I see you're back in the thread for your monthly "we had it harder in our days, we had to work hard to put food on the table despite my mortgage was less than the cost of a new car".
Mortgage Rate Rises
- Thread starter glenimp617
- Start date
I see you're back in the thread for your monthly "we had it harder in our days, we had to work hard to put food on the table despite my mortgage was less than the cost of a new car".
Have you missed me that much?
As you can see I haven't mentioned any of that.
Last posted 22 Sept, before that 15 July so not really monthly now is it?
Last edited:
Literarily all you have written in this thread is that the bank are lending too much money and that's bad as it increases the house prices.
Do you have any proof of this? that it's the amount that bank's lending that is causing the housing price inflation?
This statement of yours is just foil hat zone, the only profit that banks make is some of paperwork fee and the interest rate that needs to cover for possible inflation over the period of the mortgage. Its the NIMBYs that pocket the increase in the house prices, it's them that is stopping new builds and it's them that are asking for the crazy prices for their houses.
banks are seen as ciritical infrastructure in a modern civilization, they contribute in nation's economy, social stability, and daily life. Their productivity comes from storing dead unproductivity money from people and companies who don't need it at this present moment of time, and lending some of it to people and companies who do require it to be productive. There's not that many small businesess that have started without a loan from a bank. There's not that many students who have studied at univeristy without going into their overdraft. There's far fewer people who have managed to buy their first home without a mortgage from the bank. So unless you, yourself are willing to be productive and contribute to society by lending the money that is required for people to start busineses, better themselves with eduction, obtain transport for themselves to get to work and buy a house. I would say they are contrubuting more than you are.
Just because that is how it is and has always been, it doesn’t mean it is correct or the best way to do it.
How would it be possible for house prices to be so insanely priced above what the construction cost is, if everyone wasn’t able to borrow absurd amounts of money?
All you are describing is an entire society and economy built on colossal debt, which primarily helps those with the money to lend it in the first place to become more and more rich for doing nothing.
You are not looking at the bigger picture.
Houses in this country are seen as a stock. Anyone is able to buy them. As an investment they are one of the few things that are almost guaranteed to appreciate in value, and are also at the same time considered pretty safe.
You are not just in competition with others borrowing to purchase properties, you are against landlords, some of which are really huge portfolio landlords, investment companies, foreign investors. The housing market in the UK is one of the biggest contributors to the UK ecomony, it probably IS the biggest contributor. We take many millions of overseas funds every year that go into UK houses, not to mention all the tax and related revenue that come from the whole industry in general.
It's gone way past simple supply and demand, and that is what you are in competition with.
It would be nice if that were true, but it doesn't change the fact there are fewer properties than people need and far, far fewer properties that people actually want. If you cap the amount normal people can spend on a house, all it means is that big business gets in and buys those houses way before they become affordable to the average man on the street... and carry on renting them out at silly prices.
What price would you place on yours and your families' safety? would you not pay the extra for a low crime rate area?
What price would you put on your childerns education? Where I used to live, there was empty apartment as some families were renting them just to get the postcode so that they could send their kids to the local school..
would you not pay extra knowing that your property inside your shelter more secure?
would you not pay extra knowing that your closer/quicker to work so you're not suck in traffer for over 4 hours a day?
Rarely the cost of anything is sum total of cost of material, time and skills that was required to put it together... unless you like working for free? The insurance that the property developers, the salary tax/NI of the workers, the time of the marketing team showing tyre kickers around, is all baked into the first sale price. And some are prepared to pay more for it than others.
Do you own your property/ies, do you have a mortgage? have you any experince in this property/mortgage game? as it seems to me, that you just want modern society to collapse so you can have another chance.
I own my own house mortgage free, and have had mortgages in the past on two different previous properties.
I don't want modern society to collapse, but I can see how flawed and ridiculous it is, and how much it's all designed to primarily benefit those who already have vast sums of money.
