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

"give Up Luxuries To Buy A House"

Recommended Posts

New article based on kirsty interview where she once again demonstrates ignorance regarding affordability and interest rates, despite being tvs 'property expert'. Phil spencer agrees and makes as much sense,

now we don’t even bother to queue for things.

:blink:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/propertymarket/10201956/Give-up-luxuries-to-buy-a-house.html

When it comes to houses, the usual story is that young people today are entirely to be pitied. Lenders are stingy, prices are stratospheric and wages are low, goes the argument. The poor little urchins have to make sacrifices their parents never did.

Kirstie Allsopp, the television presenter, disagrees. In a recent interview, she claimed that first-time buyers have always had to give up some luxuries.

“Young people are slightly losing the concept that you make sacrifices to get on the ladder,” she said. “They want to go to university, they want to travel, they want to eat out frequently and they want to buy their first flat.” Allsopp has previously said that when she acquired her first mortgage she was earning a wage of around £12,000, buying pizza and lipstick as treats just once a month.

“On my 21st birthday, interest rates were at 15 per cent. It has never been, and never will be, easy.”

Is this right? We asked other broadcasters and property experts how they got that difficult first foot on the ladder, and how young people today can make it easier for themselves.

Phil Spencer, TV presenter

I agree with Kirstie (Spencer’s co-presenter on Channel 4’s Location, Location, Location). We’re not used to waiting for things any longer. My parents’ generation stayed at home with their parents when they were married and then saved up for a house, but now we don’t even bother to queue for things. People think that if they can’t have something immediately, they should move on. I wonder if lifestyle hasn’t become a greater priority than property ownership.

I took a big risk with my first purchase. I invested in a scheme where I had to find a way to live for a year while I converted a house into flats. As it turns out, I’ve never done a better deal; it was the equivalent of jumping two rungs up the property ladder.

Martin Roberts, TV presenter

My first house cost me £23,000 back in 1986, and I was delighted to secure a mortgage fixed at 15 per cent for two years! So, it was costing me about £290 a month, which with current low interest rates is the equivalent to payments on a £140,000 house these days (just below the national average). But wages were less 25 years ago, so it was a big struggle for me. I ate plenty of Pot Noodles. The house was a three-bedroom semi on a council estate outside Stockport – not my ideal location, but I bought something I could add value to. I replaced the kitchen, converted the outbuildings to a utility room and modernised. I sold it two years later for £50,000.

Sian Astley, TV presenter

Many twentysomethings seem to want Hollywood and handbags, rather than pensions and property. They’ve been dissuaded from the idea that hard work reaps rewards. I didn’t have cash or family backing when I started with £1 and a 100 per cent mortgage, but houses were cheaper. It was possible to be canny and creative. You could work hard to climb the ladder.

Sacrificing the good life for the mortgaged life is still possible, but only in less “desirable” areas. You have to get stuck in, as well as ditching luxuries for a more frugal existence.

Stephen Bayley, writer

I strongly sympathise with the difficulties of the modern first-time buyer, but I’m not sure that it’s anything to do with sacrifice. My own generation was perhaps the last to have the twin benefits of a linear relationship between effort and reward, and a property market with accessible prices.

Still, I had to borrow £500 from my father to do the deal on my first house, a semi in Wembley Park, which cost £22,000. A single-bedroom cell in the Goldfinger building (west London) is now £280,000. It used to be that if you worked hard you could make it, but today working hard is not enough.

Martin Ephson, co-founder, Fermoie

When I bought my first house, a four-storey stucco in south London, the property ladder in Thatcher’s Britain was easy to climb. I turned it from four nasty flats back into a house. Mortgage rates under Nigel Lawson went up to 17 per cent, and my then-business, Farrow & Ball, couldn’t afford to pay me anything.

It’s harder for young people now. The threshold of entry to ownership is higher, and mortgages are scarce. There’s no longer the assumption that people will be better off than their parents, so poverty of ambition might be the main problem.

Mark Prisk MP, minister for housing

I remember the sense of pride and achievement I felt when I first became a homeowner. But the unsustainable housing boom we saw in recent years priced many young people out of the market. It made getting on the ladder feel like an uphill struggle. I’m determined to help people who work hard to buy their own home.

Some comments are amusing, some boomers once more parodying themselves,

When I bought my house shortly after getting married we moved in with virtualy nothing ,we had a bed and pots and pans and nothing else we did without and saved up for what we needed as we went along , you no us oldies that are "stealing all the wealth " so the "poor young with their mobile phones and £60 trainers 40" tvs etc all seem to have
It has always been tough for young people, no different today as 30 or 40 years ago. Just that today young people must have an iPhone, TV surround system, go out several times a week etc etc - is it any wonder why they don't have any money to save for a property?!?

:lol:

Edited by cybernoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite.

Yup, that £50/month on a smartphone will definitely stop you buying a £250k house.

I recently stopped buying my monthly iPad so I should have enough saved for a 10% deposit sometime in November 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There must be an equivalent to Godwin's Law regarding the mention of Iphones in these threads and comments sections of papers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does seem that whenever an article like this appears out they come, frothing at the mouth, rallying against iphones. I rather suspect those comments come from indebted oldies who have not practiced what they preach themselves and so are dependent on someone coming along to pay an enormous sum for their house, which has been on the market for years.

"But you *must* buy it at this price! You see, I spent the money already! Go without ! Bail me out!"

I am quite cheered by the young sticking 2 fingers up at home ownership, whatever will the real spendthrifts do without their fantasy house price being realised? Comment on Telegraph articles I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently stopped buying my monthly iPad so I should have enough saved for a 10% deposit sometime in November 2016.

