I'm Giving A Talk On House Prices. Call For Comments And Suggestions!

[Muddlehead]

In the above post I meant to quote satch regarding market being dysfunctional with free market government implementing HTB etc.

[Killer Bunny]

I've been asked to give a 10 minute presentation at work and I think I might talk about house prices.

Are you totally mad? Do you want to kill your career?

They'll hate you.

[Dorkins]

I would go for something safe and relatively uncontroversial that you can sound passionate about like an advance in science/technology that interests you.

[Killer Bunny]

BTW rates will never rise bar face saves which will come straight back down again

[Muddlehead]

Thanks for that prompt Dorkins. Makes me think about driverless cars, or 3D printing. The only problem is, I have very little interest in these technologies. When I think about these things, I dwell on the economic and political consequences.

[Muddlehead]

How about this for an alternative topic?

Some Popular Confusions About Voting

1) "If you don't vote, you have no right to criticise the government."

This isn't true. You might feel and sound a bit silly if it turned out you could have changed the outcome. But it is perfectly reasonable to criticise the government.

2) "You should vote. Think of the Chartists and the Suffragettes who died so you could vote."

They didn't sacrifice in the abstract. The working people wanted the vote in order to change the political system. If you conclude all the parties are similar enough (could be the case they are all pretty good and you don't want change, or they are all pretty terrible and all ignore the issues you consider important) then you might reasonably not vote. You might still try to influence debate by writing to representatives, talking, debating, educating...

3) "The low turnout implies [something] (typically (a) people don't care, ( people don't feel represented by any of the existing parties)

They might feel equally represented by several of them.

They might be happy with the status quo and expect it to continue without them - i.e. big majority in their constituency. OK that is a bit lazy.

3a) "Fewer than half of the electorate voted for the party which formed a majority. This means [something]"

It does suggest the winning party isn't very popular. But we need some sort of measure of how much voters prefer their 1st over their 2nd choice. Did people toss a coin and vote UKIP rather than Conservative? Maybe some did.

Maybe some who didn't vote would have voted Conservative.

On the other hand, if we had only Conservative and Labour in each constituency, surely there would be many who would prefer a much more left-wing or right-wing, or free-market or whatever alternative.

[Eroginald Rimmington]

Why not talk about something that affects the business itself? It could be an opportunity to show off your strategic awareness and enthusiasm for the job.

[Muddlehead]

Killer Bunny - Do you think rates will go any lower than 0.5%? What do you think about the central banks which have negative interest rates? How long until they are positive?

[Fully Detached]

I think your voting subject is a really good idea.

I think the HPI subject is a really bad idea.

[Muddlehead]

That's interesting Fully Detached. I thought my ideas on voting were more uncompromising.

Here are some other thoughts,

4) "Markets are undemocratic."

(To be fully democratic, we require industrial democracy. We might need to suspend parliamentary democracy in order to maintain industrial democracy)

Though there is some truth to this, the apparent conclusion (that markets must be heavily constrained) is problematic. If the outcome of a free election suggested overwhelming support for markets, what should happen?

5) "Inequality is a threat to democracy"

Again, there is some truth to this. Plutocrats controlling the media and making big campaign donations have an enormous. But even if these were removed political elites would still enjoy influence. Consider the political dynasties that exist in the US and the UK. Perhaps these could perpetuate themselves without great wealth.

6) "Democracy is necessary for liberty"

Some republics are freer, more prosperous and liberal than some democracies.

7) "Democracy guarantees liberty"

If people favour an undemocratic system, is there any way of preserving democracy which doesn't rely on some undemocratic means?

8) "We need more diversity in our elected representatives. The fact that the majority are "male and pale" demonstrates something is wrong with our democracy."

(It probably demonstrates some form of discrimination. Something should be done about.)

Certain qualities seem to be important for leaders. And certain types of people seem to be more keen to seek positions of leadership. This seems to be the case in business and in politics.

If women are at a disadvantage is this because they are women, or is because they lack masculine qualities? If it is the latter, do effeminate men suffer the same disadvantage?

There is a currently a push for everyone to consider conscious biases against women and try to encourage more women into top positions. In other words, women are out there and there is something wrong with us for not voting for them or promoting them.

But in general people are encouraged to work to improve how they are perceived - we are given endless talks about communication and presentation skills, body language etc. If we are not perceived well, that is our fault and our problem, unless we are women.

[Dorkins]

Thanks for that prompt Dorkins. Makes me think about driverless cars, or 3D printing. The only problem is, I have very little interest in these technologies. When I think about these things, I dwell on the economic and political consequences.

Well you only have 10 minutes so you could easily do some reasonably well-researched factual background about what has already been done with driverless cars/3D printing, what might come next, and a few bullet points on possible good and bad political and economic consequences of these technologies in general. I think these would be good for sparking the audience's interest as they are topical and could impact on their lives.

I would avoid giving a talk based on big, vague words like "democracy", "liberty", "equality", "money" etc as this could all too easily turn into a low information content subjective rant. Ideally you want to aim for 80-90% information and 10-20% personal interpretation/speculation.

Edited May 31, 2015 by Dorkins

[Habeas Domus]

I would follow the BBC pattern of showing two sides and then summarising it and letting them make their own mind up

So 3 slides:

4 minutes on how FTBers are struggling with high prices

Then 4 minutes with a history of how previous generations have benefited from rising prices

Then 2 minute summary with some industry predictions of where prices will be in 5 years from now.

You dont have time for any detailed analysis, just "prices have gone up - here are the winners, here are the losers - what do you think?"

Don't let anyone know what your real opinions are, let them join the dots and make up their own mind

[Bear Goggles]

WTF?

Am I missing something here about the purpose of this 10 minute talk?

If you want to give a talk at work then you need to inspire your audience not depress or enrage them, even if they agree with you then will come away feeling irritated and associate you with that feeling.

You need to talk about something positive. A person, idea or entity that you admire. Talk about something you are passionate about and aim to educate, entertain and inspire.

Moan about house prices down the pub or on an Internet forum.

Jeez

[Venger]

Thanks for all the replies!

It would be a talk to 10 or 11 people.

I'm 30 years old. The others are evenly split between slightly younger, slightly older and middle aged.

I know one owns a flat quite near me. I assume the middle-aged own (they have been settled for many years). I know most of the rest rent, at least one in a house-share (he's a recent graduate).

I bought a flat in 2013. I'm selling and buying somewhere cheaper and further out. So I've benefitted (at least if the transaction goes ahead) from house price increases. I would benefit from further increases. Maybe some of them would think it was hypocritical to seemingly denounce the thing I've benefitted from, but I don't think that follows. I've discussed some of these things before and don't think I've offended anyone.

If you could eavesdrop on the conversations I've had about property I think you would actually be pleasantly surprised! Many are at least sympathetic to arguments that HPC could happen or will happen.

Bought in 2013, planning to sell and buy again, something cheaper further out. Not rent. 'Benefited' from HPI since 2013.

Pleasantly surprised? Sympathetic to argument population growth doesn't guarantee HPI. Prices are set at the margin. Cash in your HPI and buy again, if you can. No one is going to answer all of your HPI worry questions.

[Killer Bunny]

Killer Bunny - Do you think rates will go any lower than 0.5%? What do you think about the central banks which have negative interest rates? How long until they are positive?

Did you see my first post? 2 before that one?

[Muddlehead]

Sorry Venger I probably wasn't clear. Sale agreed on my flat and offer accepted on another flat. Obviously either could fall through regardless of what I want. Buyer has had survey and probably incurred some legal costs so probably fairly unlikely to withdraw. I have paid for survey and some legal costs. I may still withdraw from the purchase. You have prompted me to reconsider renting!

There are several purposes to the move. The main one is to be closer to work. Financial considerations play a part too.

I have given renting a lot of thought. I've had bad experiences renting previously though. One of the things which worries me most is the logistics. Once I exchange I will have only a short period to find a suitable place. Looking at the places for rent there aren't many available. If the rental adverts are anything like the sale adverts, many aren't even available - they just want you to call so they are on your list to spam you with anything. When renting previously I have been forced to move at difficult times. I suppose I am probably prepared to pay a little for convenience and stability of my living arrangements.

Another worry is I'm not sure my income is high income to convince a letting agent I can afford it. I know some insist on rent not exceeding a certain percentage of income, and not necessarily accepting paying rent for the whole tenancy term up front. Do you think I'm worrying excessively?

The reason I said pleasantly surprised is all the property owners I've spoken to agree with my arguments:

1) Lower prices would be a good thing

2) They agreed with my arguments that prices will fall. I think prices may be falling (it seems to me it's difficult to spot trends due to seasonality, different sources of data, and different markets - FTB very different to "mansions" etc.) but maybe we've got another few years. The closest to disagreeing was someone who said those arguments all make sense, but I thought that 10 years ago. The market can stay irrational for a long time, especially if supported by irrational government and central bank policy.

A typical comment during these discussions: "I could buy but I just think it's massively overvalued.... When I do buy I want it to be a place to live, not view as an investment." He - and others like him I've talked to - earn a good salary (no less than 60k). I just thought it's good people like him are thinking renting is better than buying at present, and I would have thought most on here would agree - hence "pleasantly surprised." I'm not sure I know anyone who thinks price rises are a good thing. Certainly nobody seems to boast about it, or react with anger if I mention prices falling.

I'm not sure about "argument population growth doesn't guarantee HPI." I'm sure my original post wasn't very clear. I suppose my main argument is rental yields are very low. As prices are set at the margin, when BTLers are forced to sell as yields are too low and IRs are too high, prices will fall. Even if there are many more government schemes or foreign money or whatever, surely things will end badly for landlords at some point. I just thought that wouldn't be a very sensible way to begin a talk. Instead I thought a largely chronological presentation of the forces pushing prices higher would be interesting. I put up some notes here as I was just interested in some views on whether I was putting too much emphasis on some factors, whilst forgetting some other obvious ones.

[Muddlehead]

I'm not sure there is a purpose to the talk. We have a monthly team meeting. There usually isn't much that's essential to discuss, but we have a two hour meeting. My manager is quite talkative, but says he wants us to be more involved. Someone suggested at each meeting someone doing a presentation, and he liked the idea, so I'm doing a presentation.

He said it didn't have to be work related. I work for an insurance company. I did think a work-related topic might be best. In future if I'm doing presentations, they will be work-related, so perhaps better to practice talking about insurance than something of personal interest. But rather than something fairly specific and technical about a particular type of insurance, I thought something broader might be more interesting. Somehow I ended up thinking about politics, the general election, the upcoming Budget. What might happen if we vote to leave the EU? (It occurred to me that we might be exempted from some European regulations which are a pretty big deal in insurance - one is coming soon, the other one was several years)

What about the increase in IHT? There might be less interest in whole of life policies.

But I just ended up thinking most of the interesting political developments concern house prices. I was reminded of a comment from a talk by Danny Dorling: every Osbourne has done (at least in the second half of the term) was to keep house prices high. It seemed an interesting thing to talk about.

[pig]

I'm not sure there is a purpose to the talk. We have a monthly team meeting. There usually isn't much that's essential to discuss, but we have a two hour meeting. My manager is quite talkative, but says he wants us to be more involved. Someone suggested at each meeting someone doing a presentation, and he liked the idea, so I'm doing a presentation.

He said it didn't have to be work related. I work for an insurance company. I did think a work-related topic might be best. In future if I'm doing presentations, they will be work-related, so perhaps better to practice talking about insurance than something of personal interest. But rather than something fairly specific and technical about a particular type of insurance, I thought something broader might be more interesting. Somehow I ended up thinking about politics, the general election, the upcoming Budget. What might happen if we vote to leave the EU? (It occurred to me that we might be exempted from some European regulations which are a pretty big deal in insurance - one is coming soon, the other one was several years)

What about the increase in IHT? There might be less interest in whole of life policies.

But I just ended up thinking most of the interesting political developments concern house prices. I was reminded of a comment from a talk by Danny Dorling: every Osbourne has done (at least in the second half of the term) was to keep house prices high. It seemed an interesting thing to talk about.

I think you're right - go for it and do a talk on hpi.

It is fast becoming a political hot potato, and is linked to many other issues not to mention affecting everybody sat in the room.

