Bungalows

[Nick Cash]

7 hours ago, jiltedjen said:

bungalows probably have a fair amount of selling pressure, being that they are often sold due to deaths. 

Meaning regardless of a slow market, plenty of inheritors will want to get rid without being too concerned about dropping price 10k every 2 months 

equally they have been soo inflated for so long, it probably has fed into most cost effective solutions like lifts and stair-lifts.

most modern houses don’t have a straight run like the 1930’s houses, but awkward  folded 3 flights, with little structure just plasterboard and wooden batten construction. 

I think bungalows appealed more to more sensible generations - like the silent generation than they do for boomers. 

My own semi elderly boomer parents struggle with stairs, but could not bring themselves to live in a bungalow, as that’s for ‘old people’, and didn’t have the fancy image of status they liked. think they see themselves as ‘hip’ 40 somethings and cool, but they are more ‘replacement hip’ than cool. 

I think generationally people find it hard to let go of status when it comes to houses, more so with boomers than previous generations. House is tied to self worth, as many didn’t achieve anything other than being wealthy (by robbing their own kids)

hence why the ‘posh’ bungalows with sea views are sought after, but the practical bungalow in an ‘old people’ area is much less sought after. Doesn’t have the right image. 

as others have said I think it’s fairly rapid the time between the loss of mobility and death anyway. 

I think with boomers it’s the first generation who refuses to admit they are as old as they are, when life has been soo easy and wealthy, it’s hard to let go. I think it’s also why soo many are poor with estate planning, and sharing the wealth, it’s hard to come to terms with failing health, loss of status, loss of respect. 

same thing happens in the boating community. The amount of boomers who bought boats to ‘do up’ and sails round the world, many get as far as buying a project boat, maybe doing a weeks worth of work on it, then fizzles out, they get ill, or think they are just temporarily tired. inevitably they never return, but also never sell, the boat sits rotting in it’s mooring, sinks, becomes a hazard, but in the owners mind, they will come back to it, they can’t admit they themselves are too far gone. Didn’t a 75 year old glider pilot die in France recently also?, or the oldies flying jets in air shows, jets designed for fit healthy 19 year olds being flown by 70 year olds (only ones who can afford them) trying to show off - passing out due to age, killing crowd members? It’s grotesque. 

seen the same thing with bikes, ‘why don’t you throw out the bikes?’ ‘Well in case we want to go on a bike ride!’ (Meanwhile they can barely walk). It’s the admitting time has passed, and the ‘last time’ they do stuff has already passed, often years ago. I think it’s sad when people refuse to come to terms with their own mortality, it prevents people from thinking about legacy, or passing on wealth. It’s selfish. 

it also has other effects, if your say 70 and your keeping money back ‘just in case the roof needs doing’ but you bought a new roof when you were 60, that roof will see you out easily, then being head in sand with your own mortality means your just making bad choices, especially against a back-drop of knowing your kids are struggling. 

it’s a bit like the king should step down if he really cared about the image of the royal family. it’s killing the marketing of the royal family having some old codger in the role. It’s also bad for society to venerate the old like that. 

or American politics, having semi senile people running, it’s also partly what brought down the Soviet Union, eventually the large decision making party was all ancient oldies. 
 

perhaps what society needs is a return to some ageism, to go back to having younger presenters, a return to people ‘knowing their value’ and how it decreases over time. it would be better for older people to actually realise they are old, to plan accordingly. Same goes for work places, I’m seeing this at the moment where older management only want to employ someone who looks like the guy who just retired at 65 for a role, but ignore younger people (as the person making the decision sees people younger than themselves as super young - just due to personal perception). Should force people to retire, especially in governmental roles. 

the oldies shouldn’t be fed constant re-enforcement about ‘active lives’ and seeing a few fit oldies on TV all the time. It creates the wrong perception that ‘old’ is no longer ‘old’, it prevents correct longer term planning. it prevents looking toward the future of caring about younger generations.

seems society has lost a view of ‘old’, perhaps it’s due to the fact many are unfairly retiring absolutely loaded, where in the olden days people were poorer and more modest. Much more aware of their own mortality, more society minded. more rooted in lifestyle and means closer to their own kids than the gaping chasm between themselves being loaded and their kids being in relative poverty. 
 

