Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Ash4781

Does Your House Make More Than You?

Recommended Posts

They didn't know/don't know what they were/are doing. More QE/FLS/HTB/base rate floored longer.

What a mess. Those tip top Oldham terraces were £50,000 in 2004. I know because a family member inherited one and it took a year to get it on the market, and the solicitor was surprised by how much it had gone up in his view of the market from 2003. Only £80K now aww.. need to get them back to peak £100,000.

And now those who bought at peak in other areas rewarded by 30% more HPI. Remember you excuses in 2008/09?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They paid £450,000 - right at the top of the house price boom of the last decade.

The entire article is just a vehicle for more house price propaganda.

"The house price boom of the last decade" tries to make it sound so ancient and separate from the current London mega bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Fearon has been an estate agent in Bristol since 1997. Even at the height of the last boom, he says, he never saw anything like the present level of demand.

"I think they are creating a bubble," he says.

"I think maybe in a year, 18 months time you may find there may be a big crash."

At least one decent comment and from an EA, who would have believed it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. It could alternatively have been put:

"Does the house the Landlord lets to you make more than you earn?"

The laws of thermodynamics laugh at perpetual motion machines. Fortunately economics is not troubled by such reality. Edited by 8 year itch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. It could alternatively have been put:

"Does the house the Landlord lets to you make more than you earn?"

Or "Are you being paid f*ck all?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From 2000-2006 the first house we had earned more money than me. Although currently we are living in a house that if we where first time buyers would be way out of our league. In fact our first house would probably be beyond us now. Amazingly the housing market defies economic reality of what is affordable on wages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or "Are you being paid f*ck all?"

Out of the ashes... Sandbanks developer shows his traditional side with £8m New Forest manor

8msmuggerman.jpg

Smug older VI owner says "Give The Young Wage Inflation"

Sinclair, 61, planned to live there with his wife Karen, 52, and their children Adam, 21, Guy, 18, and Bethany, 16, but with the children rarely at home it is too big for the couple and is now up for sale for £7.95million.
Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. It could alternatively have been put:

"Does the house the Landlord lets to you make more than you earn?"

Who makes the most out of your landlord, is it the tenant or the bank?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.......so what are they saying, the best place to live is the place where the differential between earning and income.......so earning £10k and home growing £30k is a better place than earning £100k and home growing £100k pa........or is the best place to be is where you can earn zero but have a home earning £100k.

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Relaxation Suite

Housing crashes really only happen when things get beyond the control of the patrician class for the reason this sector is where that class stores its wealth. In the past the patrician class has gone to extreme lengths to avoid a decrease in the value of their wealth, but sometimes circumstances, usually international ones, are beyond their control and that is when you see a "crash". The proletarian class (around 40% of the population) generally do not own property assets, or vote, so are largely untouched by these issues, but the plebeians (around 60% of the population), who do own and vote, can be made and broken in this way.

History shows that sometimes the plebeian class grows too big and rich, and threaten the patricians (just a few thousand people), and it is at this point that the latter will make arrangements to ring-fence their own wealth while annihilating that of the plebeians. Recent policies, and by recent I mean the last half century or so, that have eroded the power and wealth of the plebeian class include the destruction of grammar schools and the massive increase in the debt held by them. We have seen this struggle since the Conflict of the Orders 2500 years ago when the Roman Senate, terrified by plebs revolting over their debt, sent Menenius to pacify them with the creation of the Plebeian Tribune. This is very broad brush stroke, of course, but it is how history is constituted and will never change. There has been no change in the four-tiered social class structure since ancient times, None at all, and I will defend that statement against any rebuttals.

Edited by Lord of the Pies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History shows that sometimes the plebeian class grows too big and rich, and threaten the patricians (just a few thousand people), and it is at this point that the latter will make arrangements to ring-fence their own wealth while annihilating that of the plebeians.

5881138.png

The Plebeians were the commoners, and took on basic jobs in Rome as well as being farmers and being the entire Roman fighting force. The Patricians are the people that sit back, relax and drink wine. Patricians also took on all government positions and were the military leaders. The Patricians have no appreciation for the Plebeians and give them little rights, as well as not allowing them to hold government positions and claiming they are "uneducated," which is false.

http://plebeianplace.weebly.com/roman-people.html

Can sympthasise with that position. Getting into debt in Rome was usually ruinous, because of the high interest rates/ruthless lenders, who were eager to claim homes/land as security - with families sometimes turning to debt when husbands and sons away with the army on campaigns. (Such problems with debt were recognised in later societies hence the religious taboo/ban usury.)

So it was the Patricians as well as a few Oligarchs who ended up owning too much by way of lands and housing, for their own gain, denying others opportunity and seeking to consolidate their power via force... so there was no incentive and no respect for declining numbers of younger Plebeians to try improve their lot and give depth/security to the system, leading to Romes continued decline. You'd have hoped some of the Oligarchs/Patricians would be willing to improve their lot by selling up, allowing a crash. So many joker Patricians who are hopeless at anything apart from their expertise in borrowing and over-expanding (BTL forums), and getting ever more excited about how much their homes are worth, to ridiculous levels.... let the QE/FLS roll to protect the values. Have some Gov sponsored HTB you pathetic younger Phlebians.

Edited by Venger

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:   215 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.