Si1 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Cracking effort. Even by the embittered standards of this site these are some sour responses here. On a 15 year repayment, this mortgage will cost around 1k per month. Probably not that far off the rent (Although the OP didn't include rent info). If the base rate stays low and HPI remains flat/mildly negative it certainly wont be the worst decision in the world. To the posters that say that'll never happen, hows your track record at calling the situation over the last 5 years? This used to be a fantastic site for actal debate. It would be a shame if it ended up as just another place where anyone with a different opinion from the herd gets castigated into silence IMO. no, just the innumerate and illogical get castigated - if you had an IQ greater than 90 you'd understand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manchester50 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 again, that's not what he said do you like making peoples' intentions up for them and then constructing fabricated arguments around them? That is precisely what he said. "Renters by and large have the freedom to actually live a bit, unless you consider weekends of DIY and being stuck in the same neighbourhood year after year time well spent. I happen not to, but each to their own." That does not sound to me like someone with any desire to buy a house. How do you read it differently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagabond Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 no, just the innumerate and illogical get castigated - if you had an IQ greater than 90 you'd understand The 'logic' in buying a house is all in the eye of the beholder. OP obviously isn't innumerate as he has spent time working out if they can afford payments at higher rates. As for the ad hom. Poor. Even by your generally unambitious standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 The 'logic' in buying a house is all in the eye of the beholder. OP obviously isn't innumerate as he has spent time working out if they can afford payments at higher rates. As for the ad hom. Poor. Even by your generally unambitious standards. it wasn't ad hom, it was based on an informed opinion of your posts and no logic isn't in the eye of the beholder - that's the whole point of logic (doh) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 That is precisely what he said. "Renters by and large have the freedom to actually live a bit, unless you consider weekends of DIY and being stuck in the same neighbourhood year after year time well spent. I happen not to, but each to their own." That does not sound to me like someone with any desire to buy a house. How do you read it differently? it's situation specific, clearly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagabond Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 it wasn't ad hom, it was based on an informed opinion of your posts and no logic isn't in the eye of the beholder - that's the whole point of logic (doh) Ye gods. You even bring facetious internet arguments down to a new level of dull. Tell you what, why don't I just ignore your petty cyber-bullying from now on, you can ignore my obviously sub normal ripostes and the rest of the board won't have to bleach their eyes on a regular basis at the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravity sucks Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Some posters are what the scroll is for, thank heavens for the avatars. Avoid the nutters on the bus, they have a look about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Ye gods. You even bring facetious internet arguments down to a new level of dull. Tell you what, why don't I just ignore your petty cyber-bullying from now on, you can ignore my obviously sub normal ripostes and the rest of the board won't have to bleach their eyes on a regular basis at the results. nice straw man so you may be logically and argumentatively wrong but hey It's dull being right so this is your new riposte well done likewise let's quit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Liebenstein Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 (edited) Sadly, it really is. QE and artificial low interest rates have changed the game. Not that I think it will turn out well in the long term. The major banks are global, and it is not in their interest that Britain's banking system is brought down. So the UK will continue unmolested by the markets for a long time yet. Maybe not forever though. The thing with the QE is it hasn't really kicked in yet in terms of potential inflationary effects. Right now there is a high rate of credit destruction, and a high rate of QE. At some point I suspect the credit destruction will slow to zero and the QE will then be seen in inflation. Although a few may have doubted it for sometime, the graph on the front page still looks good to repeat its historical cycle. I reckon real prices will bottom out in 2014 (mostly now through inflation), before the next house price upswing kicks off. It does all seem so alarmingly predictable. Edited June 9, 2012 by Mikhail Liebenstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 The thing with the QE is it hasn't really kicked in yet in terms of potential inflationary effects. Right now there is a high rate of credit destruction, and a high rate of QE. At some point I suspect the credit destruction will slow to zero and the QE will then be seen in inflation. Although a few may have doubted it for sometime, the graph on the front page still looks good to repeat its historical cycle. I reckon real prices will bottom out in 2014 (mostly now through inflation), before the next house price upswing kicks off. It does all seem so alarmingly predictable. Why did you doctor the trend line to go the wrong way? Anything to do with having bought a house last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19 year mortgage 8itch Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 The thing with the QE is it hasn't really kicked in yet in terms of potential inflationary effects. Right now there is a high rate of credit destruction, and a high rate of QE. At some point I suspect the credit destruction will slow to zero and the QE will then be seen in inflation. Although a few may have doubted it for sometime, the graph on the front page still looks good to repeat its historical cycle. I reckon real prices will bottom out in 2014 (mostly now through inflation), before the next house price upswing kicks off. It does all seem so alarmingly predictable. Have you accounted for changing demographics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Liebenstein Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Have you accounted for changing demographics? Well the UK population meant to peak at 80 million, so some way to go I'd say. But really demographics isn't the same as the general price level - it is perfectly possible to have an economy with double the price level and half the people. It not necessarily the real values that, but the nominal ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Liebenstein Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Why did you doctor the trend line to go the wrong way? Anything to do with having bought a house last year? Hadn't really tried to draw an really accurate trend line, but if anything I'd say the actual trend line would probably curve up more steeply due to the compounding effect. What really matters over time is the relative value of houses relative to other price levels (including wages), not the absolute nominal value of houses. I'm just convinced that money is nothing more than a unit of measurement, and a unit of measurement that gets small every year. It's a bit like if we declared the inch 2% smaller every year, a lot of men would spend time trying to impress the ladies with their statistics. When really it was just inflation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19 year mortgage 8itch Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Well the UK population meant to peak at 80 million, so some way to go I'd say. But really demographics isn't the same as the general price level - it is perfectly possible to have an economy with double the price level and half the people. It not necessarily the real values that, but the nominal ones. Don't believe that projection as things stand and that graph IS real, NOT nominal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 population and demographics are not quite the same subject by the way - the question 'have you considered demographics' still hasn't been answered, or rather it was a 'no' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybernoid Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 If you've no intention of ever buying (downsides of stuck in the same neighbourhood, DIY etc) then how did you come to have so many posts on this site? I suspect most people here would like to buy a house - at the right price. I intend to buy but would rather have rented rather than purchased at about that time. You'd live in a worse neighbourhood in a worse property instead of renting something of a higher standard in a better place for the same monthly cost. And you'd be no better off financially by now. Typically you overpaid, and are a slave to that debt most likely at the fringes of your affordability. People who bought since then are in a mess, and when forbearance ends and the cost of borrowing continues to rise they'll wish they rented instead. They're more trapped than me, and have had a worse time than me in the interim. That doesn't mean that buying in the future will also be a bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts