Mortgage Rate Rises

413x said:
As said. It only helps the initial cohort. It just makes it more difficult for the next lot again.

We should have never gone beyond 3x borrowings.
And also had some rent caps. That would have kept prices down and stopped this spiraling up of prices.

IMO the housing market shouldn't be free enterprise where anyone with enough cash can hold everyone else captive.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I fear it is almost an impossible thing to fix now.

As you point out, the very fact that everyone can borrow so much means that prices go up. Of course this is what the rich, the banks and people with money want. More and more secured debt, and the more people have to borrow the better. Then even if they **** up like in 2008 it doesn't matter as they will get bailed out by the taxpayers anyway.

The whole system has started off bent and manipulated by those that had the money to lend in the first place, and it has just snowballed more and more and more.
 
Last edited:
200sols said:
Even if you banned all second homes tomorrow it wouldnt make any difference to the wider market. More an ideological argument than anything else.
Click to expand...

Yeah holiday homes wouldn't make much of a difference at all.

It would be interesting to see what impact the property moguls, foreign investors and off shoreholdings have on it all though
 
Jono8 said:
Unfortunately, I fear it is almost an impossible thing to fix now.

As you point out, the very fact that everyone can borrow so much means that prices go up. Of course this is what the rich, the banks and people with money want. More and more secured debt, and the more people have to borrow the better. Then even if they **** up like in 2008 it doesn't matter as they will get bailed out by the taxpayers anyway.

The whole system has started off bent and manipulated by those that had the money to lend in the first place, and it has just snowballed more and more and more.
Click to expand...

Makes you think.
If people couldn't borrow enough to made these house prices what they are, but wages were as they were now, and BTL was regulated.. Would everyone have more in thier pocket to spend in the local economy?

I'm not clued up enough to know if this would be the case. I do know that if I had less housing cost I probably would spend more. What else is there to do with it?

There's so much cash locked up in assets, it does make you wonder.

We like to over leverage into housing.. "buy the best you can afford.. Houses always go Up" is kind of true. But if it didn't.. Maybe housing wouldn't be treated as an investment and life would generally be better.
 
Last edited:
413x said:
Makes you think.
If people couldn't borrow enough to made these house prices what they are, but wages were as they were now, and BTL was regulated.. Would everyone have more in thier pocket to spend in the local economy?

I'm not clued up enough to know if this would be the case. I do know that if I had less housing cost I probably would spend more. What else is there to do with it?

There's so much cash locked up in assets, it does make you wonder.
Click to expand...
Probably wouldn't happen that way as its all linked. If houses weren't as expensive, inflation would have been systemically lower and you'd not have the same wages as you do now.

Conversely, if everyone had more free cash it might push inflation up meaning that your cash doesn't go as far anyway.

But certainly I agree that the borrowing limits have been designed to extract the maximum possible out of people. Part of the problem is that many people are willing to throw every spare penny at their mortgage instead of spending more of it in the wider economy. If one group of people is willing to max out then it makes it harder for everyone else.
 
Last edited:
413x said:
Makes you think.
If people couldn't borrow enough to made these house prices what they are, but wages were as they were now, and BTL was regulated.. Would everyone have more in thier pocket to spend in the local economy?
Click to expand...

Instead of putting into the pockets of banks/the already wealthy, yes.

Houses holding value/going up in relation and inline with wages/inflation etc is fine.

As shown though earlier, since 1999, wages have only doubled, yet house prices are 3.5 times what they were. I just don't see how mathematically that is sustainable.
 
Jono8 said:
Instead of putting into the pockets of banks/the already wealthy, yes.

Houses holding value/going up in relation and inline with wages/inflation etc is fine.

As shown though earlier, since 1999, wages have only doubled, yet house prices are 3.5 times what they were. I just don't see how mathematically that is sustainable.
Click to expand...

It seems like it's only sustainable with tweaks to the playing field.

Increase the salary multiplier
Help to buy
Lisa
99pc mortgages
Increasing max terms to 30 years

Soon will be multigenerational mortgages.

Its clear that affordability is at the limit. So increasing the debt individuals are allowed to take on is now the order of the day.

I wouldn't call that progress.


My parents first house I can find on historical prices was 70k and much bigger than our 260k house.

Our first mortgage is 5x theirs for much less house.
We all know wages haven't kept up.


They had 3 kids, have a million pound house, final salary pension, etc etc just working and living. Nothing smart, nothing clever. There's absolutely no way an average Jo dad n get that now without a helping hand from inheritance.


Looks like it's only getting worse to. If I live to an OK age I think we'll see all this unravel. Without technology (ie revolutions in medicine) people will just die younger, have less kids and less assets as time goes on.. Well.. The majority. The rich are (as always) getting richer.
 
Last edited:
21-22 there were 800k second homes in the UK.

I am not sure I would agree it wouldn't make a difference adding that many onto the market.

Although a lot of these are let. It seems something like 200k are probably true second homes.
Not an insignificant amount still.

Its a bit ideological though I think to target these.

Just build more ffs.

