Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
apom

My Parents Generation Never Paid Their Mortgage..

Recommended Posts

My mum says that inflation ate away their debt...

Then they were able to move with higher salaries and inflation led gains in the value of their home.

so they borrowed money..

Inflation:

Raised their salaries, and the value of their home..

But the debt payment portion of their salary shrank with inflation... They then bought a bigger place..

forget high prices...

I surmise that if prices had stayed put with inflation (normal) inflation would never have enabled people to move up the ladder..

so all low interest rates, easy borrowing and a mad speculative market have done is to hide the fact that a low inflation economy (which we have).. causes house prices to drop..

So in a low inflation economy.. have house prices actually dropped?

I say yes.

So why can't I afford one?

Because although a low inflation economy caused prices to drop.. People decided to pay massive amounts for the houses..

But doesnt mean low interest rates meant hat prices should rise...?

No, it means they do... But then people get carried away, into too much debt.. Interest rates rise.. (they always do.. and must) and then people go crunch.. (see record amount going bankrupt)

So, after this crash... Will low inflation mean that house prices stay very low.. until the government realsie that growth requires inflation?

Because... House prices are now at a record low..

Just as soon as people stop pating too much for them you will be able to see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you have to ask yourself is whether future generations will have to.

Why would they choose unwinding the growth that's occured over allowing growth to continue & old debts to melt away?

Without high interest rates we would have seen static prices..

then prices dropping as people needed to move up the ladder.. and couldn't with their debt not inflating away...

Essentially the only reason we have house prices is that morons think that a 25 year flexible rate loan should be based on lowest ever interest rates for affordability..

To make that choice in an era of low inflation...

ouch..

loans not getting inflated lower... interest rates scary for longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My uncle..... bought house 1968....... £4000.........average semi-detached...when on ave salary of £1150.....

14 years later after the inflation of the 70s and early 80s his average salary job paid £8500.........and the house worth £30000............the repayment mortgage being only £9 a week.....an almost comical 8% of his take home pay!

This is a typical house and a typical earner!.............................In April 1975 the inflation rate reached 25.4% pa i seem to remember!.........and again about 16% in 1981 ........both times oil-induced....

and was far higher than in all the other major economies...........

Edited by Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on Apom.

I literally had sleepless nights when we bought our first house in 1975 with a 10.5k mortgage at 11%. 2 years later, after a couple of 20% inflation wage increases it was a cinch.

I then took a 14.4k mortgage on our next house in 1977, and some of the older guys in the office just couldn't believe how reckless I was being! (this has shades of your "blame it on the older generation" theme, since I remember thinking "you're OK with your big semis that you bought 10 yeasrs ago for 2k)

Anyway, we stayed in that house until 1994, so you can imagine how tiny my 14.4k felt by then.

Low inflation is a nightmare for new homebuyers (and anyone wanting to trade up, come to that) I haven't got my head around what should happen to prices in our low inflation era, in order to sustain a housing ladder, since I've never lived through one before. Prices ought to be lower because of it, but how do we achieve that when the corollary of low inflation is low IRs and the higher mortgage multiples that this enables. How can this work?

Answers on a postcard please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you have to ask yourself is whether future generations will have to.

Why would they choose unwinding the growth that's occured over allowing growth to continue & old debts to melt away?

I've made this point elsewhere but no bull has seen fit to address it.

Whatever house prices are now represents, roughly, the price a young person will one day need to borrow to buy that house.

Let's say a 3 bed detached house is 300k now.

You're 25 and you've just taken on a 100% mortgage of 150k to buy your first flat (let's forget the deposit - it is insignificant).

By the time you are 40 you reckon you are ready for the 3 bed detached house. There has been no House Price Inflation in the meantime. So, you now need to borrow 300k to get that house.

If there has been little or no wage inflation in that period (very likely in this global economy) - on the same wages as now - you will have to take on an IMPOSSIBLE mortgage to move up the property ladder.

But, I hear you say, there will be HPI and there will be wage inflation. This, of course is the critical question.

If wage inflation moves ahead of HPI - the real amount needed to be borrowed to buy the bigger house will have diminished.