I think bungalows are currently suffering from a generational issue where the next set of buyers (which would be boomers) can’t bring themselves to buy old peoples homes.

 

I don’t know whether you’ve heard of a chap called Winston Churchill?
 

He once famously apologised for writing a very long letter because “he hadn’t had the time to write a short one”.

[MARTINX9]

On 11/09/2023 at 14:32, Nick Cash said:

I don’t know whether you’ve heard of a chap called Winston Churchill?
 

He once famously apologised for writing a very long letter because “he hadn’t had the time to write a short one”.

 

That's a bit harsh - more of an article than a post but still a good read.

One of Churchill's other non war related quotes was in a response to a comment by Lady Astor - the first woman to sit as an MP in the Commons. 'If I was your wife I would poison your whiskey. If I was your husband I would drink it'!!

[Nick Cash]

12 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

 

That's a bit harsh - more of an article than a post but still a good read.

One of Churchill's other non war related quotes was in a response to a comment by Lady Astor - the first woman to sit as an MP in the Commons. 'If I was your wife I would poison your whiskey. If I was your husband I would drink it'!!

I don’t like his anti Boomer stance. JiltedJen not Churchill.

I think he’s a very strange individual with some very strange ideas. (JiltedJen not Churchill).

[Insane]

9 minutes ago, Nick Cash said:

I don’t like his anti Boomer stance. JiltedJen not Churchill.

I think he’s a very strange individual with some very strange ideas. (JiltedJen not Churchill).

If you read his posts (I read some parts but not all) he has this obsession with hate towards the Boomers. But dig a bit deeper and I think it is a massive resentment towards his parents who judging by what he writes were quite comfortable enjoyed their money but could have set him up in life if they had not spent the money. I think this is his issue they did not set him up, he thinks all people born between 1945 - 1965 are the same as his parents. 

[Nick Cash]

2 minutes ago, Insane said:

If you read his posts (I read some parts but not all) he has this obsession with hate towards the Boomers. But dig a bit deeper and I think it is a massive resentment towards his parents who judging by what he writes were quite comfortable enjoyed their money but could have set him up in life if they had not spent the money. I think this is his issue they did not set him up, he thinks all people born between 1945 - 1965 are the same as his parents. 

Agreed. I can’t take his posts seriously. Mass of contradictions.

[Confusion of VIs]

26 minutes ago, Nick Cash said:

I don’t like his anti Boomer stance. JiltedJen not Churchill.

I think he’s a very strange individual with some very strange ideas. (JiltedJen not Churchill).

He does seem to be carrying a lot of chips on his shoulders, especially for someone who managed to clear his mortgage by a lucky bit of speculating on Bitcoin. 

 

[Insane]

43 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

especially for someone who managed to clear his mortgage by a lucky bit of speculating on Bitcoin. 

 

Yet in the " My property is my pension" thread yesterday he told us he was kicking the hell not to drown. Does not make much sense. 

[MARTINX9]

1 hour ago, Nick Cash said:

I don’t like his anti Boomer stance. JiltedJen not Churchill.

I think he’s a very strange individual with some very strange ideas. (JiltedJen not Churchill).

I really can’t do with the ageism.

So called boomers are our parents or grandparents - who brought us up and gave us life.

Save the wrath for global elite entitles, and politicians and of course bankers. Most boomers just bought a house to live in when it was cheaper!

[Nick Cash]

12 minutes ago, MARTINX9 said:

I really can’t do with the ageism.

So called boomers are our parents or grandparents - who brought us up and gave us life.

Save the wrath for global elite entitles, and politicians and of course bankers. Most boomers just bought a house to live in when it was cheaper!

Or indeed some of the thickest skinned posters on here.

(Nearly forgot to type “skinned”.)

[yodigo]

On 09/09/2023 at 06:46, Will! said:

Where I live on the Sussex coast there are lots of bungalows, which are popular with old people who want or need to live on a single level.  Their sold prices are usually higher than houses comparable in terms of floor space with no sign of falling prices, which I suppose reflects that old people are often at the top of the housing pyramid with the most equity.