I wouldn't directly attack hpi. If it were me I'd take a specific positive angle to get people engaged. For example 'The Affordable Housing Crisis'. You can kill off many myths (e.g. we're running out of land), identify problems (hb spiraling out of control?) run through potential solutions (will building actually help and bywhen ?) and get your audience to discuss. The fact that hpi has become a disaster on a national scale from economic to social will more than likely come out in the wash.

[Muddlehead]

Several people have suggested it's a bad idea to talk about house prices, so maybe I won't.

Even if I don't give the talk, I think it's useful to reflect on what is the best way to present the arguments against house price inflation to a receptive audience.

An alternative way to introduce the issues:

Myth: renting is dead money

Then discuss some assumptions about rent, buying costs, interest rates, returns from other investments under different strategies.

All of the people in the meeting spend their days working on spread sheets investigating financial projections, so this would really just be an application of the tools we use at work to personal finance.

[renting til I die]

Several people have suggested it's a bad idea to talk about house prices, so maybe I won't.

Even if I don't give the talk, I think it's useful to reflect on what is the best way to present the arguments against house price inflation to a receptive audience.

An alternative way to introduce the issues:

Myth: renting is dead money

Then discuss some assumptions about rent, buying costs, interest rates, returns from other investments under different strategies.

All of the people in the meeting spend their days working on spread sheets investigating financial projections, so this would really just be an application of the tools we use at work to personal finance.

Probably a better and more focused discussion to have, especially since you only have 10 minutes!

[porca misèria]

Does anyone know any good house price jokes?!

"E M Forster said 'Property is the religion of the English middle classes.' I gather it is not polite to discuss religion, so if anyone is worried my talk is likely to be offensive, I'll will gladly talk about [think of alternative topic - possibly an impossibly boring one] instead.

OK, I'll start with a joke. Two antiquarian booksellers were stranded on a desert island with nothing but the clothes on their backs and their wallets. One day a waterlogged book washed up on shore. When they were finally rescued they were both rich.

Now can anyone see the relationship between this joke and George Osbourne's long term economic plan?

or

Can anyone see where I'm going with this?"

That's actually looking rather jolly. If the subject inspires you to that kind of thing, then perhaps it is a good one to talk about after all.

The fact that you own will also help with not being seen as a moaning loser, as might be a risk for some HPCers.

[wherebee]

I'm not sure there is a purpose to the talk. We have a monthly team meeting. There usually isn't much that's essential to discuss, but we have a two hour meeting. My manager is quite talkative, but says he wants us to be more involved. Someone suggested at each meeting someone doing a presentation, and he liked the idea, so I'm doing a presentation.

He said it didn't have to be work related. I work for an insurance company. I did think a work-related topic might be best. In future if I'm doing presentations, they will be work-related, so perhaps better to practice talking about insurance than something of personal interest. But rather than something fairly specific and technical about a particular type of insurance, I thought something broader might be more interesting. Somehow I ended up thinking about politics, the general election, the upcoming Budget. What might happen if we vote to leave the EU? (It occurred to me that we might be exempted from some European regulations which are a pretty big deal in insurance - one is coming soon, the other one was several years)

What about the increase in IHT? There might be less interest in whole of life policies.

But I just ended up thinking most of the interesting political developments concern house prices. I was reminded of a comment from a talk by Danny Dorling: every Osbourne has done (at least in the second half of the term) was to keep house prices high. It seemed an interesting thing to talk about.

Muddlehead - as someone who has worked in and with senior management in those sort of firms, do not do this. I am sure you would be passionate, but it is not only a career killer, if it goes against what your boss personally believes, it can damage your standing and relationship. If he has a big ******off mortgage, for example, you reminding him that HPI is not a natural law will be bad. Ever heard 'dont shoot the messanger?" There is a reason that phrase arose.

Now, I am not saying be a coward at work - if you worked for a company and saw they were investing in housing with no counterbalancing risk analysis, I'd say good to speak up in the right forum. But this....no, mate.

Pick another topic. *****ing over nuns would be less dangerous.

[Bear Goggles]

Several people have suggested it's a bad idea to talk about house prices, so maybe I won't.

Even if I don't give the talk, I think it's useful to reflect on what is the best way to present the arguments against house price inflation to a receptive audience.

