Raven

It's exaclty like the DOTCOM era, all of a sudden everyone was on a computer course, everyone was a web designer and/or a programmer of some sort, you cou;dn;t get on a course for love nor money, now too many IT specialist, not enough IT jobs (only the cream survive). Now, it's Plumbing (and other building trades). People hear stories of plumbers et al earning shedloads and go off to do that (en mass). In a year or so there are going to be far more plumbers than we need, therefore competition will dictate that none of them will be earing a furtune, it's the jonny come lately effect (like BTL).

Ok. I'll bite! I was keen to read your post, the sub-title said "reason why a crash cannot happen". Now I've read it twice and still can't find a single reason why a crash cannot accure. Please clarify why a crash CAN NOT happen? the only reason I can gather you mean is that the goverment will not LET it happen, if so why have previous goverments never prevented previous crashes?

I'd rather get my news from an organisation that is possibly influenced by the goverment of the day than from an organisation owned by a single person, I'm not saying the beeb is not influenced, i'm not totally bonkers. The real world hay? Let's Rupert Murdoch for a real world examle, instructed his drivers to run over picket lines during the strikes, take his news papers, how unbiased are they, you expect his TV channels to be different? Your the one in cloud cockoo land dude. GO TO AMERICA see if you can find any news about anything going on in the rest of the world. Be grateful for what we have.

Amen to that! What other channels would do Blue Planet/Walking With Dinosours?Ray Mears Bush Craft/Wildlife on One/Simon Schama History of Britain/Newsnight/Question Time to name a few.

As I said, we should be campaining for a MORE independent Beeb. Personally I'd prefer this situation to a situation where I only get news from sources owned by individuals. Ever been to america? Watched thier news? There is a reason that the BBC is respected (and watched) worldwide, we should be proud of it. It's lost it's teeth during this goverment (one of their teeth is still sharp, paxman) granted, but that is due to us (the people) allowing the goverment to appoint cronies to carry out investigations.

Your bloody kidding, you must be!! So that some Rupert Mrdoch f*ck can tell me the news he want me to hear? No thanks. We should be campaigning for a MORE independent Beeb, the goverment should have NO inlfuence on programming or news stories.

That is the best artilcal I have ever read on the HPI subject!

There is not one house in any part of Hackney that is woth £200k let alone £600k, it's a dive, the whole of it. The only decent part of it is Hoxton square and that's full of wineo's!

If this is true then it is very good news. The banks would contribute to a HPC, by restricting and tightening lending they would excelerate any falls in HP. If they start only lending people 3.5 x income then this would mean people will only be able to get mortgages on houses for a lot less than those houses are up for, so if someone needs to sell, they willl have to sell at whatever people can lend. Yeh!

Mine had a graph

Here you go. repo stats.

Are most of us here not assiming that Ash's Dad's house will be worth in the region £200,000 within the next 3/4 years? Just thought I'd mention it.

Classic! Here we go......... ready everyone?.......... weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...................

Or just as likely be on the maiden voyage of HMS Titanic, on his way to America to "seek his fortune" You really do see yourself (and other BTL) as pioneers of the property front, you believe that you are bold and a step above the rest of us. So buy-2-let is ok as long as you have a wealthy reletive that it's about to pop thier clogs and leave everything to you?

yeah probably right, how about 3 x single and 4 x couples income? As for the HPI, it would rise with inflation because it would be constrained by affordability, you wouldn;t be ALLOWED to pay more than you can afford too. As for Buy to Let, I don;t think they would be a previlent as there would never be a point where they could use equity (from massive HPI 0 to fund buying a propery? They would have to pay off thier mortgage at double the rate of everyone else and then remortgage and buy another property, anyone that's willing to work that hard deserves to earn a living from renting a propery out. I suppose everyone would have a total running on what they owe (CC as well, stop irresponsible lending) Well, they could average it out over three years for peope in that situation, get an average. I disagree, it would give an upper limit to house prices and stop HPI taking HP away from earnings. Personally I'd say that personal loans and credit cards should be included in the maximum, and the amximum would be 3.5/4 x earnings not infinate as it is now, no more of these 10xmultiples.

Surely with Browns HUGE spending deficit he's going to be looking for some frog to squeeze? i think he'll be in more of a hurry to close that loophole! Plus, what about CGT on the profit on any house sold on? Surely if you won an asset as a business and you sell it on, you have to pay tax? Any comments. So, CGT on rent and CGT on profits from HPI, that's if there is any HPI. So heads you lose, tails you lose big time.

(Obviously this can only happen after HP have fallen back to the average) Assuming that we do get our HPC (please god) would it be a good idea for the goverment of the day (or FSA for that matter) to restrict banks to lending people a maximum of 4 x income multiples. This would then link HPI to wages and therefore to inflation in general making everything a bit more stable and as far as I can figure (not very far admitidly) this would do away with rampant HPI and do away (once and for all) to Boom & Bust (in the housing market anyway) and we could return to a house being a home not an investment. Obviously this would also have to be met by stricter controls on lie-to-buy, but I guess once the banks get burned these are coming anyway. Can anyone tell me the problems with this idea? I'm sure there are bound to be loads.

Yeah, but why would they take on potential losses when they have it the best of both ways now.

Morgage for falling prices Jitters anyone. Good to hear the word Negative Equity in the press so often lately, subconsciously influencual IMO.

DOGBOX: WHERE IS YOUR MATE'S FLAT?

Shows that it can work, if you do the maths, sadly for many, they haven't. Can we ask in what area (roughly)?

I can. If everyone thought like this we wouldn't be in the mess we are now!

Thanks for the support Gilf, wasn;t asking anyone for sympathy or anything just gets on my nerves when people have a go about us being lazy! Sorry to hear that about your dad, are the union/brigade/walfare doing much? They are supposed to be pretty suportive, are they? Where did your dad serve?

Bring back Harold Wilson's "Buy British!" (it was him wassn;t it?)

I suppose it helps! Can't believe these people are allowed to lend money, there should be an aptitude test in banks!