cock-eyed octopus

This is NOT a rational explanation. It is an appeal to authority (the lender). A rational explanation would involve some financial calculation.

This has nothing to do with the logic, or otherwise, behind income multiples.

There is no logic to this at all. The person on £10k is in a far worse position whatever happens. Unless someone gives me a RATIONAL explanation for income multiples I can only conclude there isn't one.

And the guy on £10k??

It was also seen that the Earth was flat & the centre of the Universe & house prices always went up. I'd be grateful for the rationale, please.

Sorry, still can't see what's magical about 3.5, or any other multiple. Looked up some figures: £500k mortgage over 25 yrs. = £2956 p.m. Income £100k p.a. = £5340 p. m. so residue > £2300 p.m. £35k mortgage over 25 yrs. = £207 p.m. Income £10k p.a. = £708 p. m. so residue = £501 p.m Who's at greater risk?

... the logic behind income multiples? I keep seeing some value for this (usually 3.5*income) quoted as being holy writ so far as mortgage affordability is concerned. I just can't see this. Whether you're earning 10k or 100k, your fixed costs are going to be essentially the same. The richer person may choose (almost certainly) to spend more on non-essentials, but they don't HAVE to. The balance can surely be used to spend on a mortgage, if they wish. The effect of tax allowances, banding etc. will diminish the differential, but I would maintain that someone on 100k p.a. is much more able to afford a 500k mortgage than someone on 10k p.a. is able to afford a 35k one. Perhaps someone could provide some comparative figures for me. (Or has this already been done?)

15 miles west of Ipswich: 2 out of 6 local EAs shut down. Of remainder, biggest has as follows Price(£) SSTC 300k-250k 22% 250k-200k 25% 200k-150k 30% 150k-100k 60% Whether they'll hold up or not, who can say. I have a suspicion that some may have gone through at the lower end - there are definitely less for sale, & the % SSTC has dropped slightly.

You should ge out more. (So should I... ) A RAF friend of mine came out with one I hadn't heard before. "She's worth a squirt" Haven't got a clue what he means

How dare you! It's a well known fact that everybody here is a demi-god, of impeccable moral virtue, whereas everybody else is a heartless, moneygrubbing, greedy, selfish, capitalist, non-Welsh speaking, lying, thieving, capitalist so-and-so who deserves to die of cancer. It must be true, they all say it is

Vested interest, owner occupier.

I'm not sure it will speed anything up. Do not forget that for every opinion there is an opposite opinion; there is a huge amount of rubbish about on the internet (some of it on this site). People here seem to think that anyone coming to this site while be overwhelmed by the lambent intellectual force of the arguments posited, while simultaneously deriding them as being thick as pig shit. Bit of a contradiction there. I doubt if the net no. of people swayed one way or another will amount to very much. Ultimately, most rely on experience, & the experience of MOST people over the last 40 years, if not longer, is that home ownership is beneficial.

What debt level would be the sign of a healthy economy?

I visit this site to learn. Mostly I learn that there are an awful lot of unhappy people out there. A big thank you to people like yourself who are trying to have some sort of rational debate which helps us come to some sort of informed decision. My trouble is that I am always looking for the deeper underlying reasons as to why things are as they are. My only conclusion so far is that it's all bloody complicated - I get really hacked off by simplistically minded bears ( & bulls) who "know" exactly what is going to happen. So, a small request: more thinking, less hatred?

At the moment. And not necessarily.

And theprice of the £300k house after 25 yrs.? I seem to remember an old joke about someone who invested 25p, got cryogenically frozen & woken up after 1000yrs.; he excitedly phoned the bank yo see what he was worth: "your balance is now £100,000" "Yipee!" "That will be £250,000 for the phone call" Actually, I could not agree more that, for most people, ftbing NOW would be an extremely bad choice. The problem is that, over a 25 yr. period, I can't think of anyone who hasn't been far, far better off buying than renting. This may change. The past is not necessarily a guide to the future. However, with the awful track record of economic "experts", past experience is what people rely on.

I heard about an old bloke who was having a haircut when the girl slapped him around the face, exclaiming " you dirty old man!" Whereupon he produced the pair of glasse he'd been polishing...

2 out of 6 local EAs closed in last month. However, 1 EA has 50% of houses SSTC £200k<£150k, 67% £150k<£100k.

Absolutely! But how to change it? I think we have to abandon our whole metaphysical system - get rid of free will, morality, guilt... the odd thing is, you end up with an almost Christ-like compassion for the whole of creation. I'm working on it.

The same mistake! Time & time again! Laying all the troubles of the world at the door of the "capitalist system" is ludicrous. A really capitalist regime has no more chance of survival than a really communist one. Famine, war, torture, all the horrors of the world existed long before anybody thought of communism or capitalism. We live in this fallen, sub-lunary world, forever trapped within our own natures. The only way forward I can see is for an evolution in human nature towards peace, love & understanding. How to do this I only wish I knew, but it will NOT be acheived by enforcing a social system which compels us to support those who demonstrate none of the above.

The voice of reason. "You some kinda prevert?" You won't be popular round here...

Completely the opposite round here. Anybody else different?

Happy to oblige! Here goes. Looked up "syndicalism" & got: "A model syndicalist community is as follows. The local unit, the syndicat, would communicate with other syndicats through the bourse de travail (labour exchange). The bourse would handle management and the transfer of commodities. All participants in each organized trade internally share equal ownership of its output and therefore deserve equal earnings and benefits within that particular trade, regardless of position or duty." Absolutely bonkers. Can only be dreamed up by people with very little experience of other people (young), experience but ability to ignore what they observe & still survive somehow (immature & lucky), or cynically lying for their own ends (want to be rich/want to get laid/rich&want to get laid). The world is full of nice guys. it's also full of bastards. Sometimes the characteristics overlap, which can make life difficult, but interesting. Most of us are only too happy to help the nice guys, but we'll be buggered if we'll help the others. In my experience, bastardity & niceness are independent of colour,creed, race, age, sex ... I'm no Dr. Pangloss, but improving this "best of all possible worlds" will not be solved by applying simplistic solutions to the mother of all complexities called life.

Doesn't the article say It was first published July23rd 2004?