|
|
| The UK housing market: a bubble about to burst? |
"I'm a bleeding heart! Lets give money away"
by Bob Roberts
|
#1001559
of 3278
 17 Dec 2002
09:04 PM |
Rik,
”first off it would be nice if you could ensure your quotes are attributed to the people you claim they are from, as some of those used are mine!”
I stick to my presumption that you are infact the same person. I am pleased you are amused by my theory of haves and have nots. Especially when to quote you,
“Furthermore, your haves and have nots arguement does not apply to all of those expecting a fall of some sort or another in the market as I personally am holding off yet could quite easily purchase a very decent property exactly where I want to live with a perfectly normal 2.5X salary multiple.”
Sir, you surely are a “have not”, therefore although you argue I am wrong, you prove I am right with your remarks! This argument, not “arguement”, is about the ownership, or not, of capital. I cannot tell you how to live your life, but I can advise you that jealousy is not a solution to a deep-seated personal problem.
With regards to my sarcastic swipe, at your theory of cheap housing, I quipped about Manchester, not Mancheter, and Chelsea. To this you respond,
“I would also like to point out that your comparison of Mancheter to Chelsea makes, as I am sure you are aware, no sense whatsoever. Firstly wages are higher in london than manchester and secondly it is hardly fair to compare one area of a city to a whole city. No doubt there are some areas in Manchester that are much more pricey than others, furthermore, some parts of london are much less expensive.”
Now you state there are differences and that market is not homogenous, which is my point! Get your facts right and think in 3 dimensions if you are to respond to me. No one in the south east will be getting 2.5 time income home loans, unless they live below their own social expectations. Competition always leads to an imperfect market.
Further you use figures, yourself, about housing loans in June this year,
"The number of loans for house purchase made in June totalled 125,000 compared with 111,000 the previous month. The proportion of these loans made to first-time buyers increased to 45% in June compared with 40% in May
FTBs are decreasing, the market is going down, but hey, there's a nice studio flat round the corner from me, only £100k, you'd better snap it up quickly."
This point is immaterial, what % are FTBS????? You make a point with nonsense information. What does this quote prove? It’s out of date, there is no reference to its source, what are you trying to say?
I find it tiresome to respond to an idiot.
In closing you suggest,
”Oh and I'm not sure quite why you felt the need to drop in your favourite authors list, still I am partial to a few of those that you mention.
Anyway, keep up the good, if misguided work. At the very least you provide many people with a good laugh.”
You may consider my work misguided, until maturity and experience prove my points to you. Sheep always consider that the direction of the flock as a good thing, those more courageous and knowledgeable reap the rewards of being “informed”. I know I will find it difficult to educate the incompetent, but it is my civic duty. Further this I leave studio flats to the likes of you, who have left it so long to enter the housing market. After all you would not know of its availability unless you were looking at it as an option. I’m sure you’ll tell your friends you love the convenience of open plan, but of course, we both know the truth don’t we? |
|
Bob a job
by Rik
|
#1001558
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
08:10 PM |
Bobby,
first off it would be nice if you could ensure your quotes are attributed to the people you claim they are from, as some of those used are mine!
Secondly, your analysis amuses me. Atempting to apply some sort of anti communist spin to the whole situation is rather strange as most people on this forum seem to be under the impression that housing is a market like any other and are quite happy for it to continue that way.
Furthermore, your haves and have nots arguement does not apply to all of those expecting a fall of some sort or another in the market as I personally am holding off yet could quite easily purchase a very decent property exactly where I want to live with a perfectly normal 2.5X salary multiple. I simply believe that the market is overvalued following an excessive boom period. To back up my figures, properties in Brighton, where i live, are currently going for, on average, 92% of the asking price where only 1 year ago most were being sold for more than the asking price.
I would also like to point out that your comparison of Mancheter to Chelsea makes, as I am sure you are aware, no sense whatsoever. Firstly wages are higher in london than manchester and secondly it is hardly fair to compare one area of a city to a whole city. No doubt there are some areas in Manchester that are much more pricey than others, furthermore, some parts of london are much less expensive.
