we have to acknowledge that an increase in demand adds upward pressure to prices.
The renting/buying issue is irrelevant...an occupied house means less supply left on the open market and that adds upward pressure to prices.
Basic economics and you can't understand the housing market without understanding economics
The housing market is not sufficiently pressured by net migration to have caused the severe issues we currently face. We have sold off social housing and failed to build enough houses for over 30 years.
Without the level of migration we have, the economic impact would stagnate the economy and disrupt and impoverish vital services.
"Supply and demand" is a basic issue in terms of upward pressure on prices but the scale of the problem is vastly beyond issues to do with the amount of foreign labour we import. Without them, we still dont have enough houses
I disagree.
If we have been having net immigration of 350,000 people per year (anyone have the exact figure?) for the last 15 years it means that is an extra 5,250,000 people needing houses.
That is a very strong increase in demand. I can't see how that can't have contributed to rising prices"350,000 is the higgest figure. The average is 240,000. Net migration doesnt mean we have population increase though - birth rates have dropped and the native population is currently decreasing - 1.65 is the annual birth rate (2019). Population growth is about 0.45% Population in 2000 was 58m Population 2021 is 68m Interestingly, polulation growth has been higher under the tories in the last 10 years than any other 10 year period since 1950 - and that includes 2016-2021 post Brexit (where EU migration has dropped substantially). Failure to build is government policy and not the fault of the net migration - which accounts for less than half the population growth. If there was a neutral rate of emigration/migration the polulation would still have risen over the last 20 years by significantly more than for the previous 50 years where the population grew by 8m from 1950 to 2000. House prices rose massively previously too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tax private landlords at 75%. Huge amounts of public money go to landlords via benefits paying rent. This money needs to be spent on building social housing. " not all landlords are greedy most council and housing association charge just as much some cases more than I used to charge | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"One other driver that’s not been mentioned much… the changing population dynamic in the UK over the past 30 or so years. Many more smaller family units than there were s few generations ago (reduction in the “traditional” or previously more typical nuclear family) must have had some impact on fuelling demand too. " This is a massive issue - esp in reducing social housing availability. It has also meant single occupancy of 3 and 4 bedroom council houses when peoples children leave home and the occupier isnt made to move into a smaller property by the council | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It has also meant single occupancy of 3 and 4 bedroom council houses when peoples children leave home and the occupier isnt made to move into a smaller property by the council" It was this, the hidden trap in the bedroom tax… there isn’t enough one and two bedroom social housing stock. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It has also meant single occupancy of 3 and 4 bedroom council houses when peoples children leave home and the occupier isnt made to move into a smaller property by the council It was this, the hidden trap in the bedroom tax… there isn’t enough one and two bedroom social housing stock." That is true but subsidised private rent has been an option for many years - friends of mine had a 3 bed house completely paid for via privste rental. Two bed flats are pretty much all that gets built in my town of 80,000 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