Well, I reckon if I gave up my PAYG mobile phone ( £100/year), my car (~£1.5k per year net), broadband (£120 pa), I reckon a 10% deposit on a decent 3 bed semi near me would only take around 10 years to save up.

Of course, by then it would go further as I'd be ready to downsize. My deposit is my pension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and sell your computer and save for a house! :lol::blink:

You are not just buying their house, but paying for their pension, lifestyle. cruises, crap Kia cars, holidays etcc..

Might as well forego the house and just have the other stuff yourself.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some truth on that article whether you like it or not. Many people in this country has 0 common sense with regards to their spending. Before some one point it out, yes that includes buying over priced house.

My bugbear is that many people spend way beyond their means and got themselves into debt then blamed the banks because they offer them credit card, this is stupid and absolving responsibility.

Just an example my Mrs' nurses earns less than half what she earns, but decked with the latest gadgets, expensive bags and shoes. She herself did a lot of research, deliberation and more deliberation before she bought her very first smartphone (iPhone 4) two years back. And that goes to all our spending, always think twice before we buy them. What's difference? Well she has common sense that's it. You buy what you need, you save and invest the rest. Many of her nurses are deep in debt yet they go holiday overseas every year and more than once a year.

When we finished uni we both earns way more but spend a whole lot less compared to these girls. We go on holidays but not every year. We are both fortunate to have parents who instil this behaviour, for those who don't I do think that managing your money should be a compulsory subject in school.

Ok rant over...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't easy getting a mortgage in the 80s.

You had to demonstrate a track record of saving with a building society. Remember them? Banks in general didn't lend at all for residential mortgages. They lent money commercially, to businesses, to invest in productive capacity to make stuff.

It's also true that you didn't eat out more than perhaps once a month maybe in a local Italian.

We couldn't afford furniture for 2 years, and only had a plastic garden table/chairs and a shite settee from Habitat.

So, despite it being Kirstie, there is some truth in the article.

It's not a good thing, but it is the case.

Wage inflation sorted all that out though. Hurrah!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't easy getting a mortgage in the 80s.

You had to demonstrate a track record of saving with a building society. Remember them? Banks in general didn't lend at all for residential mortgages. They lent money commercially, to businesses, to invest in productive capacity to make stuff.

It's also true that you didn't eat out more than perhaps once a month maybe in a local Italian.

We couldn't afford furniture for 2 years, and only had a plastic garden table/chairs and a shite settee from Habitat.

So, despite it being Kirstie, there is some truth in the article.

It's not a good thing, but it is the case.

Wage inflation sorted all that out though. Hurrah!

I'd go as far as saying the majority of HPCers were brought up to be in that world, nay, conditioned to live like that.

When we got there, the ******nuts in charge had broken it.

That's why we're angry at being poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither could I, currently spending under £2 per week (excluding handset one-off £50).

I'm spending under £2 per month - and my last handset cost £2.50!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Phil. These days we queue up to get our money out of failed banks.

+1

It's absolutely ***king surreal. Last time I looked at the Lloyds Group accounts, I think over 70% of the balance sheet was property related lending (mortgages or loans to property companies - commercial and residential), the bust has blown up the banks the wreckage of the bust has blown up the government's balance sheet and still these property clowns are talking about "it was never easy". It would be nice to get a little toke at whatever the hell they're smoking, just to take the edge off every now and again! I feel like there's been a nuclear detonation and the photons have whisked past burning off a little skin and in the brief pause before the shock-wave rolls in some ***kwit wants to get back to selling me an ice-cream, as if there was no bomb and there will be no shockwave.

It's also just so ignorant, as if house prices were totally unrelated to the prevailing credit conditions, as if we didn't have Northern Rock with their 125% LTV mortgages and the investment bank sponsored 'specialist lenders' with 90%-95% self-cert IO. To steal a phrase from Michael Burry, "the ignorance is wilful". I don't really believe that it's coordinated propaganda, but it might as well be.

My deposit is my pension.

:lol:

This I really like.

Edited by ChairmanOfTheBored

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some truth on that article whether you like it or not. Many people in this country has 0 common sense with regards to their spending. Before some one point it out, yes that includes buying over priced house.

My bugbear is that many people spend way beyond their means and got themselves into debt then blamed the banks because they offer them credit card, this is stupid and absolving responsibility.

Just an example my Mrs' nurses earns less than half what she earns, but decked with the latest gadgets, expensive bags and shoes. She herself did a lot of research, deliberation and more deliberation before she bought her very first smartphone (iPhone 4) two years back. And that goes to all our spending, always think twice before we buy them. What's difference? Well she has common sense that's it. You buy what you need, you save and invest the rest. Many of her nurses are deep in debt yet they go holiday overseas every year and more than once a year.

When we finished uni we both earns way more but spend a whole lot less compared to these girls. We go on holidays but not every year. We are both fortunate to have parents who instil this behaviour, for those who don't I do think that managing your money should be a compulsory subject in school.

Ok rant over...

The thing that irks the most is the assumption that there were no spendthrifts prior to 1980. I remember solving basic maths problems at school centred around interest payments on hire purchase. Well blow me, turns out no-one ever bought anything on HP 'cos they were all busy knitting their clothes and turning the allotments and definitely not getting pissed.

My old man said this one day "Young people want everything instantly these days". To which my Mum said "It's true, although you (Dad) were terrible at saving anything, and you still are." I had to laugh.

Edited by cheeznbreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   218 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.