Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

danlightbulb

Members
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About danlightbulb

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. And thus a vicious circle begins. Employers won't pay for good people - students know there's no earning potential so don't bother going that extra mile for academic achievement. Employers say 'we told you so', and cut salaries again - and so on and so on until everyone has lost respect for each other. The discussion about social mobility is interesting. Speaking from my own point of view I have managed to take a couple of steps up by doing additional qualifications and now earn a modest £27k. However I now have a baby, a missus, a house, a car. It is difficult to justify the risk of changing jobs to move up the ladder when my current position affords me what I need. Thus, although I want to earn more, the risk of losing the average wage I have is too great. Also, more often than not getting over that £30k barrier requires a relocation, especially in the engineering field. I reckon a lot of people don't want that hassle. Social mobility is also reduced because of the gap between the city and the rest of the country. If city companies spread their wings a bit by investing in other areas of the UK then more jobs would be available. Alot of this country now only has low paid jobs available because no big companies want to locate there and provide these jobs. Speaking for the Midlands, it seems to be to be a completely dead area job wise.
  2. Hi all, Sorry to drop this on the forum, its actually for something I have been tasked with at work, but I am trying to find out how land prices have changed over the last century. Not interested in the price of houses that sit on the land, just the underlying inflation of the land itself. Obviously rural land and urban land will have inflated at different rates. I am aware that different areas of the country will experience different inflation of land also. Can anyone point me in the direction of some inflation data please!! Does it exist? Many thanks Dan
  3. Thanks for all replies so far. Obviously a complicated issue. I'm still a bit confused though. Lets say i borrow £100k from the rock at 6%. Over 25 years I would pay back about double that, £200k. So the rock sell my loan to citibank for £120k and makes £20k straight profit. Citibank makes £80k profit (ultimately, over the full 25 years). £200k - £120k. How does citibank recieve my monthly payments (which are still being paid to the rock)? What happens in 5 years when I remortgage and pay off the original loan - no where near £200k paid up to that point. Futhermore, the 'package' sold to citibank is probably 100's of loans packaged up. How does citibank know which houses these loans are secured on? Everytime the issue of selling on loans is mentioned it is always said that the buyer doesn't know what 'bad debts' are in the package. But to be recieving the payments there must be a trace back to the original mortgagee, somewhere? And how are the monthly payments collected when the debt is sold again, and again and again. The debt may be owned by someone in Dubai, packaged into god knows how many loan combinations, but how do they receive my monthly payment? Thanks
  4. Hi all, Just wondering how a mortgage debt can be sold on? If I borrow £100k from the rock, for example, how do they go about selling it on? Thanks
  5. Change this to: 76.53% of statistics are just bo!!ocks
  6. Theres been alot of talk on here recently (mainly people with a good grasp of the markets) about what to do with any savings or cash that they have. Some of the frequently discussed options seem to be: * Foreign currencies (foreign currency accounts or holding foreign cash under mattress) * Commodities (gold, silver etc) * Cash * Bonds I'm sure there are others. Problem is, for many people including me, I don't know enough about these things to be confident that my money is safe, hence it is sitting in my bank savings account earning modest interest. On the one hand I don't want these savings to be lost cos of a bank run, or lost because of devaluation (hyperinflation). On the other hand I don't want to put it somewhere where I am running other risks, eg how is anyone supposed to know whether Gold will rise or fall? I (and probably many others) are in a sort of limbo middle ground. We know enough to be worried, but not enough to risk our hard earned modest savings by investing in markets we don't really understand and are likely to get just as screwed by in the know 'insiders' (people in the high level banking / government world who would happily screw over some rookie investor). If the uneducated sheeple get stung, so will we, except we will know its happening yet feel that its too risky to do anything else. I hope people understand what I am trying to say here. So given this huge uncertainty, and difference of opinion, what should I do with my modest savings? Regards Dan
  7. Define irony: 3 months before his death Pavarotti sang at a concert to save the rainforests. Now they've had to cut a couple down just to build a coffin for the fat ****.
  8. So come on then... whats it worth? Lets see what people think given that there is no benchmark for comparison.
  9. If the price of a car you already own tripled people would be overjoyed. Its the belief that increasing value of things you already own makes you weathly, and as MEWers have found out, it can make you very wealthy for a time, until you come to make the repayments. NR have been leveraging 4 to 1 but passing that leverage onto others by selling off the debt. So ultimately who owns this bad debt now cos its not northern rock.
  10. Just out of interest, what happens if NR go bust? What happens to the mortgages and loans that people currently hold with them? (Not a VI by the way, just wondering). Presumably people who have savings with be bailed out up to a certain level by the FSA guarantee (don't know what its called).
  11. From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-inflation Also from wiki: (same page) I take it that non-monetary assets include houses?
  12. Thats the problem - they should be! And there should be a more realistic inflation measure that includes mortgages, housing, stealth tax increases etc. Tax codes, tax thresholds, tax credits, etc etc should also all rise annually by this measure, it should be the law. I fail to understand how private and public sector can continually get away with below inflation pay rises. It is cutting peoples pay and it effects those in financial hardship the most.
  13. Not sure I agree with this. I would love a large house in the country and if a line of credit was available to me to go and buy this dream then why wouldn't I take it? If everyone else does the same then demand drives up prices the same as any other market or product. You are assuming that (1) everyone is happy where they live and don't want to upgrade (2) everyone is financially prudent This was inevitable due to human nature. If house prices were more affordable then there would be more demand which would drive up prices. Back to square one. If house prices stopped low enough for everyone to afford then everyone would want the nice ones and would be fighting at the gates. You are correct that some individuals will benefit, some won't but central government and banks will always benefit. Lower house prices will only occur with a combination of severe credit tightening and mass unemployment bought about by economic recession. Supply and demand says that house prices cannot reduce in isolation, otherwise everyone would afford the nice ones! You think people want to pay £200k for a sh*thole in a sh*t area? As with all areas of life we compromise from our dreams. My dream is a nice detached house in the country with an acre of land to bring up my kid in. A better quality of life. I can't afford that so I make compromises. So I look for a lower spec house. Of course, everyone else is doing the same and so on down the ladder so prices rise across the board. Eventually there are compromises people are not willing to take and you reach the level of £75k firebombed dumps in gangster land. The only way to significantly reduce prices is to reduce demand. Demand will be reduced by severe credit tightening AND mass unemployment (which forces homeowners to sell). Both are needed. Given the choice I wouldn't pay £200k for a house of the standard that money gets you these days, but the non financial benefits of house ownership are imprinted in our pysche and that is here to stay. Peoples property dreams, which in the old days were just dreams, are now made reachable through cheap credit. You expect people to just sit there and pass this by?
  14. cos they bought in 95 and unknowingly caught the bottom of the market?
×
×
  • 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.