Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Moo

  1. You have my sympathy. I am in a similar position - I have a very good deposit but I can't see why I should have saved damn hard for years in order to then effectively zero my savings, live in a rabbit hutch and still have a mountain of mortgage debt! Frankly, my job is not secure enough anyway now so I've told the EAs that rang me recently that I am no longer looking. The amusing thing is that no doubt I am down on some of the EAs bulls**t figures as a 'new enquiry' about 3 or 4 months back! But I wasn't a serious buyer then at the market prices - I just thought I might be able to drive a hard bargain as a FTB who could get finance. This is what distorts the figures so much - the VIs band the 'new enqiries' figures around as if they indicate what's happening but they are infact a very unreliable indicator.

    Much the same position here. There are things in life that are worth going "all in" for, and the prospect of doing so in order to move from a very pleasent semi in a genuinely very nice area to the absolute **** end of the freehold market in a considerably less pleasent area whilst at the same time increasing monthly costs noticeable really, really isn't one of them.

  2. Personally I'd do away with big "headline" composite indices, as these are pretty meaningless, and instead go for a series of smaller indices to measure changes in cost of living essentials and almost-essentials excluding housing (food, water, power, transport, mandatory indirect taxation), net pay (as if, after tax), non-essentials (home entertainment systems, holidays, injection-moulded plastic dogplops, etc.), and housing itself.

    To my mind, a major part of the reason we're in the mess we are at the moment is because inflation levels in different types of "stuff" have, over the last ten or so years, been all over the place, and have yet the dozy headline figures used have completely failed to pick this up. In terms of policy, if you could get all those indices going along together as smoothly as possible, you'd have a pretty well balanced system. Okay, it wouldn't be easy, and it would require a much more sophisticated approach than the Big Interest Rate Lever, but I suspect it would be well worth a try.

    If a single inflation rate is needed, then it's probably easiest to just think of a number and say it's that every month, as it would arguably be no less meaningful than the current system.

  3. How annoying would it be if this was the bottom? I still think there's a way to go due to my belief that on my current salary which around double the natonal average I should be able to afford (with my deposit) a large detached house in a very good area. And I can't yet. I refuse to believe there are many people out there in a better financial position than I am at the moment therefor if I ain't buying the very few are.

    I guess if prices stagnate for 2 - 3 years my deposit would increase in size so I would be able to afford that house anyway as my mortgage would be smaller. That would piss me off too though.

    Out of interest, how much are said houses going for at the moment, and what is classed as a "good area"?

    Just asking because said statement can be classed as perfectly reasonable or outrageous fantasy depending on where you're looking to buy.

  4. Her mother told her that "some people bring up a family on that salary", but she still can't get her head around the fact that (at least) half of her so called necessary spending is completely optional.

    And her mother was completely wrong. Some people bring up a family on that salary plus considerable state benefits. They don't do it on the salary alone.

    (That said, yeah, she's clearly pissing a lot of money up the wall)

  5. I see that half the country still had negative MoM figures with London's big increase the only thing that stopped a countrywide fall in prices for the month.

    The LR figures IMHO are the ones that are likely to show the most stable picture in the current environment. Bearing in mind that there were only 30,000 transactions in total, the percentage included in the Haliwide data must be tiny.

    I agree on their accuracy relative to some of the other indices. They are, however, a bit of a historical document by comparison. My guess is we'll see the LR figures rise for a few months now as they start to reflect with Nationwide and Halifax were showing a few months back.

  6. Well if by surviving day to day you mean buying property they can't afford, buying cars they can't afford, going on holidays they can't afford, etc, etc, etc.

    It is surprising how little you can live on if you put your mind to it.

    You don't need to spend 200 quid a week on food for two people, you don't need brand new mobile phones, laptops, plasma. They were simply living an 'aspirational' lifestyle they can't afford.

    To be fair, there are a few out there (well, there's one at least, and no it's not me) who's ended up with an unmanageable CC bill despite some pretty damn frugal living. That said, on the whole I think you're right there, especially when it comes to the really big borrowers. Yes, I can quite see how someone on a very tight budget could end up with a few hundred quid on there thanks to a load of badly timed life events (puncture, washing machine dies, etc.), but to run up the larger bills takes serious effort.

  7. I think there'll be a cataclysmic split in the Labour Party between OldLab/NuLab, on a scale that will make the Tories' internal divisions over Europe look like a trivial lovers' tiff. The way it plays out will depend to a certain extent on whether the Blairites or the old guard bear the brunt of the seat losses, but of course the unions are also a major force in determining who the next Labour leader will be.

    My money would be on a jump to the left, with no chance of either a step to the right or simply hands on hips.

    If you think back to 1997, the whole point of New Labour was it gave them a chance to say "We're just like the Tories, only much more competent, and a lot more cuddly". It was a pretty easy sell for them at the time because the Tories were in a hell of a mess. Looking at Labour now, from opposition they're simply not going to be able to sell themselves with the "we're really good and they're shit" message because of the large amount of recent evidence to the contrary.

    In my opinion, Labour's only real chance post-election is to dis-associate themselves with "New" Labour, fess up to their previous leader's mistakes, and start looking properly Lefty again. That way they'll have a clear ideological difference with the Tories* that's easy to sell to their core vote.

    * Yes, there's a bit of a difference there now with regards to "unlimited-borrow-and-spend", but that's a particularly easy one to get over to the public.

  8. The hotel proprietor has paid off the £100 debt with money he doesn't have and will have to make good the shortfall somehow.

    Precisely. Remove the rest of the crap and the net result is "hotellier is £100 down". It demonstrates velocity and the multiplier effect of spending rather well, but has bugger all to do with the current situation.

    To make it analagous to the current situation the tourist would have to return to the hotel and tell the hotellier that he doesn't want the room yet or doesn't want his £100 back yet although will, at some point in the future, be back to claim either the room or the £100, or a combination of both, whilst also demanding a note from the hotellier he can show to his to wife to prove where the £100 went so she doesn't beat him up with the Kenwood Chef bread making attachment for going £100 down for nothing.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.