The Housing Crisis (UK)
- Thread starter Jericholyte2
- Start date
Was thinking more that it restricts the ability to move at different life stages, eg upsizing if you have kids, downsizing when older, moving for work etc...
Wirrall, Altrincham, North Cheshire, St Helens, combined has around 1 million people living there. That's a big chunk of population who are living in relatively nice areas (though St Helens can be hit or miss).
Then you have places like Wilmslow, Didsbury, Alderley Edge etc.
Yes, the NW has some pretty impoverished areas. But the narrative that it's hard to get by for most people and "What jobs are you going to get up there" isn't grounded in reality.
It is. In Singapore 80% of people live in government built and subsidised housing, but housing affordability is still among the worst in the world.
I'm not the one with posts like "Yeah but what jobs can you get in the NW".
I'm not equating low income sections of society to a hellhole. There are low income sections of society which I really enjoyed being in (Salford). There are low income sections of society which are hellholes (Hull, no offence to people who are from there). There are also high income sections of society which are hellholes (Mayfair).
How many of those residents would be living there if they were looking to buy their first home now?
Not very many and that's really what the discussion is about
Absolutely, and not to dismiss that, while we are dealing with a crisis that is seeing all manner of homelessness on the increase we should deal with the most pressing issues. In ireland, moving for work as a renter or mortgage holder is not available to most. Just punitive commutes, unfortunately.
When they purchase the house they accounted to pay the 1 million, right? so if they don't have a set back, they will still be able to keep paying. Yes, it sucks that now you house has a different value. And now is only 400k. But they are much more people that they can only dream on having this 400k. In the end money should be a transactional liquid tool and you should be interested in the house
Your steps that you mention i wholeheartly agree because basically we are talking the same thing. You are talking about to increase the offer and reduce the demand to lower the prices. It all depends on how quick you implement it. If the government would be willing and more important, would be capable to do what you are asking very quick, it will happen the scenario that I am talking about and crash the housing market
So we are basically asking for the same I am asking. I don't want the market to crash. I don't want people to get shafted ( I would be shafted if that would happen) but something needs to happen because yes, millions would be shafted if the offer and demand cross moves too quick but while we are not doing anything even more million people are getting even more shafted spending their wages away with outrages rent costs
So in the end is who are we are screwing over. millions of houseowners (with a reasonable wealth and if they had been decent with their calculations they should still have a house) or CONTINOUSLY screwing even more millions people that has no savings. I don't know why the less of the more wealthy bracket worth to protect more than the majority of the lower wealth bracket just because is the status quote currently
But the availability of jobs is key, it's why the property is cheaper there and the rates of income is lower than in London. That's not a judgement, just the factors in the conversation.
My first ever bought home was a detached 3 bed in Northwich in 2017 for 185k.
I bought a new build 5 years back. After a year the main incoming pipe burst flooding my kitchen. I like an idiot had my media/gaming system (NAS drives, plex server, and my computer) on the floor in the store connected to the kitchen. All got fried. I got denied insurance claim through the house manufacturer as the electronics didn't look fried and the person who was called to fix the pipe didn't see if the things were fried. I had a few other issues with the house, like a lot of the skirting being badly installed and the ethernet cables not working on top of radiators leaking so I went through my home insurance for the flood damage while getting rest of the stuff done by the house manufacturer. The white goods they install especially the fridge/freezer is s*** beyond belief.
I bet you earned more than the average wage though, the vast majority of people cannot do as you did
My post was written in a half-joking manner. Of course there are some jobs. Most areas with a sizeable population will need teachers, nurses, electricians, construction workers etc. But when it comes to jobs like engineer, programmer and business consultant etc I reckon there are 10 times as many opportunities in the London area. Which is why people flock there, even if they have to pay an absurd amount and commute daily for an hour on a crammed train.
It's also not just about getting a job. What if you have a role/background with few openings? Even if you are lucky to land one of the few positions in your area it's hardly a good feeling. What if the office shuts down (which is far more likely when you don't live near the capital/main "business region")? What happens if you get a terrible boss? Or if you want to negotiate for a higher salary?
You lose a lot of flexibility by not being "where it happens". That is the nature of centralisation. And it's happening everywhere.
Came here to basically post this. It's a global problem with little to no quick or easy fixes.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...lobal-what-are-other-countries-doing-about-it
Not sure why you're bothering. He already ignored other points mentioning that housing affordability and deposits are two separate things.
I see the insanity of housing like the insanity of the health care system in US. But is global. Is an essential part of a person like health care, education, justice but there is treated as a for profit
But as it is global and our everyday since we are born, we don't have the same perception like being able to compare european health care vs US health care
But as it is global and our everyday since we are born, we don't have the same perception like being able to compare european health care vs US health care
Just as vulnerable as paying 10-20% more a mortgage payment in the form of rent to a private landlord.
Having a deposit and being able to afford monthly payments are completely 2 different things.
What's the point in saving for a minimum deposit if you can't afford the monthly payments? And you will note I used the national average salary rather than the north west which is sigficantly lower. Furthermore, a lot of people don't earn the national or regional average anyway which makes it even more difficult. Whether you have a 5% deposit or not becomes a moot point in this sort of environment.
There are many factors on whether someone has a deposit or not. For some young people they are lucky enough to live at home for free and save the majority of their wages, others are more fortunate that they have rich parents or inherit or they are highly paid. I think you are angling down the Starbucks, smartphones and Netflix route which is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
Completely depends upon where you live, of course, but when I think about buying my first house, it is a lot worse now.
The main difference I can see is rent. The cost of rent now is huge, and makes saving for a deposit very difficult. For those able to do so, however, most people where I live would be able to buy a house if they lived with their parents whilst saving for the deposit.
I'm bored
4x more landlords than teachers is absolutely mental.
87 MPs in the previous UK government were landlords.
I’m pretty sure the reason for the high numbers is the majority of landlords are individuals who rent out one home/flat.
If we had a revolution tomorrow and wanted to overthrow the landlord class it wouldn’t be the CEOs of giant corporations but instead your mate dad.
Crazy situation.
It is completely true. The goal of having a passing income when retired is a goal that everybody has. And being able to buy a property that gives you a rent income when retired while the value of the the house itself while leaving "something" to your kids is a solution that everybody think as a good solution. That is why the main problem is second house ownership, but that doesn´t mean that there are many companies and rich people (among them CEOs) that they enrich and they contribute to the problem. And they enrich way more, but they are less compared to a the sheer number that represents of a big bulk of upper middle class second house owners
I find it insane because of the difference in value each roll offers society. Diseased society.
I know a few landlords, some are even friends but discussing anything beyond football or what they want to drink is mind numbing. The difference in world views is massive. I also find it hilarious when these same people go on about people on benefits/immigrants being a drain on society. The lack of self awareness is breath taking.
All true but you also need to consider why people have gone down this route, the main driving force is that they can't rely on a half decent pension from the Government and/or an employee, this was an easy alternative for a long time, at the end of the day most of them are looking after number 1
Most people will look after no1.
If it’s best to put your pension pot into buying a BTL then that is what people will do.
I’m nearly 49 and by the time I retire the state pension I will get will be almost worthless despite working non stop apart from a year travelling in my 20s.
First job I had after uni was working for allied Dunbar which was swallowed up by Zurich and at 21 I was told to not rely on a state pension as the metrics don’t stack up.
For people who are hoping that will see them through I don’t think it will.
I'm older, a decade or so older than you are, but you're not wrong, I think the younger folk today know that they cannot rely on state pensions, people of yours and my age group not so much
Housing=Affordability=House Prices=Savings
Very relevant I would say.
Average stats can be very much skewed by the big cities (average salaries likewise with big earners). For £ 850 round my way you can get a renovated 2 bed terraced.
If someone has already moved out of the parent's house then it's harder to put money aside but I am starting to pick up vibes that many people don't believe in saving money anymore
I'm always put off by the lack of a front garden. Front door can open up to practically a main road, no bushes or trees to conceal your morning routine of standing at the living room windows naked and howling.
And apparently a double bedroom now means you can squeeze a double bed in it and feck all else. And people don't have things that they need to store anymore. I must've missed that memo.
Purley boy at it again
And it make sense. But if it doesn't look ok for people that can afford a house (so they could invest elsewhere), imagine how pension it looks for a bigger majority that they can save close to 0 because they need to spend it with rent and cost of life
I suspect round your way the average salary is a lot less than the figures you used as well
Re: saving, that's partly true, most people on the lower income scale can't really do so though, I couldn't when I was younger, I had to juggle the bills every week and that was 30+ years ago, it's much harder to do so now because house prices have outstripped wages by a large margin, my rent was about 25-30% of my income and that was a grotty council flat, add in car insurance, council tax and utility bills and food there wasn't a whole lot left
That's how it is now, it wasn't the case when the BTL market really kicked off, that was due to the Right to Buy from Thatcher and the pensions raid by Brown, that's where the real root of todays issues really lie
Agreed.”nothing safer than bricks and mortar” is a saying in the uk and rightly so as it’s proven to be over the years.
The system needs to change and I’d be ok with that but as @Jippy said earlier I’m not sure how you do that without fecking over loads of first time buyers who would immediately experience negative equity.
The only way to not feck owners with negative equity is apply changes gradually. But meanehile you are fecking over the ines that their income is eaten by rent. So if you are asking me between fecking over a relatively wealthy minority with negative equity (they still have the house) AND the present VS a relatively not wealthy majority AND the future i choose the second.
And we definitely have to start somewhere and that somewhere will not be positivre for the wealthier bracket. That is why is not implemented
Sorry I disagree with fuxking over those who have a BTL as a pension as if they sink into negative equity as they surely will then the “asset” they own and was implicitly implied by numerous governments was a good idea then the asset becomes a millstone around their neck (and a liability for whoever inherits)
Don’t get me wrong I think it needs changing and I don’t have an answer but crashing property prices overnight is unlikely to be a good solution
Yes. Apologies. I was using someone else's figures as the average. I always balk when I see "average" salaries sometimes being discussed on TV as I know in huge swathes of the country it is certainly NOT average.
Would you agree it is more than one factor? House price inflation (and rental inflation) have gone crazy but expectations are also perhaps not realistic too. Are people leaving uni and straight after moving out of the parental home? If so, that decision will screw you for life when it comes to getting on the property ladder.
I bought my first house in 2008 for £ 141,000 with my fiancee (now my wife). She wasn't working at the time. I was on a salary of £ 18,000 p.a. but had some savings largely due to living at my parent's house for longer than I thought I would.
Young people are way too interested in avocados and Netflix memberships these days to save any money and that’s the real issue here, not that houses cost around 10x their annual salary.