An alternative way to introduce the issues:

Myth: renting is dead money

Then discuss some assumptions about rent, buying costs, interest rates, returns from other investments under different strategies.

All of the people in the meeting spend their days working on spread sheets investigating financial projections, so this would really just be an application of the tools we use at work to personal finance.

Here's an idea, why don't you talk about the history of social housing. Perhaps focus on a person, like George Peabody, and how people like him laid the foundation for housing associations and helped break down prejudices about poor working people during a time when government did not see fit to take responsibility for the disadvantaged. If you want to get more political, you can touch on how these institutions are now being broken down by governments and finish by asking what the consequencies of this might be.

[Fully Detached]

That's interesting Fully Detached. I thought my ideas on voting were more uncompromising.

They probably are, but politics is an age-old acceptable discussion. Moreover, it doesn't affect anybody quite so directly - either in the pocket, or because we are years away from the next general election. For a lot of people, their valuable house is the only "achievement" they have; it's incredibly personal, and they define themselves by its worth - take a stab at it, and you might as well be telling them their c0ck is tiny. IMO people will be far more relaxed about a presentation on voting, and far more prepared to open their minds to ideas they hadn't considered before because it's not telling them something that imminently affects them.

If you go for the HPI topic, then I absolutely salute your passion for the subject and your balls for taking it on. But I fear you will end up being frustrated and patronised by people who "know" they are right, and that house prices always rise "because they just do."

Sadly, that's an argument that most of us fail to counter without ending up looking like ranting loon anti-government conspiracy theorists.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Fully Detached

[Venger]

I don't think you're going to be able to get fully behind the rental side of things, the advantages it has (vs this ponzi house prices set for correction) when you have so many doubts about renting yourself.

Thanks for all the replies!

It would be a talk to 10 or 11 people.

I'm 30 years old. The others are evenly split between slightly younger, slightly older and middle aged.

I know one owns a flat quite near me. I assume the middle-aged own (they have been settled for many years). I know most of the rest rent, at least one in a house-share (he's a recent graduate).

I bought a flat in 2013. I'm selling and buying somewhere cheaper and further out. So I've benefitted (at least if the transaction goes ahead) from house price increases. I would benefit from further increases. Maybe some of them would think it was hypocritical to seemingly denounce the thing I've benefitted from, but I don't think that follows. I've discussed some of these things before and don't think I've offended anyone.

If you could eavesdrop on the conversations I've had about property I think you would actually be pleasantly surprised! Many are at least sympathetic to arguments that HPC could happen or will happen.

Sorry Venger I probably wasn't clear. Sale agreed on my flat and offer accepted on another flat. Obviously either could fall through regardless of what I want. Buyer has had survey and probably incurred some legal costs so probably fairly unlikely to withdraw. I have paid for survey and some legal costs. I may still withdraw from the purchase. You have prompted me to reconsider renting!

There are several purposes to the move. The main one is to be closer to work. Financial considerations play a part too.

I have given renting a lot of thought. I've had bad experiences renting previously though. One of the things which worries me most is the logistics. Once I exchange I will have only a short period to find a suitable place. Looking at the places for rent there aren't many available. If the rental adverts are anything like the sale adverts, many aren't even available - they just want you to call so they are on your list to spam you with anything. When renting previously I have been forced to move at difficult times. I suppose I am probably prepared to pay a little for convenience and stability of my living arrangements.

Another worry is I'm not sure my income is high income to convince a letting agent I can afford it. I know some insist on rent not exceeding a certain percentage of income, and not necessarily accepting paying rent for the whole tenancy term up front. Do you think I'm worrying excessively?

Several people have suggested it's a bad idea to talk about house prices, so maybe I won't.

Even if I don't give the talk, I think it's useful to reflect on what is the best way to present the arguments against house price inflation to a receptive audience.

An alternative way to introduce the issues:

Myth: renting is dead money

Then discuss some assumptions about rent, buying costs, interest rates, returns from other investments under different strategies.

All of the people in the meeting spend their days working on spread sheets investigating financial projections, so this would really just be an application of the tools we use at work to personal finance.

Are you totally mad? Do you want to kill your career?
They'll hate you.

This. At least with renting you won't be repossessed-default-mortgage, after you lose your job after your speech.