If HPI moves ahead of wage inflation (like the last 5 to 7 years) the amount you need to borrow will become even bigger.

Okay, who thinks wages will inflate faster than house prices over the next fifteen years?

Who thinks house prices will inflate faster than wages over the next fifteen years?

My take on it is that in the 70s and 80s high wage inflation outstripped house price inflation (from time to time) and, when this happened, people could buy up without it hurting too much. When this happened a house price rise ensued. (The market has a funny way of stabilising itself).

In the last 5 to 7 years we have had very low interest rates. This has make borrowing more affordable and people being both stupid and greedy - instead of paying down debt as rates were cheap - lots of people simply borrowed a load more money to move up the market or to MEW. This, and an unprecedented of investors, caused the house price boom.

But, there really is nowhere else for it to go. The soft landing argument just does not make sense. People on average wages who have extended themselves to buy a flat will simply never be able to trade up if wages and house prices go forwards into an eternal sunset inflating a few per cent a year - hand in hand in a wonderful new stability. It can't happen because, in 25 years time, most of the detached houses in the country will be empty. The baby boomer generation will have died but the generation behind will not be able to afford the mortgages to buy their parents houses.

You have probably spotted that this can't happen. The market will, as always adjust. What happens over the next year or two is irrelevant. Over the medium term the present market prices are not sustainable.

I have a simple question for bulls.

Assuming no HPI or wage inflation - or assuming HPI and wage inflation about the same - how are today's generation of first time buyers ever going to be able to afford their parent's houses?

(Please don't say they are all going to get huge promotions and wage rises - average age of a FTB is now 34 - they are already near their peak earning power - lots of people face redundancy in their 40s - not an eternal climb up the corporate pole).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My uncle..... bought house 1968....... £4000.........average semi-detached...when on ave salary of £1150.....

14 years later after the inflation of the 70s and early 80s his average salary job paid £8500.........and the house worth £30000............the repayment mortgage being only £9 a week.....an almost comical 8% of his take home pay!

This is a typical house and a typical earner!.............................In April 1975 the inflation rate reached 25.4% pa i seem to remember!.........and again about 16% in 1981 ........both times oil-induced....

and was far higher than in all the other major economies...........

What's comical about 8% of take home pay???????

My mortgage is 6.6% of mine...................................................................................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's comical about 8% of take home pay???????

My mortgage is 6.6% of mine...................................................................................

Well, Michael's point was that his uncle was a typical earner. Are you a typical earner i.e. on £25k?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. My parents paid £29k for their house in 1975 - now valued at ~£750k. Years ago my father said it wasn't worth paying off the mortgage early because of the tax relief - think the mortgage was about £11k because they had equity from previous houses. Parents bought first house, three bed semi, in early 60s when my father started his first job as a university lecturer (straight after PhD, no student debts). My mother didn't work.

Whenever people say "it was always hard to get on the property ladder" I can only think they're stupid or wifully ignorant. And now, my parents didn't get any help from their families, as none of them had any money.

What has changed in a low-inflation environment is that the capital sum has to be repaid out of after-tax income. Of course you might say I'm lucky, as I'll inherit one day - sure, actuarially that'll be 20 or so years into the future when I'll not be that far off the age at which my parents retired. 'Course it won't be the age at which I get to retire. Great.

Triple whammy - parents get to buy and live in huge house when they had a young family, never pay for it, retire on generous final-salary pension, and then live forever. And as I'm starting to notice I'm not the only one with strained relations with their parents because of this. If I hear once more "it was hard in our day, too" I'll - well, I'll throw my toys out of my pram, to start with! On a more serious note, though, I think it's likely we're heading for some serious inter-generational strife in the not too distant future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on Apom.

I literally had sleepless nights when we bought our first house in 1975 with a 10.5k mortgage at 11%. 2 years later, after a couple of 20% inflation wage increases it was a cinch.

I then took a 14.4k mortgage on our next house in 1977, and some of the older guys in the office just couldn't believe how reckless I was being! (this has shades of your "blame it on the older generation" theme, since I remember thinking "you're OK with your big semis that you bought 10 yeasrs ago for 2k)

Anyway, we stayed in that house until 1994, so you can imagine how tiny my 14.4k felt by then.