I believe that absurd wealth inequality and insane greed is the number one cause of most of the world's problems.
so you will be happy to sell your house for the what the construction cost is?
without the banks, who a mainly public owned, the rich would be getting much richer as it would be only them that could afford to buy the houses out right and then have a capitive market to charge what they like for renting. pretty much what's happening with landlord fees at the moment.
I'm not sure you understand. I'm advocating for the end of individuals rich enough to buy multiple properties and loads of land etc. Companies and coporations should not be allowed to buy up housing stock etc
You are still thinking in terms of our current system, which has inherently metastasized from ridiculous wealth inequality and grown into the abomination we have today (which will eventually fail catastrophically).
...and no I obviously wouldn't be happy to sell my house for it's construction cost whilst living in the current system we live in. That isn't some kind of gotcha or hypocrisy. I have to play the game along with everyone else to survive, but I can point out the massive flaw in its rules.
I think you will find that the vast majority are happy with the current system and you are too if you are willing to play along with it.
Again, I point out it's not the banks that are causing the house prices to raise.. the more money they lend the higher risk it is to them, the more assets they have tried up.
It is simply a case of supply and demand, if people vote for governements that allow more house building and if people who already have houses don't stop the development of new buildings. you will see the house prices settle in that region until the demand out weights the supply again.
I get it all the time in my village, we have serveal brown fields where old buildings have been knocked over for decades, yet as soon as anyone want's to build anything. The locals come out saying that there's not in GP/Dentists appointments, which in my view is clearly not true as I can get a same day appointment every time I need one and the fact that one of each closed down recently as they was not busy enough to keep open. School places, the roads are busy enough already.. etc etc. etc... the average bungalow here in the middle of no where is over £300k for a 60s build that would need a load of work doing on it.
If I look at mansfield, a place that I've prevously lived, a new build bungalow is 180K.. and there are far more schools, GPs and denists. The only issue I have is that I have to still work for a living for another 20 years.
If you really want to bring down house prices so that the banks don't have to lend out so much, support housing devoplements.
Getting there...
Congrats. However, they really should reword that letter. I know I've overpaid on my mortgage to the fat cats without having made a single additional payment
.
Well I took out a 2 year fix at 4.07% when I just remortgaged in June this year. Trackers which are typically set a bit higher than the best fixes, are currently down to under 4%. I can see HSBC do one for 3.99%. If rates start to drop more then we could see trackers down to as low as 3.0-3.5% over the next 1.5 years. That would have made a difference to me yeah, as my outstanding balance is high.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,959
- Location
- Surrey
But I think the point they were making is that by the time these rates drop, you've been over paying for say 1 year, and now start saving for the final year or 6 months, so at best you've about even over all
Ah yeah that's right! Dang. Hadn't had my coffee obviously.
So yeah it will be minimal that's true.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,959
- Location
- Surrey
it's christmas, it's ok to admit you've been at the snowballs already
Associate
- Joined
- 19 May 2010
- Posts
- 2,123
- Location
- Cheltenham
it's christmas, it's ok to admit you've been at the snowballs already
At the moment on this forum you don’t have a choice!
Women entering the workforce. That has really shot up house prices too.
Before you could get a decent house on 1 salary.
Now you can't.
Our mortgage is not a big fraction of our take home pay.
I don't ever want it to be bigger.
When you don't have kids to pass inheritance onto. Having a big asset you have to take a bad loan on later (equity release) there isn't much point having loads of cash tied up in it.
Before you could get a decent house on 1 salary.
Now you can't.
Our mortgage is not a big fraction of our take home pay.
I don't ever want it to be bigger.
When you don't have kids to pass inheritance onto. Having a big asset you have to take a bad loan on later (equity release) there isn't much point having loads of cash tied up in it.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,959
- Location
- Surrey
It works out the same surely.
If women didn't enter the work force and so house prices were based on 1 wage, then you'd only have 1 wage to contribute to a mortgage over 2.