And finally, you harp on about first time buyers once again well I do like a challenge... so from the council of mortgage lenders, the following quote:
"The number of loans for house purchase made in June totalled 125,000 compared with 111,000 the previous month. The proportion of these loans made to first-time buyers increased to 45% in June compared with 40% in May"
This refers to June this year. I appreciate that not all buyers need a mtg but I think that if you were to strip out 50000 or so buyers from the housing market then that is likely to result in a "correction". And before you start to claim I have "caught myself out" the figures are from 6 months ago. FTBs are decreasing, the market is going down, but hey, there's a nice studio flat round the corner from me, only £100k, you'd better snap it up quickly.
Oh and I'm not sure quite why you felt the need to drop in your favourite authors list, still I am partial to a few of those that you mention.
Anyway, keep up the good, if misguided work. At the very least you provide many people with a good laugh. |
|
Bob Robaloobol Alob Bam Boom
by Rob G
|
#1001557
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
07:22 PM |
Mr Roberts, If you're going to quote me supposedly contradicting myself:
Further I do like Rob G, he quips,
”This forum seems like it has become a little battle ground for 1 or 2 people to argue complex theory that in reality has little to do with what will happen and see who can add in the most pompous quote.”
And then follows this up with
”Look out of the window of your ivory towers gentleman”
“You'll never make this much money sitting on your fat, spotty @rse again in this lifetime.”
A beautiful piece of self-hatred, I’d hazard to suggest. He states parameters for pomposity and then fulfils them.
...Please try to use quotes that I've actually posted rather than from myself and someone else.
DUH |
|
Additional
by Bob Roberts
|
#1001556
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
07:03 PM |
Mortgagedtothehilt quips.
"Ten years ago you couldn't give houses away."
I feel, if this was the case i.e. free houses, there'd be no problem with takers! Well for a start Rob G and KIP! Amusing point though! |
|
"we'll be fine without you"
by Bob Roberts
|
#1001555
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
06:59 PM |
Hello all, I see how this forum becomes addictive. You place a point and get abused by “less informed” members of the proletariat. Mind you I must agree with KIPPER, or KIP, whoever he is today: -
“Find your comments very unsavoury, and distasteful. You are embarking on an argument that many others in the forum discuss. That is, FTB and the next generation (the have nots) are just jealous, and this underpins every argument they make.”
Jon also states,
“All this talk of fundamentals and competing theorists is all starting to look a little self serving.”
These points prove my case; yes it is true that’s what happens. It’s a disagreement between the “haves and the have nots”. Let me ask you KIP/Rob G do you own? No, they do not! With regard to the next generation? What does that mean, are you 5 year olds? 2 year olds? Embryo stage? Glint in the milkman’s eye? I fail to see our age difference as being that marked, the difference is purely between the entrepreneur and the wage earner.
”This may be true”
Says KIP, agreeing my point. But then confuses the issue with,
“(why shouldn't someone younger & behind the curve) want the same as people in the generation above them. Is that unfair? Should they not make a fuss & just bit their lips?”
Again with regard to age please confirm your view of what a generation involves?
But then confuses he real world with some form of sickly socialist manifesto. It’s not a free lunch dear boy, you “earn what you get and get what you earn”. Your suggestions prove my case. Your bitter rantings prove you are just jealous, infact
“All the new grads etc will leave ol blighty for sun & a better life.”
Is not a bad thing? The quality of degrees, below the first tier Universities, has reduced in quality. With nearly 50% going, or considering going, to University clearly the quality of the service cannot be maintained. Getting rid of the oikes that did “David Beckham studies” at Sunderland University is no bad thing. Mind you to give KIP, or KIPPER, his due Winston Churchill once lamented, I paraphrase.
“To be under 30 and not a liberal means you do not have heart, to be over 30 and not a conservative means you are a fool”
Further, I would hazard to suggest that the belief of a better life elsewhere, I also find amusing. But since I am an avid reader of Wyndham, Swift, Orwell, Huxley and Waugh this maybe understandable. I have heard this form of social commentary before. Still when you grow up, following Orwell’s line in “Animal Farm”, I’m sure when the animals looks from the men (me) to the pigs (KIP) they will see no difference.
We can see now the ranting, of KIP, move from some sort of generation question to :-
”This housing crisis is going to impact on society at large, and on the strength of the UK. A very sad state of affairs whether you're black, white, communist or what ever!”
What does this mean KIP? Socialist, sickly liberal diatribe suggesting that the Uk is moribund? Ridiculous, in its content and meaning nothing, but still maturity provides a better vision of the whole market. Are you suggesting some form of racist debate in my arguments? If you are we see who the true racist is. I am not afraid of this argument, I have nothing to hide. Your attempts are just those of a desparate drowning sickly liberal grasping any subject to save their own life. You’ll be blaming fox hunting for property values next!