Recently though I've seen lots of bungalows coming back on the market from Sold SSTC and prices being reduced.  I wonder whether this represents the chains behind them failing and is a sign that falling prices are working their way up the pyramid.

Here's a "lovely" specimen

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/129213212#/?channel=RES_BUY

Property tracker shows initial price of £300k

[Insane]

36 minutes ago, yodigo said:

Here's a "lovely" specimen

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/129213212#/?channel=RES_BUY

Property tracker shows initial price of £300k

Gee that is Grim. 

[Sackboii]

5 minutes ago, Insane said:

Gee that is Grim. 

But it's deceptively spacious and when you step inside you will be surprised by the space on offer, in what was formerly a scouts hall ..?

[jiltedjen]

23 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

I really can’t do with the ageism.

So called boomers are our parents or grandparents - who brought us up and gave us life.

Save the wrath for global elite entitles, and politicians and of course bankers. Most boomers just bought a house to live in when it was cheaper!

I have a lot of respect for the greatest generation and rightfully so. Just a shame a lot of things they fought and died for (for their children and grandchildren) was thrown away in the span of a single generation.

and the bitcoin ‘win’ was something like 1/4 of my mortgage, the rest was through a lot of hard work as I was terrified I was going to get trapped by raising rates (and I seem to have gotten away with it by the skin of my teeth - many of my peers are not so lucky).

I think on HPC there are a few millennials who ‘know how it feels’, there are plenty of older posters who just have no idea what facing the current economic situation feels like. 

my parents did have it easy, and so did a lot of boomer parents. the first generation to leave their own kids worse off than themselves, a broken social contract.

I have not really ever seen any convincing arguments otherwise, most are more personal attacks. I think the reason I upset a lot of older people is that it cuts a bit too close to the bone. 

I’m before the curve, but as we can see in the news the rest of my generation are finally waking up. see my posts as a warning of what’s to come.

 

[sta100]

15 minutes ago, jiltedjen said:

my parents did have it easy, and so did a lot of boomer parents. the first generation to leave their own kids worse off than themselves, a broken social contract.

 

It's not really a contract that's been around that long, at the beginning of last century it was common for 5 year olds to work in a factory.

If you want anyone to blame then successive governments who have focused on short term goals for re-election over long term prosperity are the problem.

[Insane]

20 minutes ago, jiltedjen said:

my parents did have it easy

Who spent it instead of setting you up for life. That is why you resent them so much

21 minutes ago, jiltedjen said:

that it cuts a bit too close to the bone. 

You have never dealt with it have you. 

[sta100]

It's an odd narrative that generations are supposed to leave their own kids better off as firstly, progress is not normally made in a straight line, and secondly the planet has become more crowded and changed a lot geopolitically in the last few decades.

Those born around 1900 were worse off in some ways than their parents as they were more likely to die in a war and I'm sure there's many more examples over the course of human history.

 

 

[Insane]

20 minutes ago, sta100 said:

Those born around 1900 were worse off in some ways than their parents as they were more likely to die in a war and I'm sure there's many more examples over the course of human history.

Yes 

I read a book a few years ago by a lady who traced her family back. Those 5 Generations back were illiterate but those 6 back were not. This was due to the industrial revolution sending a lot of working class people backwards. Many talented people saw their skills wiped out and not needed anymore so they became the poorly paid factory fodder and were far worse off than their parents. As Education was not free at the time they could not send their children to school.

If you look at the UK in the last 50 years we have had a new industrial revolution . The heavy Labour intensive industry has gone abroad where Labour is cheaper. There has now formed two new classes those with certain skills doing better than their parents in higher paid tech jobs and those doing worse in unskilled minimum wage employment. The second group cannot have the same standards as their parents but this is not the parents fault.

[The Angry Capitalist]

6 hours ago, Insane said:

Yes 

I read a book a few years ago by a lady who traced her family back. Those 5 Generations back were illiterate but those 6 back were not. This was due to the industrial revolution sending a lot of working class people backwards. Many talented people saw their skills wiped out and not needed anymore so they became the poorly paid factory fodder and were far worse off than their parents. As Education was not free at the time they could not send their children to school.

