Daily Express Headline Tomorrow - Nice One (itv News)

[It is different this time]

Just watched it on ITV News nice big front page "Mortgage cost crippling" it reads " Mortgage cost is so high, in some cases, cost some homeowners three quarters of take home pay! This is scary, how desperate are people to pay 75% their salary to buy a shoebox? If anyone had any doubts of HPC before, IMO, this headline does confirm it will end in tears! Unbelievable & Unsustainable bubble at its best

[Kebab]

Just watched it on ITV News nice big front page "Mortgage cost crippling" it reads " Mortgage cost is so high, in some cases, cost some homeowners three quarters of take home pay! This is scary, how desperate are people to pay 75% their salary to buy a shoebox? If anyone had any doubts of HPC before, IMO, this headline does confirm it will end in tears! Unbelievable & Unsustainable bubble at its best

The stats like every other stat in news reports will be dodgy - based on a sample of 100 people in a job centre or something. The word "some" is rather vague for the number of households affected.

Anyway, whats the actual problem with spending 75% on mortgage repayments? They selected the option through choice didnt they? If they are people coming off fixed rates then probably beforehand they were paying 60% of their income on mortgage payments?

If they wanna do it then let them - meybe these are people with 2 or 3 properties that are equity millionaires? Meybe they are prudently overpaying their mortgages to clear the loans early? Or meybe they are just total morons..........

[It is different this time]

Anyway, whats the actual problem with spending 75% on mortgage repayments? They selected the option through choice didnt they? If they are people coming off fixed rates then probably beforehand they were paying 60% of their income on mortgage payments?

What is the actual problem with spending 75% on mortgage? err nothing really, you got a case there it is only 75% we should only worry when it hits 125% all salary + 25% homeowners loan to pay the mortgage!

[Kebab]

What is the actual problem with spending 75% on mortgage? err nothing really, you got a case there it is only 75% we should only worry when it hits 125% all salary + 25% homeowners loan to pay the mortgage!

If take home pay is £10,000 a month then you can cope well enough with £2,500 per month to live on I expect.

[Guest mattsta1964]

If take home pay is £10,000 a month then you can cope well enough with £2,500 per month to live on I expect.

Wotcha kebab! Another surrey hills geezer huh! Join the club!

Not many people on 10K a month......even in Surrey!

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

Daily Express Front Page

[It is different this time]

If take home pay is £10,000 a month then you can cope well enough with £2,500 per month to live on I expect.

Sorry I agree with you, I couldn't think why an Average Jo wouldn't survive on £2.5K per month as people usually take home £120K pa

Edit: What planet are you on?

[Kebab]

Wotcha kebab! Another surrey hills geezer huh! Join the club!

Not many people on 10K a month......even in Surrey!

Well, we need a bit of large on this site at times.......

[Guest mattsta1964]

Well, we need a bit of large on this site at times.......

Surrey Hills? Might that be somewhere like Dorking?

[Guest Bart of Darkness]

Mortgage cost is so high, in some cases, cost some homeowners three quarters of take home pay

I'll try tackling this as a bull.

Low interest rate environment, erm.... affordable monthly payments yadda yadda, whatever, yadda yadda, something something, always been hard to buy a house.... etc. etc. and so on

Jeez, I take my hat off to you bulls, it's harder work than I first thought!

[christhpc]

Nevermind that! How about this? New Labour: Putting the champagne into Socialism.

THE SECRET PENSION SCANDAL

16/02/07

EXCLUSIVE

By Gabriel Milland

Political Correspondent

TONY Blair and his closest Cabinet allies are to escape punitive new taxes on pensions which they imposed on other Britons.

The Prime Minister will collect a guaranteed pay-out of £62,400 a year from the moment he leaves office.

But last night it emerged that Mr Blair and other ministers will also be immune from a heavy new tax on private pension funds.

New tax laws introduced by the Government mean that any pension pot worth more than £1.5million is taxed at 55 per cent.

But although Mr Blair and several ministers have packages in excess of that, they are exempt from the tax because their funds are not held in a

private pension.

The revelation prompted outrage from taxpayer groups and amazement from pension experts.

http://www.express.co.uk/news_detail.html?sku=1227

[It is different this time]

I'll try tackling this as a bull.

Low interest rate environment, erm.... affordable monthly payments yadda yadda, whatever, yadda yadda, something something, always been hard to buy a house.... etc. etc. and so on

Jeez, I take my hat off to you bulls, it's harder work than I first thought!

I'll actually take my hat off to you at least for trying, I can't lie& spin & brainwash enough to tackle it

[It is different this time]

The Prime Minister will collect a guaranteed pay-out of £62,400 a year from the moment he leaves office.

Can we not pay him £162,400 a year providing he leaves the office now & takes Crash Gordon with him?

[Guest mattsta1964]

Nevermind that! How about this? New Labour: Putting the champagne into Socialism.

THE SECRET PENSION SCANDAL

16/02/07

EXCLUSIVE

By Gabriel Milland

Political Correspondent

TONY Blair and his closest Cabinet allies are to escape punitive new taxes on pensions which they imposed on other Britons.

The Prime Minister will collect a guaranteed pay-out of £62,400 a year from the moment he leaves office.

But last night it emerged that Mr Blair and other ministers will also be immune from a heavy new tax on private pension funds.

New tax laws introduced by the Government mean that any pension pot worth more than £1.5million is taxed at 55 per cent.

But although Mr Blair and several ministers have packages in excess of that, they are exempt from the tax because their funds are not held in a

private pension.

The revelation prompted outrage from taxpayer groups and amazement from pension experts.

http://www.express.co.uk/news_detail.html?sku=1227

proof were it needed that they are utterly despicable scum. Utter fekkn filth

Hanging is too bloody good for Bliar

[idunno]

If take home pay is £10,000 a month then you can cope well enough with £2,500 per month to live on I expect.

average yearly pay is 25000 pounds

[Casual Observer]

average yearly pay is 25000 pounds

But not all mortgagees pay 75% of their THP on mortgages, do they? So your point is?

A few do, and it may be because they are on high salaries.

I would suggest the average FTB payment is below 50%

Edited February 17, 2007 by Casual Observer

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

From the article

The figures were revealed in a report which makes clear the shocking financial burden being shouldered by hard-working families because of soaring property prices.

The grim report reveals that the property boom pushed average house prices to more than six-and-a-half times salaries last year – up a formidable seven per cent from the previous year’s figure. It led experts to warn that while rising prices are felt by many to be positive, any significant increase in interest rates could have a damaging impact on households.

Rob McPherson, of management consultants Hay Group which produced the study, titled Home Truths: Pay and Property 2006, said: “Rising house prices are outstripping take-home pay, placing enormous pressure on home owners.

As I have always said it`s NET pay wherein lays the problem.

[Converted Lurker]

If take home pay is £10,000 a month then you can cope well enough with £2,500 per month to live on I expect.

I'm trying hard to recall a more ridiculous, I just dont get the 'whole thing' type statement, I've ever seen on this forum. Congratulations, you have summed up for me (in one sentence) the attitude of so many misguided fools

[Realistbear]

Daily Express Front Page

Page 3, giant ad by Abbey: You can borrow 5 times your salary, just sign here...............

I read that NuLabour are proposing a new kind of mortgage due to Gordon's irresponsibility over the last ten years: You rent 90% of the house and "own" the other 10%. Sounds a bit like a return to council houses to me.

What HAVE you done Gordon, you silleee billy? Tut tut, I just don't know what we are going to do with you. Perhaps bring back the birch.

[Casual Observer]

Page 3, giant ad by Abbey: You can borrow 5 times your salary, just sign here...............

I read that NuLabour are proposing a new kind of mortgage due to Gordon's irresponsibility over the last ten years: You rent 90% of the house and "own" the other 10%. Sounds a bit like a return to council houses to me.

What HAVE you done Gordon, you silleee billy? Tut tut, I just don't know what we are going to do with you. Perhaps bring back the birch.

RB, in your opinion,what mortgage availability should be available when IRs are:

1. 15%

2. 1%

3. 5%

And could you give a reason for each answer?

[scott666]

Nevermind that! How about this? New Labour: Putting the champagne into Socialism.

THE SECRET PENSION SCANDAL

16/02/07

EXCLUSIVE

By Gabriel Milland

Political Correspondent

TONY Blair and his closest Cabinet allies are to escape punitive new taxes on pensions which they imposed on other Britons.

The Prime Minister will collect a guaranteed pay-out of £62,400 a year from the moment he leaves office.

But last night it emerged that Mr Blair and other ministers will also be immune from a heavy new tax on private pension funds.

New tax laws introduced by the Government mean that any pension pot worth more than £1.5million is taxed at 55 per cent.

But although Mr Blair and several ministers have packages in excess of that, they are exempt from the tax because their funds are not held in a

private pension.

The revelation prompted outrage from taxpayer groups and amazement from pension experts.

http://www.express.co.uk/news_detail.html?sku=1227

Blair and Brown fiddling while Britain burns :angry:

[OscillatingWildly]

I'm trying hard to recall a more ridiculous, I just dont get the 'whole thing' type statement, I've ever seen on this forum. Congratulations, you have summed up for me (in one sentence) the attitude of so many misguided fools

I think Kebab was simply noting that for a few lucky people, spending 75% of THP is not an absolute crisis. Therefore it is hardly newsworthy if the some people quoted in the article are from this group.

A sensationalist statement like the one reported by the Express is meaningless when absolutely no information is provided to set the statement into context. The Express and the Mail are the worst newspapers for doing this kind of thing.

BD

[Realistbear]

RB, in your opinion,what mortgage availability should be available when IRs are:

1. 15%

2. 1%

3. 5%

And could you give a reason for each answer?

I am not sure what "should" has to do with it. Mortgage availability will be restricted as soon as enough stress enters the market. IR will not cause a collapse as we are in a miracle economy where debt is illusory and house prices are real. Merv's last 3 hikes did nothing and the next 3 will equally do nothing. All the punter needs do is borrow more to keep up with each hike. Thats in a miracle economy, of course.

But in the real world it doesn't last forever because punters start to find themselves in difficulty as soon as the banks says no. Credit tightening will kick in very soon just as it is in the US causing the greatest collapse in house prices since the Great Depression.

1% IR will not help the bubble if the banks won't make the loan. Equally, 15% will not stop a punter from trying to get on the ladder or buy extra BTLs if the bank is willing and the belief is there that the miracle will continue by making long term CG more attractive than short term losses on yield.

The problem as I see it with what Gordon has created is the delusional thinking that credit is unlimited and that prices will continually outpace debt. Merv summed it up when he said house prices are just opinion whereas debt is real. The reality is that debt will choke the credit supply and then the market collapses. Starved to death.

Edited February 17, 2007 by Realistbear

[Casual Observer]

I am not sure what "should" has to do with it. Mortgage availability will be restricted as soon as enough stress enters the market. IR will not cause a collapse as we are in a miracle economy where debt is illusory and house prices are real. Merv's last 3 hikes did nothing and the next 3 will equally do nothing. All the punter needs do is borrow more to keep up with each hike. Thats in a miracle economy, of course.

But in the real world it doesn't last forever because punters start to find themselves in difficulty as soon as the banks says no. Credit tightening will kick in very soon just as it is in the US causing the greatest collapse in house prices since the Great Depression.

1% IR will not help the bubble if the banks won't make the loan. Equally, 15% will not stop a punter from trying to get on the ladder or buy extra BTLs if the bank is willing and the belief is there that the miracle will continue by making long term CG more attractive than short term losses on yield.

The problem as I see it with what Gordon has created is the delusional thinking that credit is unlimited and that prices will continually outpace debt. Merv summed it up when he said house prices are just opinion whereas debt is real. The reality is that debt will choke the credit supply and then themraket collapses. Starved to death.

Tough one to answer wasn't it?

You see many people on here think that prices of a nice 3 bed semi in the home counties should always be about 3 times single average salaries. i.e. at the moment a nice family house in Surrey should be abut 75k. And if IRs dropped to 3%, the price should stay the same, and you could buy it with monthly repayments of about £250 over 25 years. Because, you see, IRs don't matter.

All a bit unrealistic isn't it RB? At the end of the day we have to agree a realistic figure, don't we, rather than this dogmatic 3 times earnings rubbish.

[Realistbear]

Tough one to answer wasn't it?

You see many people on here think that prices of a nice 3 bed semi in the home counties should always be about 3 times single average salaries. i.e. at the moment a nice family house in Surrey should be abut 75k. And if IRs dropped to 3%, the price should stay the same, and you could buy it with monthly repayments of about £250 over 25 years. Because, you see, IRs don't matter.

All a bit unrealistic isn't it RB? At the end of the day we have to agree a realistic figure, don't we, rather than this dogmatic 3 times earnings rubbish.

I don't agree. Over the long haul, house prices have never strayed far from income. That is, never. When they do a correction always follows. This is why our house market is a long series of peaks and troughs (boom and bust). See the nationwide chart. And no, I don't believe "its different this time!"

The HPI-MEW miracle has lasted here for so long because Gordon's policy has been to unleash unrestricted credit and ability to MEW to stay up with spending. Low IR were not really a factor as people borrowed so much more than they would ordinarily do in a real economy. Cheaper to borrow 70k with an 9% loan than 250k at 5%.

How can someone on 30k afford a 5 X mortgage? They can't. They just borrow more from banks willing to extend the credit and on it goes. Many probably are spending 75% of their income to stay on the ladder but they must also be borrowing to to pay for other things such as council tax, car payments etc. Prudent lendning says 2.5 times income is affordable. And this formula applies to any salary level. When HPI kicks in credit must rise and when it rises too far the market collapses from stress (insolvency, repossession, bankruptcy, suicide, divorce, alcoholism--all on the rise along with HPI.).

HPI is a disease (all inflation is a disease) and the only cure is to starve it to death with credit restriction. HSBC is learning that lesson at this point in the cycle.

Edited February 17, 2007 by Realistbear