Alternatives to living in a house?

dowie · 22 May 2011 at 21:30

FoxEye said:
In the world we live in, middle-class people buy all the cheap properties and rent them to the less well off, forcing people on low incomes out of the property market completely. At least that's my uneducated take on it.

I don't believe that is correct - the majority of private residential property across just about any price bracket is not rented.

So does anyone here...

live on a boat?
live in a caravan?
live in a tent?
live in a cave?

I don't but I did look into the boat option once on a whim - there are two difficulties with it - one is getting a decent mooring and the other is that you'll be unlikely to secure a mortgage on it. Essentially if you can afford to do it then you've likely got a big enough deposit for a flat/house anyway.

Wicksta · 22 May 2011 at 21:36

FoxEye said:
What's the rent like in France? Do people there pay 30-50% of their monthly wage on rent? I genuinely don't know.

I can only speak for Germany where I both rented and the owned an apartment. It wasn't much different in price monthly, there was a lot of red tape buying though, especially with the leasehold.

Costwise (rent vs buying) it really wasn't much different to here though, I think people just can't be arsed over there and don't mind living in generic apartments with the same laminate flooring and white walls.

dowie · 22 May 2011 at 21:37

FoxEye said:
Wouldn't it be a good thing if everybody did? OK, not if you're a landlord trying to make money of the backs of other people, but for everyone else?

Everyone makes money off the backs of other people, that's how the economy works.

It certainly isn't necessary for everyone to own a property and landlords provide a service to people who don't want or need to.(and of course those who can't afford to)

When I first moved down to London I couldn't afford to buy, I rented a room in a shared flat that a landlord has taken on risk to buy and make available to me or anyone else in need of such accommodation.

FoxEye · 22 May 2011 at 21:41

dowie said:
Everyone makes money off the backs of other people, that's how the economy works.

Er, no. Just no. The money I earn I earn through applying my own abilities directly for my employers benefit.

How is that the same at all?

[TW]Fox · 22 May 2011 at 21:43

FoxEye said:
Er, no. Just no. The money I earn I earn through applying my own abilities directly for my employers benefit.

And your employer makes money by selling products or services to other people - ie, it makes money off the back of other people?

dowie · 22 May 2011 at 21:45

FoxEye said:
Er, no. Just no. The money I earn I earn through applying my own abilities directly for my employers benefit.

How is that the same at all?

Does your company not have customers?

badcompany · 22 May 2011 at 21:46

Wicksta said:
lol @ poster on a computer overclocking forum trying to pretend he's not middle class.

What if you have a computer your middle class? WTF!

FoxEye · 22 May 2011 at 21:47

I'm not going to argue semantics, but the phrase I used is supposed to imply, to use a different word, exploitation.

Ie, knowing that there are some people who can't afford (or can't get) a mortgage, and buying properties with the sole aim of milking these people for as much rent as you can get from them.

I am biased because down here rent is exceptionally high.

Vonhelmet · 22 May 2011 at 21:48

FoxEye said:
Wouldn't it be a good thing if everybody did? OK, not if you're a landlord trying to make money of the backs of other people, but for everyone else?

A landlord doesn't make money off other people's backs. He exploits his investments. You've managed to pick one line of business that doesn't depend on the labour of others. Well done.

FoxEye · 22 May 2011 at 21:49

badcompany said:
What if you have a computer your middle class? WTF!

Yeah I have no idea where he got that idea. Not all of us have top-of-the-range i7 machines with quadfire 6970s. You can make a half-decent computer for not too much money if you're careful.

badcompany · 22 May 2011 at 21:50

To be fair people who have buy to let properties need to be taxed a lot more.

Vonhelmet · 22 May 2011 at 21:52

badcompany said:
To be fair people who have buy to let properties need to be taxed a lot more.

Not really. The government might want to fix the housing benefit thing, which might help balance things at the bottom end.

flibbage0 · 22 May 2011 at 21:53

This might make some people feel better

Be greatful for what you have, not everyone can afford a house.

Pawnless Endgame · 22 May 2011 at 21:54

I contemplated living on a narrow boat back in 2005. I just went for a bachelor pad in the end, basically half a house - a single large downstairs room and a single large bedroom upstairs plus a small/average bathroom.

A mate of mine who still lives with his parents got given planning permission to convert their garage (detached) into an inhabitable pad and he now lives in there.

dowie · 22 May 2011 at 22:08

FoxEye said:
I'm not going to argue semantics, but the phrase I used is supposed to imply, to use a different word, exploitation.

Ie, knowing that there are some people who can't afford (or can't get) a mortgage, and buying properties with the sole aim of milking these people for as much rent as you can get from them.

I am biased because down here rent is exceptionally high.

How is that different from any other business providing goods or services that other people need/want?

FoxEye · 22 May 2011 at 22:14

dowie said:
How is that different from any other business providing goods or services that other people need/want?

Last time I checked the gas company wasn't asking for 30-50% of my wages to provide gas.

If rent was reasonable I wouldn't make the claim that landlords are exploiting the poor. But down here a small 1 bedroom house costs £500 p.m.

Chinese sweat shops wouldn't be exploiting their workers if they paid them decent wages. Same principle.

[TW]Fox · 22 May 2011 at 22:15

FoxEye said:
Last time I checked the gas company wasn't asking for 30-50% of my wages to provide gas.

Since when does a services cost as a percentage of your personal wage dictate whether it's immoral or not?

Are you going to have a pop at Land Rover, they are probably asking in excess of 100% of your wages for the monthly lease of a Range Rover?

Then maybe you can line up to take a shot at Kuoni, who will be happy to releive you of 300% of your monthly wage for a holiday?

The rent charge you pay is set by simple market forces - supply and demand.

dowie · 22 May 2011 at 22:23

FoxEye said:
Last time I checked the gas company wasn't asking for 30-50% of my wages to provide gas.

If rent was reasonable I wouldn't make the claim that landlords are exploiting the poor. But down here a small 1 bedroom house costs £500 p.m.

Chinese sweat shops wouldn't be exploiting their workers if they paid them decent wages. Same principle.

Interesting how you believe it is the landlord who is exploiting you and not your employer. Could you not also use the same logic to argue that that as you have to spend 30-50% of your wages on rent you're not paid enough?

Do you not realise that rent is a reflection of the market price of those properties.

FoxEye · 22 May 2011 at 22:23

[TW]Fox;19200224 said:
Since when does a services cost as a percentage of your personal wage dictate whether it's immoral or not?

Are you going to have a pop at Land Rover, they are probably asking in excess of 100% of your wages for the monthly lease of a Range Rover?

Then maybe you can line up to take a shot at Kuoni, who will be happy to releive you of 300% of your monthly wage for a holiday?

Come on Fox, is that even a serious question?

I don't need Range Rover do I. I do, however, need a house to live in.

Chinese people also need a job. Sweat shop owners give them a job, but don't compensate them fairly for their time. It's exploitation.

Landlords knowingly charging high rents in places with very low incomes (hello Cornwall) is classic exploitation.

FoxEye · 22 May 2011 at 22:27

dowie said:
Interesting how you believe it is the landlord who is exploiting you and not your employer. Could you not also use the same logic to argue that that as you have to spend 30-50% of your wages on rent you're not paid enough?

Nope. I fully expect that if wages went up across the region rents would also go up. I'm sure you would expect that too.

Landlords would justify this by saying it's a "very desirable area" to live in. And screw the locals, who were born here, because we don't really care about them. Let's just buy more second homes and buy-to-let properties and royally screw everyone who doesn't just want to come here to retire (with a large pot of gold).