Low inflation is a nightmare for new homebuyers (and anyone wanting to trade up, come to that) I haven't got my head around what should happen to prices in our low inflation era, in order to sustain a housing ladder, since I've never lived through one before. Prices ought to be lower because of it, but how do we achieve that when the corollary of low inflation is low IRs and the higher mortgage multiples that this enables. How can this work?

Answers on a postcard please.

The answer is simple.

As you say, low inflation and low IRs mean people have borrowed more. But, there is a limit to how much people can borrow even at very low IRs. (And, of course a huge risk if IRs go back to their historical average).

Now we have reached the limit - it's that simple. FTBs got priced out in most areas a few years ago and where this would have been a natural brake on the market, this time they were replaced by investors.

Prices kept rising long after they would have in a normal market but now investors find prices are so high the yields are laughable.

Next, as always happens, the tide will turn.

The next phase is a falling market. How far it will fall is anyone's guess.

All I know from my experience is that a falling market is harder to stop than a rising market.

In a rising market there is a natural cut-off point - when property becomes unaffordable. In a falling market there is not as much incentive to buy - especially for the FTBs at the bottom. Why should they take on a 150k mortgage today when they might only need a 120k mortgage in a years time?

Once this feeling permeates into society as a whole - a falling market provides its own momentum. It's why the VIs are desperate to keep pumping out their bull that everything is okay and sustainable. It isn't. With property prices as they are, in a low wage inflation environment, young people buying today will never be able to borrow enough money to move up the property ladder.

It might take a while yet - but a reverse is inevitable (unless we suddenly get high wage inflation - what are the chances in this global economy - negative real wage inflation is actually both more common and likely.)

Edited by Marina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. My parents paid £29k for their house in 1975 - now valued at ~£750k. Years ago my father said it wasn't worth paying off the mortgage early because of the tax relief - think the mortgage was about £11k because they had equity from previous houses. Parents bought first house, three bed semi, in early 60s when my father started his first job as a university lecturer (straight after PhD, no student debts). My mother didn't work.

Whenever people say "it was always hard to get on the property ladder" I can only think they're stupid or wifully ignorant. And now, my parents didn't get any help from their families, as none of them had any money.

What has changed in a low-inflation environment is that the capital sum has to be repaid out of after-tax income. Of course you might say I'm lucky, as I'll inherit one day - sure, actuarially that'll be 20 or so years into the future when I'll not be that far off the age at which my parents retired. 'Course it won't be the age at which I get to retire. Great.

Triple whammy - parents get to buy and live in huge house when they had a young family, never pay for it, retire on generous final-salary pension, and then live forever. And as I'm starting to notice I'm not the only one with strained relations with their parents because of this. If I hear once more "it was hard in our day, too" I'll - well, I'll throw my toys out of my pram, to start with! On a more serious note, though, I think it's likely we're heading for some serious inter-generational strife in the not too distant future.

Well yes and no. See my post 3 or 4 up. It WAS hard to buy a house in the 70's, certainly in the SE, where I live(d). I was the only 1 of my 5 siblings who bought, the others just could not afford it on their salaries, even as couples, despite being on average pay. But if you could save a big deposit and afford the initial payments, INFLATION wiped it out pretty soon. Some young people are buying houses now for goodness sake, otherwise there would be no market at all. I know lots of 20 somethings who are buying properties - I just wonder how the will ever trade up, is the only difference.

In the 70's, couples had to borrow about 3 times joint salaries (at 11%) and have a big deposit, and then they could only afford the cheapest housing. Today's counterparts would be able to afford £150k plus their deposits, on that reckoning - maybe a £180-200k property?

Edited by Casual Observer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marina, I have a friend who's in the process of doing just that, moving from a 1-bed to a 4-bed house.

Has "made" 50K over past 4 years (S London), will have a guaranteed job, but the extra needed is frightening...

What do you reckon? Another 200K or so I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marina, I have a friend who's in the process of doing just that, moving from a 1-bed to a 4-bed house.

Has "made" 50K over past 4 years (S London), will have a guaranteed job, but the extra needed is frightening...