If you look at the UK in the last 50 years we have had a new industrial revolution . The heavy Labour intensive industry has gone abroad where Labour is cheaper. There has now formed two new classes those with certain skills doing better than their parents in higher paid tech jobs and those doing worse in unskilled minimum wage employment. The second group cannot have the same standards as their parents but this is not the parents fault.

The industrial revolution really was that. A revolution.

Without that the majority of the population would be living in absolute misery. It was serfdom after all.

Many people were on the verge of starvation before it and many children died before the age of 12.

The factories employed the children and gave them an opportunity to sustain themselves and eventually allowed them to purchase the things that were made in the factories that were mass produced such as shoes & clothes etc.

That was what raised Britain's living standards and allowed us to evolve into the economy we have today.

It was a necessary transition.

We have not had a new industrial revolution in the last 50 years.

We have been living off the scraps of our previous economic miracle and cheap abundant oil especially from the North sea which took us away from the misery of the 1970s.

The last 20 years has seen Britain decline.

Real wage growth has declined and prosperity has decreased since around 2002.

Productivity has been stagnant for at least 10 years.

The purchasing power of the currency has been eroding decade after decade.

House prices to average wage have gone to stratospheric levels.

We have a serious problem with energy policy and no real plan to help Britain make any real gains in improving our current predicament.

Britain is a train wreck waiting to happen.

[Insane]

3 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

It was a necessary transition.

Not everyone lived in dire poverty pre the industrial revolution.

During the process a lot of people went backwards. 

The best books are written by those who were there at the time of something. Another book I read was written by someone born at Tower Bridge in 1900 the poverty was atrocious. 

Have you ever read anything on the Victorian Slums in our City's? 

7 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

The last 20 years has seen Britain decline.

Real wage growth has declined and prosperity has decreased since around 2002.

That is not the case for everyone. I know many who have gone backwards compared to their parents but also equally know many who are much better off. Much of my Family worked in Fords at Dagenham their children and grandchildren who work in the city are far better off than them. The wage growth is an average but as I said some have got more some on minimum wage have got less it is not an even spread. 

10 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

Productivity has been stagnant for at least 10 years.

How do you measure that? What about invisible exports like Banking, Insurance and legal? 

11 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

The purchasing power of the currency has been eroding decade after decade.

Again how are you measuring that? Stuff we get in the shops that are imported like clothing , appliances, computers and TV's have never been cheaper. 

12 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

House prices to average wage have gone to stratospheric levels.

We all know that on here. But we are not living one room one family like they were in the industrial revolution. 

14 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

We have a serious problem with energy policy and no real plan to help Britain make any real gains in improving our current predicament.

Britain is a train wreck waiting to happen.

That is in the future and no one knows what that holds yet, it is all speculation. 

[The Angry Capitalist]

1 hour ago, Insane said:

Have you ever read anything on the Victorian Slums in our City's? 

How do you measure that? What about invisible exports like Banking, Insurance and legal? 

Again how are you measuring that? Stuff we get in the shops that are imported like clothing , appliances, computers and TV's have never been cheaper. 

I have read books on Britain's history and the Industrial revolution.

Obviously there was lots of poverty. But there was less than before the boom.

See charts of productivity and they are all stagnant.

Insurance and legal is service economy not production although it is obviously part of GDP. You can't export insurance or legal although banking via shares can be.

You can measure purchasing power against many things.

How about housing?

Look at the increase in pricing over the last 25 years.

That house has gone up as the currency has lost purchasing power. It's still the same house as before where in most cases no value has been added.

The house has not gone up in value. Only the currency has lost purchasing power via low interest rates and excess credit/debt.

Credit/debt that will default and be sucked out of the economy resulting in much lower prices.

Cars, food and energy are others.

There is very little where things are cheaper now compared to 20 years ago.

What is cheaper is usually due to a giant leap in innovation and efficiency and not because of a strong currency.

All the products are inferior too as they are mainly produced in China and come with 1 year warranties etc.

 

[Insane]

1 minute ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

Insurance and legal is service economy not production although it is obviously part of GDP. You can't export insurance or legal although banking via shares can be.

Insurance is know as an invisible export as are our legal services so yes as you say it is obviously part of GDP and an asset to the UK. 

3 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

You can measure purchasing power against many things.

Yes but you said our purchasing power had decreased decade after decade which I don't agree with. You have not shown a purchasing power measure. 

5 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

How about housing?

Look at the increase in pricing over the last 25 years.

Yes we all know housing has gone up and up but that is not quite what we are discussing is it. I answered a post stating that the current time is not the only time in history where people have gone backwards. There are many who have been priced out of housing but many who have made fortunes. How do you determine if the UK as a whole is more wealthy due to more expensive property or poorer. I am not talking about individuals but the UK as a whole? How much money has been drawn to the UK to buy our property? 

11 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

That house has gone up as the currency has lost purchasing power. It's still the same house as before where in most cases no value has been added.

Again how do you determine this? It has had a negative impact on some a positive on others. What is value? Someone bought a house in West London 40 years ago for £50,000 and sold it for £2 Million to an overseas buyer. The seller now has a massive increase in purchasing power wherever they decide to spend that money. I  am not saying this is a good thing or bad thing and yes I know many have been left out but does this make the UK as a whole better or worse off. 

15 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

Credit/debt that will default and be sucked out of the economy resulting in much lower prices.

Cars, food and energy are others.

Again this is all speculation and in the future. 

15 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

There is very little where things are cheaper now compared to 20 years ago.

Err I left home in 1986 and paid £300 for a Fridge Freezer the same today £200. I paid £40 for a Continental  Quilt today £15 Free standing oven £600 today fitted oven and hob £400.  I would say everything standard for the home (not top spec) is all cheaper today than 40 years ago never mind 20 years ago. 

19 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

All the products are inferior too as they are mainly produced in China and come with 1 year warranties etc.

My washing machine a cheap Beko was in this house when I moved in 4 years ago so I don't know how old it is but at least 4 years plus and is still going strong. 

Just a quick google on poverty in London 1900 and this popped up loads more there. 

ted Kingdom - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_Kingdom

Poverty in Britain in the early 1900s was widespread and severe. Only 75 per cent of population had enough money to access food, clothes, rent and fuel¹. Many people lived in terrible conditions such as damp and badly built houses¹². The poor law administration provided minimal support for the unemployed¹. Overcrowding and disease were common¹. The poverty surveys and the public outcry led to the first measures of the Welfare State³, such as free school meals, old age pensions, and health and unemployment insurance.

[The Angry Capitalist]

2 hours ago, Insane said:

Yes but you said our purchasing power had decreased decade after decade which I don't agree with. You have not shown a purchasing power measure. 

Yes we all know housing has gone up and up but that is not quite what we are discussing is it. I answered a post stating that the current time is not the only time in history where people have gone backwards. There are many who have been priced out of housing but many who have made fortunes. How do you determine if the UK as a whole is more wealthy due to more expensive property or poorer. I am not talking about individuals but the UK as a whole? How much money has been drawn to the UK to buy our property? 

Again how do you determine this? It has had a negative impact on some a positive on others. What is value? Someone bought a house in West London 40 years ago for £50,000 and sold it for £2 Million to an overseas buyer. The seller now has a massive increase in purchasing power wherever they decide to spend that money. I  am not saying this is a good thing or bad thing and yes I know many have been left out but does this make the UK as a whole better or worse off. 

Again this is all speculation and in the future. 

Err I left home in 1986 and paid £300 for a Fridge Freezer the same today £200. I paid £40 for a Continental  Quilt today £15 Free standing oven £600 today fitted oven and hob £400.  I would say everything standard for the home (not top spec) is all cheaper today than 40 years ago never mind 20 years ago. 

My washing machine a cheap Beko was in this house when I moved in 4 years ago so I don't know how old it is but at least 4 years plus and is still going strong. 

Just a quick google on poverty in London 1900 and this popped up loads more there. 

ted Kingdom - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_Kingdom

Poverty in Britain in the early 1900s was widespread and severe. Only 75 per cent of population had enough money to access food, clothes, rent and fuel¹. Many people lived in terrible conditions such as damp and badly built houses¹². The poor law administration provided minimal support for the unemployed¹. Overcrowding and disease were common¹. The poverty surveys and the public outcry led to the first measures of the Welfare State³, such as free school meals, old age pensions, and health and unemployment insurance.

You clearly don't understand what I am telling you so I will make a second attempt.

I mentioned house prices as a measure of purchasing power. A house valued at £200,000 today but was sold at below £150,000 over 10 years ago is a loss of purchasing power.

I cannot be any more blunt on that matter as that is a simple concept to understand and shows the loss of purchasing power in relation to housing.

More currency and credit added to the economy has caused those price increases and not production of goods or services and thus wage growth.

We know this because prices have separated from average incomes.

Look at the price of new vehicles over the decades and see the price increases.

Sure, some of the price increases are due to over regulation by governments such as air bags and stringent testing for crashes etc. This makes producing cars more expensive.

However, when you factor in the innovation of vehicle producers especially Toyota who have maximized efficiency enormously over the years then you can see how the purchasing power has decreased against new vehicles over time too.

I will finish on the purchasing power of the GBP by linking to the price of the most telling of barometers of measuring purchasing power namely gold.

As you can see on this 20 year chart the price has gone from £214 an ounce in 2004 to £1540 an ounce today:

https://www.gold.co.uk/gold-price/20year/ounces/GBP/

That is your evidence beyond any debate that the pound has gone to the dogs. Gold generally still buys the same amount of things it did in 2004. The only difference is the GBP does not because your government has added new currency into the economy and diluted it to the extent that it is close to worthless.

Some assets will go down against gold due to cycles such as property.

Houses in relation to gold should take less and less ounces of gold going forward from here as the housing cycle on the upside has peaked but gold has not peaked yet.

You can tell how wealthy a nation is by many things such as what it produces and its debts etc. Also, how much disposable income people have. 

Let me ask you a question.

If people in the UK are doing so well why did the government have to bail out the energy suppliers and subsidize our energy bills?

Look at the national debt of the UK. It is close to record levels.

There is two ways that gets resolved. More loss of purchasing power or defaults and bankruptcies which will show you both ways how the illusion of prosperity of the last 20 years was just that. An illusion.

What you are alluding to is a small percentage of the population who have gained from the last 20 years. That is a minority and soon we will see how much of that is illusory too when prices come down of all assets.

There always going to be some winners in any kind of society.

I mentioned that some things have gone down in price due to innovation and maximizing efficiency in the production process.

Fridges would be an example and TVs are another.

That is not due to an increase in purchasing power. That is due to globalization and cheap energy and labour from China.

If the government did not print so much money they would have been a lot more cheaper.

Try buying a fridge with a 7 year warranty or more as products used to be made and see what price you pay and not the cheap Chinese crap.

That Wikipedia article is nonsense. Charles Dickens completely exaggerated the poverty in Britain around that time and it has still got much attention from his novels.

It does not focus on the thousands if not millions of lives that have improved due to the industrial revolution.

Poverty always stands out in a capitalist society because it is so rare therefore it gets a lot of attention and stands out around the progress being made.

This was mentioned by many great economists in their studies including Hayek.

Edited September 15, 2023 by The Angry Capitalist

[Gbob]

I like bungalows. Having only one floor makes them easier to maintain. I even managed some simple roof repairs on mine which I would never have been brave enough to tackle on a house, or even have a ladder tall enough to access. You normally get good floorspace, a decent sized loft and a big garden too.  

Stairs are over rated. 

[iamnumerate]

1 hour ago, Gbob said:

I like bungalows. Having only one floor makes them easier to maintain. I even managed some simple roof repairs on mine which I would never have been brave enough to tackle on a house, or even have a ladder tall enough to access. You normally get good floorspace, a decent sized loft and a big garden too.  

Stairs are over rated. 

Good point about maintaince.

However you do get more floor space for land used which I think makes up for it.

[winkie]

19 hours ago, sta100 said:

It's not really a contract that's been around that long, at the beginning of last century it was common for 5 year olds to work in a factory.

If you want anyone to blame then successive governments who have focused on short term goals for re-election over long term prosperity are the problem.

This^^^^