”Now rational people like Rob G. & myself realise that the housing market ain’t the place to buy into at the moment. Well guess what guys it’s people like us out their that feed the market. If we don’t buy, & others don’t buy, the market has to fall to compensate for the lack of interest.”
Rob G, and yourself, are 2 peas from the same pod that is true. But I fail to see the impact one year’s graduation of a sociology degree course will impact the market. To quote myself, “Well be fine without you”. Secondly, I fail to see how “rational” people provide the quotes you 2 have provided, are you the same person?
”You don’t need an economics degree to understand that, & most joe’s on the street don’t have one. Think about the bigger picture eh & not just yourselves!”
This remark leaves me to reminisce over the “Yes minister” series. Jim Hacker states,
“The very fact ministers are not experts is vital. The very fact they know nothing is the key.”
“Although the theories are fine and I'm sure that you could all debate the relative points for an eternity, however, you are missing the point. Houses are worth what people will pay for them, it's only the seriously uninformed desperados who are still buying.”
Jon you confuse the issue, you cannot debate this point for eternity. Firstly life is finite, not infinite. Secondly, we will be see you are right over the next 12 months. To debate beyond that point will just prove the bull’s points, unless of course you are suggesting that inflation will not take a hold in the view of an infinite number of years.
” it's only the seriously uninformed desperados who are still buying. The Daily Mail, The Guardian, The Times, Independent and the FT (that I am aware of) are all telling their readers that there will be a crash If the all of the above is not true, please tell me why?”
This point can only be made by a “have not”; simply property is an investment that runs for the long term. Therefore there is no risk, to suggest that they are “uninformed desperados”, fails to take into account this fact. The sensationalist journalism of the rags you refer to is purely that. You don’t sell papers without headlines.
“A house is worth what people are prepared to pay for it.
You can come up with all the economic theory you want but if people begin to feel that the housing market is overvalued and that a drop might happen soon they will be reluctant to secure the biggest debt they will ever have on an asset that may be worth less in a few months/years.”
Ah our sickly liberal rain dancer that’s falls on and off the forum, laments again from a position of the “have nots”. A house is never available, and never has been, for what people are prepared to pay. That is why we have banks, mortgages, and building societies. No one voluntarily takes on a 25-year loan with relish, but medium to long-term inflation makes contribution minimal. To believe houses are only available for what people will pay is naive! Why? Simply because people instinctively want better than they can have, if houses were affordable people would move up market until they were unaffordable. It’s the point with “key workers”, we have nurses saying they cannot work and live in Chelsea. We never get the same complaints from Manchester. If we followed your theories Chelsea would have to be as affordable as Manchester. But then, of course, self interest would lead to a rush from one to the other and prices would rise again. Catch 22, even if prices fall at some stage they will be viewed as cheap. Then boom times again! Further your points would infer an excessive supply of housing, and thus people can “pick and choose” at prices they like. Of course this is not the case as we are in a short supply situation. This position will continue to get worse as building restrictions are coming into play, about green belt development. But, of course, you attempt to counter this with the following: -
”The supply and demand argument does not work in this case because, although everyone needs a place to live, most of them already have somewhere. If they didn't they would be homeless. I don't know of too many homeless people that are living on the street because they haven't yet managed to find a 2-bedroom maisonette that is close enough to their place of work and has a nice kitchen! The people who would buy will simply hold off until they feel the market is in a better situation. “
Clearly uninformed, what happens here, prices rise! Competition leads to housing prices, to disagree with this is naive. Look at this forum, we are all suffering from “winners curse”, we are all attempting to pay a high price in an effort to win. This is the same for the housing market, if people didn’t compete prices would not rise, but clearly you’d have to be in the housoing market to know that. This is where you, and KIP’s knowledge fails, you have no idea about reality and competition.
”Also, I have noticed that some people on this forum seem to look upon FTBs with some sort of disgust. I would say do so at your peril. If FTBs cannot afford to buy this is the biggest problem a market can face. Don't forget the majority of property transactions take place within a chain and the FTB is the one who starts this off. If they don't buy then the person in the 1 bedroom flat can't move to a 2 bedroom, the person selling the 2 bedroom can't get their terraced house, the person selling their terrace can't move to a semi etc etc etc. Maybe rather simplistic but the basis of the argument is correct.”
Not true, people move down as well as up the ladder, a society provides requirement for downsizing as well as upsizing, e.g. divorces.
With regard to FTB, this is an old chestnut used by the “have nots”, presumably as they maybe one someday. Of course these people only matter for the following reason, if FTB demand, less people leaving the market, exceeds house building quotas, for the year, prices will rise. Since building quotas are the lowest since 1927, the increase in FTB requirement has reduced, they are a tiny part of the market, and I’d suggest less than 1%. If you argue this point from the opposite direction please provide figures to prove this.
”FTBs are being priced out of the market and the sensible ones do not want to take on 7X salary multiple mortgages or 110% mortgages. It’s a huge amount of debt in return for not very much, in many ways, similar to a university education. High salary multiples and 100% + mortgages are taken out by the desperate and the desperate rarely think clearly.”
This does not apply to the whole country; qualify your argument dear boy.
Further I do like Rob G, he quips,
”This forum seems like it has become a little battle ground for 1 or 2 people to argue complex theory that in reality has little to do with what will happen and see who can add in the most pompous quote.”
And then follows this up with
”Look out of the window of your ivory towers gentleman”
“You'll never make this much money sitting on your fat, spotty @rse again in this lifetime.”
A beautiful piece of self-hatred, I’d hazard to suggest. He states parameters for pomposity and then fulfils them.
“I'm gratified to see that the forum is slowly but surely swinging in the direction of my predictions and away from the likes of Mr X and Hoogs.”
This may be the case in the forum, but we have had 4 months of rises since you and your sickly liberal chums have questioned the more “informed” among us. This doesn’t prove your point so you roll onto :-
”Unfortunately, there is a fixed pool of money, so jam today means no jam tomorrow - as he'll discover when consumer spending drops to zero very soon.
Oh, did I forget to mention the 1% NI rise next year?
MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!”
Look at the OECD disposable income figures, they prove you are wrong. But never let facts prove you are wrong, keep going Rob you amuse us. Look at new entrants in the mortgage market, Man Utd will beoffering them soon, if they don’t already.
“I was referring to 'property investment sheep' in my response below, i.e. anyone who is in a position to sell for cash and take a profit.”
Here we see the crux of my point. Again this is jealousy of the “have nots” for the “haves”. Finally we see it in this point.
Again, in summary, all I have seen in the last 24 hours, from Rob G and KIP, proves my point. This forum is clearly just a disagreement between the haves and the have nots. It’s funny how society is governed by money, or some people’s lack of it. 10% plus next year and I have not seen anything to prove this is not the case, the greed and jealousy shown by the have nots, illustrates to me they’ll buy in the end just to be on the bandwagon! |
|
The UK housing market: a bubble about to burst?
by Mortgaged2theHilt
|
#1001554
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
06:13 PM |
All investments are cyclical. Just because you live in this one doesn't mean it's not an investment.
Interest rates rise and fall, the ratio of wage multiple to house price does so too. Indeed supply and demand does as well. Beginning to see the pattern? The Golden rule is if you are ahead......Quit! Ten years ago you couldn't give houses away. Remember stamp duty being suspended? When you start out on the property ladder, if you can, buy two small properties instead of one larger one. Make the second a lifelong interest, a second income and eventually a pension that you can take when you want to.
Merry Christmas |
|
To Jeff
by Rob G
|
#1001553
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
04:57 PM |
Jeff,
I was referring to 'property investment sheep' in my response below, i.e. anyone who is in a position to sell for cash and take a profit.
People living in their house obviously can't do so unless they down-size or move out to rent, although there are some brave souls doing this at the moment for whom I have a deal of respect.
Anyone investing for a capital gain return would do well to sell now. Of course the greedy ones who believe their own hype will leave it too long and lose out... |
|
non-silly and silly remarks
by jeff morgan
|
#1001552
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
03:20 PM |
Rob G #1537 makes a good point because people taking out loans against their equity are increasing their risk at the wrong time. The lenders are also in my opinion making a mistake - though it will probably be the borrowers who take the most risk!
Then in posting #1551, Rob writes '...You'll never make this much money sitting on your fat, spotty arse again in this lifetime.'.
But that's silly, because we don't know how many houseowners care about the prices of their property. Judging by the proportion of houses sold in any one year, location is the goal and price is the hygiene factor. In this case people would have a different view of risk; I know friends who have looked around this year but have not moved because they could not find the house they want in a good location. Gaining money did not come into the decision.
I believe the economic arguments should be explored because I believe there is a sensible causal link between unemployment, ability to service a loan, and house prices. I don't see such a strong connection between people's atitudes to house values and their decision to sell. Just re-writing the statement doesn't make an argument.
I don't see an attempt to define the size of the problem either. How many (or what percentage) of houseowners care about the price of their house, beyond having a general 'warm but not wet' (or indeed 'wet but not warm') feeling about it?
[And to quote 'the public' I would expect to see a properly designed survey with a question designed to evaluate an opinion. I know that carrying out a proper survey is a rare event today but it is still the only genuine means to have confidence in the result.] |
|
A Consensus Of Opinion
by Rob G
|
#1001551
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
02:06 PM |
I'm gratified to see that the forum is slowly but surely swinging in the direction of my predictions and away from the likes of Mr X and Hoogs.
I think we can all now see that in a market dominated by the economically naiive, pure economic factors just don't hold sway.
The housing market is ruled by Joe Public and his mates talking amongst themselves and deciding (with a lot of help from the popular press) what they think is going to happen next in black-and-white terms.
Do you honestly think for one minute that even if the BoE was to drop interest rates by 0.5% in an attempt to stem the inevitable crash, that it would make a blind bit of difference when the public have become convinced that the £100,000 house they're about to buy may well be worth £70,000 in 3 years time?
Somehow I doubt it.
No, there will be no soft landing. Prices will fall like a stone and lose 40% of their value in the next 2-3 years.
In 2 years time, when we're in the middle of a (largely self-inflicted) consumer-lead recession and prices are still dropping because nobody will dare enter the market to buy, you'll all be wondering whether the housing market will reach its current level again within 10 years.
The end is nigh. Sell while you can. If you make the classic mistake of waiting until the rest of the proerty investment sheep begin to sell it'll already be too late.
You'll never make this much money sitting on your fat, spotty @rse again in this lifetime.
Gordon has had a pretty good run, keeping the market stoked with gay abandon to rake in all that tax from property transactions. Effectively fleecing the despised middle classes.
Unfortunately, there is a fixed pool of money, so jam today means no jam tomorrow - as he'll discover when consumer spending drops to zero very soon.
Oh, did I forget to mention the 1% NI rise next year?
MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! |
|
Scale of economy
by Lone Ranger
|
#1001550
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
12:32 PM |
Hoogie,
A link here to a site arguing your point on US with some of the data you are seeking.
US data
Interesting to hear what you think. |
|
Could there be property collapse – if the US economy implodes?
by Hoogstraten
|
#1001549
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
12:11 PM |
In the past, I have argued that there will be no property collapse in the UK, because of the strong economic fundamentals in the UK. One of the most important economic fundamentals is the disparity between the rate of interest and the natural rate of interest (as a result of BOE intervention) – I believe that in the UK the disparity is not too large. In this way, I have concentrated on the UK economy, and decided that prices should be stable.
After reading David Ricardo’s theories again, the question that has arisen in my mind is whether this is the case in the US? The Fed seems to have forced interest rates well below the natural interest rate, in a bizarre Keynesian frenzy.
Does anyone have any analysis as to what level interest rates would be in the US, if the Fed were not effectively forcing interest rates down? What is the magnitude of extra bank credit expansion propelled by the intervention of government and its central bank? |
|
Yawn
by Rik
|
#1001548
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
11:57 AM |
To echo what a couple of people have said recently...
A house is worth what people are prepared to pay for it.
You can come up with all the economic theory you want but if people begin to feel that the housing market is overvalued and that a drop might happen soon they will be reluctant to secure the biggest debt they will ever have on an asset that may be worth less in a few months/years.
The supply and demand arguement does not work in this case because, although everyone needs a place to live, most of them already have somewhere. If they didn't they would be homeless. I don't know of too many homeless people that are living on the street because they haven't yet managed to find a 2 bedroom maisonette that is close enough to their place of work and has a nice kitchen! The people who would buy will simply hold off until they feel the market is in a better situation. They are obviously living somewhere already, I don't doubt they can stay there for a bit longer if it means they save a few thousand pounds.
Also, I have noticed that some people on this forum seem to look upon FTBs with some sort of disgust. I would say do so at your peril. If FTBs cannot afford to buy this is the biggest problem a market can face. Don't forget the majority of property transactions take place within a chain and the FTB is the one who starts this off. If they don't buy then the person in the 1 bedroom flat can't move to a 2 bedroom, the person selling the 2 bedroom can't get their terraced house, the person selling their terrace can't move to a semi etc etc etc. Maybe rather simplistic but the basis of the arguement is correct.
FTBs are being priced out of the market and the sensible ones do not want to take on 7X salary multiple mortgages or 110% mortgages.Its a huge amount of debt in return for not very much, in many ways, similar to a university education. High salary multiples and 100% + mortgages are taken out by the desperate and the depserate rarely think clearly.
The trigger, for those of you looking for one, could very easily be public opinion. As has previously been mentioned, many popular papers are ;predicting a crash. I don't know if you have ever spoken to a daily mail reader but most of them treat it like gospel. How long before Mr and Mrs middle England amateur landlords think... hmmmm maybe now is a good time to sell that flat we have been renting out, for a nice profit. What about the young Sun reader who was about to buy his first flat that he can just about afford who may now think, maybe I'll wait for a bit. It doesn't take a genius to work out what will happen if papers keep screaming about "the housing crash".
This forum seems like it has become a little battle ground for 1 or 2 people to argue complex theory that in reality has little to do with what will happen and see who can add in the most pompous quote.
Look out of the window of your ivory towers gentleman and see what the real world is up to. |
|
Buck the trend...............
by Shareholder
|
#1001547
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
11:17 AM |
When everyone is buying then sell and when everyone is selling then buy!!!!!!!
Jon is correct in his implication that there is a move afoot to talk us into a property price spiral decline.
Then it is Christmas and the season of goodwill.
So we are preparing for war!!
We all know what happens to property prices in war time!
Buy for now?? |
|
House price publicity
by Jon
|
#1001546
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
11:04 AM |
All this talk of fundamentals and competing theorists is all starting to look a little self serving.
I've read various people arguing against a crash by saying there is no trigger, stating that you need something like high unemployment or inflation to kick it all off. Although the theories are fine and I'm sure that you could all debate the relative points for an eternity, however, you are missing the point. Houses are worth what people will pay for them, it's only the seriously uninformed desperados who are still buying. The Daily Mail, The Guardian, The Times, Independent and the FT (that I am aware of) are all telling their readers that there will be a crash, so the feedback loop begins. The loop is a dynamic social type thing, where real people talk to each other and sometimes irrational opinions get adopted by the masses.
If the all of the above is not true, please tell me why?
JON |
|
The haves and the have nots - that's pathetic!
by Knowledge is Power
|
#1001545
of 3278
17 Dec 2002
10:52 AM |
Mr Roberts,
I find your comments very unsavoury, and distasteful. You are embarking on an argument that many others in the forum discuss. That is, FTB and the next generation (the have nots) are just jealous, and this underpins every argument they make.
This may be true is a few cases (why shouldn't someone younger & behind the curve) want the same as people in the generation above them. Is that unfair? Should they not make a fuss & just bit their lips? Yeah right like that's gonna happen.
Mr Roberts, if and that's the biggest small word ever used, the housing market remains unrealistically high what will happen. Well my dear boy I'll tell you. All the new grads etc will leave ol blighty for sun & a better life.
This housing crisis is going to impact on society at large, and on the strength of the UK. A very sad state of affairs whether you're black, white, communist or what ever!
The fact remains, house prices are at an historic high at a time when there is a global slowdown/recession & a nations economy that is weakening by the day. This is indisputable. That’s how it is.
Now rational people like Rob G. & myself realise that the housing market ain’t the place to buy into at the moment. Well guess what guys it’s people like us out their that feed the market. If we don’t buy, & others don’t buy, the market has to fall to compensate for the lack of interest.
You don’t need an economics degree to understand that, & most joe’s on the street don’t have one. Think about the bigger picture eh & not just yourselves!
To shift the blame onto the potential new generation of FTB is fanciful! It was the last 5 years of greed that got us here and who’s to blame for that?
Grow up guys & target your blame & accusations on the government.
I can’t be bothered with this forum anymore, it’s a joke. Get into the real world whilst you still can guys…
KIP |
|
|