What do you reckon? Another 200K or so I think.

He's the exception that proves the rule. The amount of additional debt that young people today will need to take on is mind-boggling - and most people will simply not be able to countenance it.

If it was 10 years ago (with house prices at historically cheap levels) I would have said this was a good move. I have friends that did the same thing 25 to 30 years ago. Went from a flat to decent sized house - in one go - by taking on a mortgage that would take your breath away if they told you the repayments. Then it was much less risky as wage inflation was so high - people used to say 'as long as we can get through the first few years, we'll be okay'.

In today's market, with low wage inflation (unless you are in the right job of course - not so many about these days) and house prices at historic highs - I would say it is a far more risky strategy. That mortgage will still look huge in 15 years time.

Edited by Marina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Michael's point was that his uncle was a typical earner. Are you a typical earner i.e. on £25k?

No, I must confess I'm not. I just did it to wind some of the smug STR's or FTB's with a deposit saying they pay x amount in rent etc etc. They seem to think that they are the most savvy people moneywise and any homeowner is fooked. Not necassarily so. I bought pre bubble a 3 bed semi, paid a nice deposit and overpay on my mortgage. The EA Financial Advisor (Who my wife, then fiancee, and I went to see for a laugh mainly), tried to get us to mortgage to the hilt and buy a 250K 5 bedroom house (Why would a 26 yr old male and 24 yr old female recently engaged couple want one of them???), but we settled on a nice 3 bed semi.

Maybe this isn't the thread to get the point across but not all us homeowners are dumb...............................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on Apom.

I literally had sleepless nights when we bought our first house in 1975 with a 10.5k mortgage at 11%. 2 years later, after a couple of 20% inflation wage increases it was a cinch.

I then took a 14.4k mortgage on our next house in 1977, and some of the older guys in the office just couldn't believe how reckless I was being! (this has shades of your "blame it on the older generation" theme, since I remember thinking "you're OK with your big semis that you bought 10 yeasrs ago for 2k)

Anyway, we stayed in that house until 1994, so you can imagine how tiny my 14.4k felt by then.

Low inflation is a nightmare for new homebuyers (and anyone wanting to trade up, come to that) I haven't got my head around what should happen to prices in our low inflation era, in order to sustain a housing ladder, since I've never lived through one before. Prices ought to be lower because of it, but how do we achieve that when the corollary of low inflation is low IRs and the higher mortgage multiples that this enables. How can this work?

Answers on a postcard please.

Yes, you're right.... the current situation is unprecedented....as in all previous times of sustained low inflation and low IRs (all

before the 1970s) mortgage lending was very strictly rationed to a modest multiple of one person's salary.....This was when most women were married with children by their early 20s....

Throughout the 70s , 80s and 90s there were flash-in-the-pan periods of low inflation but never sustained enough to allow cheap long term (5, 10 and 20 year money ) loans to be available....or for lenders to be confident enough to lend large multiples.......

We are now therefore in uncharted territory..........Huge multiples combined with low IRs.....mean the debt isn't going to be eroded in the way it was in the 70s or 80s........but borrowers can lock into 10 year fixed deals at more or less current low IR level.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes and no. See my post 3 or 4 up. It WAS hard to buy a house in the 70's, certainly in the SE, where I live(d). I was the only 1 of my 5 siblings who bought, the others just could not afford it on their salaries, even as couples, despite being on average pay. But if you could save a big deposit and afford the initial payments, INFLATION wiped it out pretty soon. Some young people are buying houses now for goodness sake, otherwise there would be no market at all. I know lots of 20 somethings who are buying properties - I just wonder how the will ever trade up, is the only difference.

In the 70's, couples had to borrow about 3 times joint salaries (at 11%) and have a big deposit, and then they could only afford the cheapest housing. Today's counterparts would be able to afford £150k plus their deposits, on that reckoning - maybe a £180-200k property?

I'm sorry pal but you are talking bolleaux. Absolute, total bolleaux.

My first flat was 22,600 in West London - nice area, 2 bed maisonette - bought in 1979. I saved £4600 - pretty easily over a couple of years - so needed 18k mortgage. Earning about 7500 as a construction site engineer (pretty average salary for a pretty average job) so needed to borrow just over twice a single salary.