Apply NIMBY tax, 10% of wealth and you get a 20 year ban on the thing you want to stop. Is it worth 10% of your wealth to stop something?
(Would require local compulsory referendum. Those voting ban if they were more than 50% suffer the tax, those who didn't vote yes pay nothing even if it is banned)
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Apply NIMBY tax, 10% of wealth and you get a 20 year ban on the thing you want to stop. Is it worth 10% of your wealth to stop something?
(Would require local compulsory referendum. Those voting ban if they were more than 50% suffer the tax, those who didn't vote yes pay nothing even if it is banned)
Click to expand...

The problem with this is that unchecked development is not good. Developers don't give a **** about anything but their bottom line. They don't care about the local community. They don't care about amenities, traffic etc. Infrastructure in the country is already absolutely junk in so many areas and the more you build up and condense populations the harder that is to change.

In Tunbridge Wells there are a couple or roads that make traffic a nightmare. There is a bridge near me that is single lane which causes carnage at the best of times. If there are any road works on these vital roads the whole town grinds to a halt.

This is why there needs to be more central oversight and planning to these things. Its nice to just say "awww it just people who don't want their little village to change" but its not that simple.
 
Last edited:
fez said:
The problem with this is that unchecked development is not good. Developers don't give a **** about anything but their bottom line. They don't care about the local community. They don't care about amenities, traffic etc. Infrastructure in the country is already absolutely junk in so many areas and the more you build up and condense populations the harder that is to change.

In Tunbridge Wells there are a couple or roads that make traffic a nightmare. There is a bridge near me that is single lane which causes carnage at the best of times. If there are any road works on these vital roads the whole town grinds to a halt.

This is why there needs to be more central oversight and planning to these things. Its nice to just say "awww it just people who don't want their little village to change" but its not that simple.
Click to expand...

This needs a decent government who invest in national infra.
Local developers do a bit, but they often manage to pay to get out of it.

People talk about new towns but part of our issue is old towns. As you say they struggle to cope with traffic etc but thats because instead of planning well in advance for eg a new A road or link, or train line etc its left too late.

The central government like with many things have done the opposite they have given up just about all planning and forced it down so they can use the excuse of "not me guv"
 
All we get here is constant housing built and no infrastructure. Place is a mess and full of scummy people.

Its getting more and more demoralising seeing all the rubbish, struggling to get doctors, taking longer to drive anywhere.

Even if I don't manage to get out of the UK I can't wait to move away from here.


Coming back from Norway where everything is clean and cared for, hearing peoples Stories of how amazing it is hits a bit when you come back.




Country needs sorting out. But it won't happen. Too many influential people have too much to lose. Sad really.
 
413x said:
All we get here is constant housing built and no infrastructure. Place is a mess and full of scummy people.

Its getting more and more demoralising seeing all the rubbish, struggling to get doctors, taking longer to drive anywhere.
Click to expand...

Hence NIMBYism. Its not entirely irrational. Create a ****** place to live and you end up with mostly ****** people living there.
 
413x said:
All we get here is constant housing built and no infrastructure.
Click to expand...
We have the same argument everytime there's any building plans for my village.

It's a chicken and egg situ, without the increase of people who are the potential customers and increase in freash money going around.. no business in the right mind will want to open a place near me. And at the same time, people don't want to move to an area in the middle of nowhere where there's not the local conveniences.

So all we get is hairdresses and take aways... the take aways are being caused by the shops being owned by one person who leases them out. Some idiot takes on the lease and thinks they can make a success of it, only to close down a few months later for the land lord to pocket the lease income still.

I do agree we need more of road infrastructure, in fact I have suggested it many times and some "locals" always boos it down. We have one road going into and out of the village, if anything happens to it and it often get's flooded or road works. We are trapped in our houses until it's sorted. If we get another route out, it would easy traffic for people to want to live in the village and is able to travel back and forth from work.

Place is a mess and full of scummy people.
Click to expand...

Yub, same here.. always asking for social housing or "affordable" housing. The local councillor is a sucker for it.. the poor ****** get's tagged in every facebook post/comment in the local group, with people moaning that a street light is out, that someone stole someone bin, that some kids dare to stand outside a shop for too long.. etc.. etc.. I couldn't afford to buy or rent a house where my parents live, so I did the adult thing and rented somewhere that I could afford. The old estate is now a dump anyway; all the kids grew up and have left.. most of the people including my parents have moved out and there's just no cash in the area anymore.

People can't understand that communities/areas evolve in cycles.. young adults move into an area, they have cash to spend on their houses and local businesses, they have kids that go to the local school... as they get older the kids all move out, the parents get older and either they stay there until they meet their maker or downsize.. eventually young adults and familys move in and the cycle begins again. It didn't help my parent's area when all the local schools got closed down, so no parents would want to live there now.

Some people don't want to leave to the village for work, they could visit every company in the village in a space of 4 hours asking to ask for work but they just post on FB that they want a job that's in the village while displaying perfectly good reasons not to hire them on their FB profile/pics. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom