Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

The Questions The Journalists Should Be Asking


Dylan
 Share

Recommended Posts

But, what's a "fair" market? A fair price for a particular good must surely be whatever someone is prepared to pay for it?

You say that people have "manipulated the market". How do you do that? An individual, or even a company can't just decide to go out and rig the housing market. People have used property to make money but that's hardly immoral as every type of market only exists because people make their living off of it.

Whats a fair market - surely one which is based on affordability and openess! Individuals and banks can go out and 'rig the housing market', the consequences of the subprime mortgage collapse and the credit squeeze is the perfect example. It was based on a market which was pushed artificially high through manipulation and fraud by the real estate industry, banks and builing companies to enhance theri profits/bonuses. There may or may not have been collusion and its difficult to prove but they sure as hell just all jumped on the bandwagon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

It's very easy to refer to "a few thousand people" in so glib a manner but it goes deeper than that and it's not just about negative equity. Nor will it only be a few thousand people, either. People on here are deperate for a huge crash so they can pick up cheap properties and that means repossessions or distressed sales which also means bankruptcies, families being evicted, businesses going under, suicides, council tax and income tax rocketing to pay for all of this, and so on.

So people are forced to rent - big deal. If you value property ownership that much then save for a while, maybe a long time and make sacrifices.

Crashes and recession are very bad for a country and wanting it to hapen is just sick, quite honestly.

Your falling into the trap of thinking the crash is the problem. It's not. It's the cure. The previous malinvestment in the boom is the problem.

You can change it's nature and duration with monetary policy, but you can't stop it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it self explanitary? It's because a massive crash will be far, far worse than the alternative of a small backwards correction or stagnation for a few years.

It puzzles me why almost all the people on here seem to so desperately want a property market collapse and are quite gleefull about it. I understand why they may think it's coming but to actually want it is rather sick to my way of thinking. The fall out from it will be absolutely horrendous and all of us are going to end up paying for it through state benefits to the huge number of newly homeless, jobless tradesmen, suicides, business crashes, etc.

People who have recently bought their own homes by stretching themselves and sacrificing do not deserve that. Do any here actually remember what things were like in the early 90's? It was ******in horrible, quite honestly.

You lot on here chirp on about how these nastly BTL'ers and "fools, morons, idiots, etc, etc" who've paid big prices and have artificially inflated prices in some cases to make profit. Yet everyone wants the market to go tits-up so they can get something artificially cheap. You are all exactly the same as the BTL'ers in that you want a market advantageous to your own situation at the expense of others. Only in the case of people here you aren't prepared to risk large sums of your own cash or acrifice your lifestyles.

I've rented since 2001, long story, very boring, but I'm married with two children .. We (My wife and I) were not prepared to sacrifice the childrens lifestyle or cash that could be spent on them by buying an over valued box in the hope it would provide us with a better pension, more holidays or a bigger car. The only thing we want is a home, only one, not overpriced, nothing extravagent, just a place to live in as a family. The other luxuries in our life are paid for from our wages and what we can save not by gambling on house price rises.

If we offend you with our gleeful welcome of bad news with no regard to BLT'ers etc then we are no different to the BTL'ers etc who welcomed price rises with glee and no thought to our feelings .. I can live with that, they gambled their families future, mainly for personal gain and lost, we didn't gamble our familes future and appear now to have made the better decision. That's life.

Edited for spelling

Edited by ReggiePerrin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats a fair market - surely one which is based on affordability and openess! Individuals and banks can go out and 'rig the housing market', the consequences of the subprime mortgage collapse and the credit squeeze is the perfect example. It was based on a market which was pushed artificially high through manipulation and fraud by the real estate industry, banks and builing companies to enhance theri profits/bonuses. There may or may not have been collusion and its difficult to prove but they sure as hell just all jumped on the bandwagon.

I do not accept that individuals can rig a market like that. Tell me how I do it, please.

I entirely agree that one of the factors driving the large rise in the market is the fact that lenders have made loans which in many cases people can barely afford pay back - sometimes not at all. However, "affordability" is a very individual matter. Two families may have equal earnings but one may chose to put all their disposable income into their property purchase whilst the other chooses to spend lavishly on credit cards they never pay off. Clearly then one family is far more able to afford a particular house than the other. If I can afford to service a loan of 6 times my earnings then why shoudln't I be allowed to get one? Yes, it pushes the market up beyond what other can afford due to other financial commitments but that's "fair", surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's very easy to refer to "a few thousand people" in so glib a manner but it goes deeper than that and it's not just about negative equity. Nor will it only be a few thousand people, either. People on here are deperate for a huge crash so they can pick up cheap properties and that means repossessions or distressed sales which also means bankruptcies, families being evicted, businesses going under, suicides, council tax and income tax rocketing to pay for all of this, and so on.

So people are forced to rent - big deal. If you value property ownership that much then save for a while, maybe a long time and make sacrifices.

Crashes and recession are very bad for a country and wanting it to hapen is just sick, quite honestly.

You are wrong - a property crash is inevitable and desirable because the bubble was created by the banks, surveyors, estate agents, BTLers (borrowing on stupidly crazy and lax terms) and FTBers who could afford to follow the crazy prices being set by the other interested parties...it was and is totally unsustainable. Everyone who works hard and honestly should be able to afford to buy a house (if they want to). When almost no one, unless they lie about their income or sell their souls to the banks for the next 40 years or more of their life at stupid salary multiples (and have to opt for interest only mortgages) can borrow - then you know the market has to dive a good way down to be at its correct level.

I agree with those who think the market has to crash to correct itself and it is criminal to even consider trying to sustain house prices at current levels...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've rented since 2001, long story, very boring, but I'm married with two children .. We (My wife and I) were not prepared to sacrifice the childrens lifestyle or cash that could be spent on them by buying an over valued box in the hope it would provide us with a better pension, more holidays or a bigger car. The only thing we want is a home, only one, not overpriced, nothing extravagent, just a place to live in as a family. The other luxuries in our life are paid for from our wages and what we can save not by gambling on house price rises.

If we offend you with our gleeful welcome of bad news with no regard to BLT'ers etc then we are no different to the BTL'ers etc who welcomed price rises with glee and no thought to our feelings .. I can live with that, they gambled their families future, mainly for personal gain and lost, we didn't gamble our familes future and appear now to have made the better decision. That's life.

Edited for spelling

But you have a home. You rent one and you have plently of disposable income, by the sound of things.

You say that BTL'ers gamble their families future. Maybe, but anyone who runs their own business is doing just that anyway. There is no real difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are wrong - a property crash is inevitable and desirable because the bubble was created by the banks, surveyors, estate agents, BTLers (borrowing on stupidly crazy and lax terms) and FTBers who could afford to follow the crazy prices being set by the other interested parties...it was and is totally unsustainable. Everyone who works hard and honestly should be able to afford to buy a house (if they want to). When almost no one, unless they lie about their income or sell their souls to the banks for the next 40 years or more of their life at stupid salary multiples (and have to opt for interest only mortgages) can borrow - then you know the market has to dive a good way down to be at its correct level.

I agree with those who think the market has to crash to correct itself and it is criminal to even consider trying to sustain house prices at current levels...

But you aren't looking at the bigger pucture.

Mr & Mrs Renter want to buy a house but can't afford it. Along comes a massive crash bringing property prices to a level which they can afford. However, Mr Renter works at B&Q which has had to lay him off because their business has gone to b0llocks due to no one building or renovating houses and Mrs Renter, who works in a call centre of a large bank selling finance, has been sacked because no one is taking loans.

On top of that their council tax has gone up due to the local authority having to spend a fortune putting up repossessed familes in B&B's, which they will have to do with Mr & Mrs R in a few months when the bailiffs come calling to change the locks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have a home. You rent one and you have plently of disposable income, by the sound of things.

You say that BTL'ers gamble their families future. Maybe, but anyone who runs their own business is doing just that anyway. There is no real difference.

You mean a business that deprives others of a home or puts people in to so much debt that they will be ruined? Yep, I'll gladly greet the demise of such a business with glee.

I apologise to the OP for going off topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean a business that deprives others of a home or puts people in to so much debt that they will be ruined? Yep, I'll gladly greet the demise of such a business with glee.

I apologise to the OP for going off topic.

Oh do get off your high-horse - depriving people of a home, what crap. How can a property letting business deprive someone of a home? It's very existence is to provide people with a home, if it didn't it couldn't function.

If you mean it helps to price people out of owning a home I might agree but it's not depriving people of somewhere to live.

No one has a right to own a home, or anything else for that matter. You seem to forget that we have probably the highest rate of home ownership in Europe, far more people on the continent rent, especially in urban areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh do get off your high-horse - depriving people of a home, what crap. How can a property letting business deprive someone of a home? It's very existence is to provide people with a home, if it didn't it couldn't function.

If you mean it helps to price people out of owning a home I might agree but it's not depriving people of somewhere to live.

No one has a right to own a home, or anything else for that matter. You seem to forget that we have probably the highest rate of home ownership in Europe, far more people on the continent rent, especially in urban areas.

It's the combination of planning law and property lets that are the problem. If there were less planning regulations we'd see the true market for rental property. I suspect it would be limited mostly to students and temporary workers. Much smaller than now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Letting agencies aren't there to supply homes! They are paid by BTL speculators to find victims to live in their investments. Their two jobs are;

To maximise profits by ensuring that all properties are fully let for the highest price possible

To maximise profits by ensuring the cheapest maintenance on the properties possible

There's nothing else they do!!! The rental market COULD exist without them, but they are a beast born of two requirements;

To essentially unionise BTL investors, allowing them to raise prices across the board. Many successful agencies run a majority of the properties within their areas.

To provide a face to the tenants of these investors, a paid 'No' man. BTL speculators don't want to be a part of the house market, they want to be a part of the profit market - and any sense of having to see the 'houses' that they offer for rent puts them closer to wanting to do something about the appalling conditions that many of them offer.

MohThoM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are all exactly the same as the BTL'ers in that you want a market advantageous to your own situation at the expense of others.

You don't quite get it, do you? Most people want a home to live in. Nothing to do with market conditions, or whether something is advantageous. I want to live somewhere - I have no plans to sell a house on for 100k more after a few years, or believe that I'm entitled to that, as if it's my natural right.

You are from the Krusty School of Economics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it self explanitary? It's because a massive crash will be far, far worse than the alternative of a small backwards correction or stagnation for a few years.

It puzzles me why almost all the people on here seem to so desperately want a property market collapse and are quite gleefull about it. I understand why they may think it's coming but to actually want it is rather sick to my way of thinking. The fall out from it will be absolutely horrendous and all of us are going to end up paying for it through state benefits to the huge number of newly homeless, jobless tradesmen, suicides, business crashes, etc.

People who have recently bought their own homes by stretching themselves and sacrificing do not deserve that. Do any here actually remember what things were like in the early 90's? It was ******in horrible, quite honestly.

You lot on here chirp on about how these nastly BTL'ers and "fools, morons, idiots, etc, etc" who've paid big prices and have artificially inflated prices in some cases to make profit. Yet everyone wants the market to go tits-up so they can get something artificially cheap. You are all exactly the same as the BTL'ers in that you want a market advantageous to your own situation at the expense of others. Only in the case of people here you aren't prepared to risk large sums of your own cash or acrifice your lifestyles.

Your original post

Oh do get off your high-horse - depriving people of a home, what crap. How can a property letting business deprive someone of a home? It's very existence is to provide people with a home, if it didn't it couldn't function.

If you mean it helps to price people out of owning a home I might agree but it's not depriving people of somewhere to live.

No one has a right to own a home, or anything else for that matter. You seem to forget that we have probably the highest rate of home ownership in Europe, far more people on the continent rent, especially in urban areas.

I only clambered onto my high horse when you came onto this forum already mounted on yours (the worst analogy I've ever written)

You originally stated "It puzzles me why almost all the people on here seem to so desperately want a property market collapse and are quite gleefull about it."

You then lambasted us with the statement "Only in the case of people here you aren't prepared to risk large sums of your own cash or acrifice your lifestyles."

I explained my situation to you, why I won't take risks and why I greet price falls with glee and ignore the thoughts of people who "risk" their future. You came back at me about businesses. You now compare renting on the continent to renting in the UK.. Do you know about AST agreements and the limitations we have on us when we rent compared to the continent? We can't paint our daughters room pink (I'm actually quite thankful about that) or have pets for the children, you explain to a 5 year old why she can't have a cat when her friends do. Your comparing apples with pears.

Now I'm willing to climb of my horse if you will. Perhaps you can explain the impact that price falls will have on you and what the future lies ahead for you if things go pear shaped. Individuals who detail their personal situation aren't generally greeted with hostility here. Although GB and AD might get a hostile reception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crashes and recession are very bad for a country and wanting it to hapen is just sick, quite honestly.

People have to learn their lessons. Say the population of the UK had morals, and people chose not to borrow money at interest from anyone. Just as a matter of principle. Say people chose to live with their parents, or live in a caravan, or perhaps live abroad until they could afford a house here.

We could still have a market economy, but due to people having brains and a conscience, we could actually avoid boom and bust.

No, instead we have an economy where people screw each other over on a daily basis, and most people choose to deny the reality of that - as long as they are okay.

By the way - there are millions of people existing on less than a pound a day in this world, and they don't commit suicide. Somebody who commits suicide over house prices is quite frankly a sad individual. Even if you were at rock bottom, you could renounce your previous lifestyle and dedicate it to helping other people, perhaps the people living without clean water in Africa. If somebody was so selfish previously that their entire self-identity was threatened by a recession, to the point of suicide, I find it hard to sympathise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I can afford to service a loan of 6 times my earnings then why shoudln't I be allowed to get one? Yes, it pushes the market up beyond what other can afford due to other financial commitments but that's "fair", surely?

So what you are saying is that f88k everyone else - i want to borrow as much as i want and f88k the consequencies.... well - we've just had 7 years of that - and look where it's got us! Wake up!

Don't you see that if lending was capped, then you would never get into this situation. Everyone (except the banks, taxman, property developers) would be better off. These are the people that have caused this problem, we are NOT the cause, we just want a return to where things should be.

There isn't anything more to be done - but let the crash happen and go after the real culprits - maybe someone like yourself that still believes that reckless lending is the answer...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the combination of planning law and property lets that are the problem. If there were less planning regulations we'd see the true market for rental property. I suspect it would be limited mostly to students and temporary workers. Much smaller than now.

And if there were laxer planning regulations we would see even more properties crammed on to ever smaller plots, taking up more green belt land. Properties would be built to even crappier standards than they are now and would probably be less mortgageable than the current crop of city centre flats which builders can't give away and would probably have a service life of less than 50 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have a home. You rent one and you have plently of disposable income, by the sound of things.

You say that BTL'ers gamble their families future. Maybe, but anyone who runs their own business is doing just that anyway. There is no real difference.

How the hell is providing a valuable product/service in return for cash, a gamble?

If it doesn't work out, and opt to become an employee again, they'll probably respect you more for the fact that you are a proven salesperson who was able to stand on his own feet, at least for a while. So how is it gambling? I'm looking forward to your response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I can afford to service a loan of 6 times my earnings then why shoudln't I be allowed to get one? Yes, it pushes the market up beyond what other can afford due to other financial commitments but that's "fair", surely?

This isn't a stable system. If people have no security of tenure they will (after a number of iterations) quite simply be unable to lend you six times your earnings (this is a capital-destructive, not capital-accreciative design). So then you'll resort to borrowing from your children, and their children, and their children's children. Until eventually you have a multi-trillion dollar market desparately searching for the next larger layer to add to the base of the pyramid. And then a recession will occur (if not a depression).

Personally, I think we should stoke up an equivalent ponzi market in water, and food. It'd get to the heart of the matter far sooner.

Oh wait, we are.

Edited by ParticleMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what you are saying is that f88k everyone else - i want to borrow as much as i want and f88k the consequencies.... well - we've just had 7 years of that - and look where it's got us! Wake up!

Don't you see that if lending was capped, then you would never get into this situation.

No, we've had 7 years of unaffordable lending. That isn't the same as simply lending someone as much as they can actually sensibly afford.

If I earn, say 25K and so does the bloke next door yet I want to put all my disposable into my house and he wants to piss it away on beer, alcohol, fast women and slow horses to the extent that he can only afford a three times multiple for his mortgage then why should my lending be restricted as well? He may be able to afford 3 times and me quite comfortably 6 so why should I have to be prevented from paying what I consider to be a fair price for the house I want? Why shoudl he have an equal chance of buying the house I want for less sacrifice on his part?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How the hell is providing a valuable product/service in return for cash, a gamble?

If it doesn't work out, and opt to become an employee again, they'll probably respect you more for the fact that you are a proven salesperson who was able to stand on his own feet, at least for a while. So how is it gambling? I'm looking forward to your response.

Running any business is a gamble. Anyone who thinks a business is a dead cert is a fool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't a stable system. If people have no security of tenure they will (after a number of iterations) quite simply be unable to lend you six times your earnings (this is a capital-destructive, not capital-accreciative design). So then you'll resort to borrowing from your children, and their children, and their children's children. Until eventually you have a multi-trillion dollar market desparately searching for the next larger layer to add to the base of the pyramid. And then a recession will occur (if not a depression).

What are you on about? Where does security of tenure enter into this?

Why shouldn't I be allowed to borrow 6 times my earnings if I can afford to service the debt?

At it's simplest form. If me and the bloke next door lead identical lives - fincially speaking - with the sole difference that he has the full Sky telly package but I have freeview then I can afford mortgage payments larger by the equivilent of the Sky subscription (£50?) then he can.

If I want to spend that on my mortgage then why should I not be allowed to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

snip

Crashes and recession are very bad for a country and wanting it to hapen is just sick, quite honestly.

Its normal

Whats not normal is to claim you have defeated boom and bust.

Whats not normal is to have the nations means of exchange in a state of crisis.

Whats not normal is for people of your mindset to think prices only ever go one way.

If you wish to talk to like minded people try the singing pig website

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you on about? Where does security of tenure enter into this?

Being displaced erodes capital.

Why shouldn't I be allowed to borrow 6 times my earnings if I can afford to service the debt?

You can only service this debt because a lender has undervalued their capital.

At it's simplest form. If me and the bloke next door lead identical lives - fincially speaking - with the sole difference that he has the full Sky telly package but I have freeview then I can afford mortgage payments larger by the equivilent of the Sky subscription (£50?) then he can.

... and you're the guy bending our ear about recessions putting people out of jobs...

If I want to spend that on my mortgage then why should I not be allowed to?

If your asset falls in value, why should we care?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...

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.