My eldest brother's first house - bought in the 70s - was a 3 bed detached for 26k.

My next brother up bought before all of us - in about 1970 - 9k for a nice 2 bed flat - again in West London. He was earning about 4k as a television engineer.

Loads of my mates got married in the 70s and moved straight into 3 bed terraced houses or semis that they could afford easily. A couple of pay rises later they could afford to move up to the 3 bed detached estate house etc. That's why millions of detached estate houses got built in the 70s and the 80s - there was such a huge demand from a generation where home ownership had suddenly exploded.

I'd hate young people to read your post and think 'it was always so' and sign up for a mortgage that will cripple them and 10 years of negative equity. It wasn't always so - it was a lot easier to buy in the 70s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry pal but you are talking bolleaux. Absolute, total bolleaux.

My first flat was 22,600 in West London - nice area, 2 bed maisonette - bought in 1979. I saved £4600 - pretty easily over a couple of years - so needed 18k mortgage. Earning about 7500 as a construction site engineer (pretty average salary for a pretty average job) so needed to borrow just over twice a single salary.

My eldest brother's first house - bought in the 70s - was a 3 bed detached for 26k.

My next brother up bought before all of us - in about 1970 - 9k for a nice 2 bed flat - again in West London. He was earning about 4k as a television engineer.

Loads of my mates got married in the 70s and moved straight into 3 bed terraced houses or semis that they could afford easily. A couple of pay rises later they could afford to move up to the 3 bed detached estate house etc. That's why millions of detached estate houses got built in the 70s and the 80s - there was such a huge demand from a generation where home ownership had suddenly exploded.

I'd hate young people to read your post and think 'it was always so' and sign up for a mortgage that will cripple them and 10 years of negative equity. It wasn't always so - it was a lot easier to buy in the 70s.

Well, I'm telling you the truth, and I'm talking about 1975 in Edgware, N.London. Maybe 4 years later was a lot easier.

I remember my sister, 3 years older than me, literally crying because when she married in 1972 she (a clerk) and her husband (a mechanic) just could not afford anything, liteerally anything, and had to rent instead. I remember her saying "it's ridiculous that 2 people on average salaries literally can't afford anything"

I earned about 1.8kin 1975, my wife about 1.2k. We had to buy a tiny modern terraced house near an oil refinery 40 miles away (check it out, it's in Stanford le hope in Essex) That cost us 11.5k. Houses in Edgware were about !8-20k - impossible.

When you say I'm speaking bolloeaux, I guess you're really saying I'm lying.

I'm sorry pal but you are talking bolleaux. Absolute, total bolleaux.

My first flat was 22,600 in West London - nice area, 2 bed maisonette - bought in 1979. I saved £4600 - pretty easily over a couple of years - so needed 18k mortgage. Earning about 7500 as a construction site engineer (pretty average salary for a pretty average job) so needed to borrow just over twice a single salary.

My eldest brother's first house - bought in the 70s - was a 3 bed detached for 26k.

My next brother up bought before all of us - in about 1970 - 9k for a nice 2 bed flat - again in West London. He was earning about 4k as a television engineer.

Loads of my mates got married in the 70s and moved straight into 3 bed terraced houses or semis that they could afford easily. A couple of pay rises later they could afford to move up to the 3 bed detached estate house etc. That's why millions of detached estate houses got built in the 70s and the 80s - there was such a huge demand from a generation where home ownership had suddenly exploded.

I'd hate young people to read your post and think 'it was always so' and sign up for a mortgage that will cripple them and 10 years of negative equity. It wasn't always so - it was a lot easier to buy in the 70s.

By the way 4k salary in 1970 was a king's ransom - are you sure??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm telling you the truth, and I'm talking about 1975 in Edgware, N.London. Maybe 4 years later was a lot easier.

I remember my sister, 3 years older than me, literally crying because when she married in 1972 she (a clerk) and her husband (a mechanic) just could not afford anything, liteerally anything, and had to rent instead. I remember her saying "it's ridiculous that 2 people on average salaries literally can't afford anything"

I earned about 1.8kin 1975, my wife about 1.2k. We had to buy a tiny modern terraced house near an oil refinery 40 miles away (check it out, it's in Stanford le hope in Essex) That cost us 11.5k. Houses in Edgware were about !8-20k - impossible.

When you say I'm speaking bolloeaux, I guess you're really saying I'm lying.

By the way 4k salary in 1970 was a king's ransom - are you sure??

in 1970 ave salary was about £1300 but it shot up soon after.....to about 6 and a half times that 12 years later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in 1970 ave salary was about £1300 but it shot up soon after.....to about 6 and a half times that 12 years later

Sounds about right. Believe me, 4k in 1970 would have felt every bit like 3 times the average - a bit like someone on 75k today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes , Rpi has risen 10.5 fold since 1970..................salaries about 20 fold......and house prices about 50 fold!.............and some places like then out-of-fashion unmodernised Victorian terraces are 100 times the price they were then....so people who say how much they struggled then are not making sense!

Edited by Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes , Rpi has risen 10.5 fold since 1970..................salaries about 20 fold......and house prices about 50 fold!.............and some places like then out-of-fashion unmodernised Victorian terraces are 100 times the price they were then....so people who say how much they struggled then are not making sense!

Neither are you. The house I paid 11.5 for in 1975 recently went for about 140k. Hardly 50 fold more like 12 fold. And IRs were 11% (admittedly with tax relief i.e. about 8%) Rose cloured glasses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you have to ask yourself is whether future generations will have to.

Why would they choose unwinding the growth that's occured over allowing growth to continue & old debts to melt away?

Who the hell were you replying to? :unsure:

Listen this is what will happen - oldies can't get one over us coz of this (unless they buy even more houses at the stupid prices with their savings)

500,000 people DIE per annum in the UK coz of hospital mistakes 'old age' etc

I worked out that approx 360,000 dwellings come on to the market per annum due to deceased owner.

If all those who wished to purchase held off for buying for 4 years that's approx 1.5 MILLION houses, bungalows, flats sitting empty!

CRASH, CRASH, CRASH - works both ways!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither are you. The house I paid 11.5 for in 1975 recently went for about 140k. Hardly 50 fold more like 12 fold. And IRs were 11% (admittedly with tax relief i.e. about 8%) Rose cloured glasses?

My home ....1970 £4k............1972 £8k.............1977 £15k .........1982 £33k...........

Prices rose substantially between 1970 and 75 you see.................although 100% gain in 71-72 was wiped out in REAL terms by high inflation 1973-75.............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm telling you the truth, and I'm talking about 1975 in Edgware, N.London. Maybe 4 years later was a lot easier.

I remember my sister, 3 years older than me, literally crying because when she married in 1972 she (a clerk) and her husband (a mechanic) just could not afford anything, liteerally anything, and had to rent instead. I remember her saying "it's ridiculous that 2 people on average salaries literally can't afford anything"

I earned about 1.8kin 1975, my wife about 1.2k. We had to buy a tiny modern terraced house near an oil refinery 40 miles away (check it out, it's in Stanford le hope in Essex) That cost us 11.5k. Houses in Edgware were about !8-20k - impossible.

When you say I'm speaking bolloeaux, I guess you're really saying I'm lying.

By the way 4k salary in 1970 was a king's ransom - are you sure??

I'm sorry, I am not accusing you of lying - your memory of the 70s is clearly different from mine. I would say one thing though. If you were earning 1.8k in 1975 - without wishing to be insulting - you must have been doing a completely unskilled job.

My first job in 1969 was on a building site as a trainee engineer/manager. I was on apprentice's money. I used to have to do the payroll for the labourers. Most of them were on the lump (sub-contractors). The labourers got £7 a day - the tradesmen about £2 more. So a labourer was earning £1750 for a five day week in 1969.

In 1973 I went freelancing and earned £80 a week easily - over £100 with overtime. Admittedly I was on 'good' money at the time. A moderate wage then was 3k.

I took a full time job in 1979 at a salary of 7.5k (looking for job security). As I say, if you were on 1.8k in 1975 you found it hard to buy property because you were very poorly paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.