3 ms·

young buyers get priced out It's good that younger people can't easily buy property. They have a substantially higher risk of financial irresponsibility. As dw

by mafribe 10y ago

young buyers get priced out It's good that younger people can't easily buy property. They have a substantially higher risk of financial irresponsibility. As dwellings are pretty much the biggest financial investment we make in our lifetimes, care is warrented. Dwellings should be purchased only by those who are very likely to be able to afford this -- even in the event of unplanned and costly life events like illness, children, the dwelling needing costly and unexpected repair etc. That's why stable job with good career prospects, married with children, being able to afford substantial deposit, being older, are good heuristics for who should by property. Giving a mortgage to everyone encourages financial rectlessness, which lead to the financial crisis of 2007–2008.

Nursie 10y ago
>> It's good that younger people can't easily buy property. No, it's not, and it's not even to the owner-occupier's benefit that the market inflates so much. >> Dwellings should be purchased only by those who are very likely to be able to afford this Young people can afford this, who the hell do you think is paying the buy-to-let mortgage crowd's mortgage? The fecking fairies? >> That's why stable job with good career prospects, married with children, being able to afford substantial deposit, being older, are good heuristics for who should by property. They're good heuristics for who should already have property, and already have a substantial sum paid down. Something unachievable if people cannot get started in their 20s. >> Giving a mortgage to everyone encourages financial rectlessness, which lead to the financial crisis of 2007–2008. I'm not advocating giving a mortgage to everyone, I'm advocating giving out fewer mortgages to those who wish to buy more homes - they're effectively leveraging cheap mortgages to get someone else to buy them a huge asset, and at the same time making that asset further out of reach for the person who is really paying for it.
- mafribe 10y ago
  who the hell do you think is paying Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing a long-term investment like a dwelling. should already have property Why? What's wrong with renting? As I said in a previous post, Chancellor Merkel in Germany rents. I'm advocating giving out fewer mortgages I'm advocating building enough dwellings, not doctoring with symptoms like restriction on mortgages, rent control, draconian building codes, zoning laws and the like. I find it supremely baffling that the obvious solution seems to be deeply unpopular.
  - Nursie 10y ago
    >> Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing a long-term investment like a dwelling This is less frequently the case in the UK, as the inflated market keeps people renting for longer. >> Why? What's wrong with renting? A lot, if that's not where you want to be, and have seen the market mutate in the space of a few years from somewhere that was inclusive for most people earning a decent wage, to something reserved for few, or those who already have property. >> I'm advocating building enough dwellings, Good luck with that. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" when easing up on certain mortgage categories has been a major cause. I haven't mentioned those other methods, I have no opinion on them.
    - mafribe 10y ago
      keeps people renting for longer. That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. A lot, This has nothing to do with renting vs owning, or even with second mortgages, but is primarily because supply of dwellings did not keep up with demand. The UK, especially the greater London area, has seen a lot of immigration, and on top of that there is the ongoing reduction in family size. So more and more dwellings are needed, but supply has not kept up. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings.
      - Nursie 10y ago
        >> That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. So what? People who don't want to move a lot find they must keep paying someone else's mortgage as they can't get their own. >> Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings. If buying up housing is made, by whatever means, financially less attractive to those who already own homes then of course this tackles demand for purchases and allows more people who are forced into renting the ability to buy their own home.
        mafribe 10y ago
djmobley 10y ago
> Dwellings should be purchased only by those who are very likely to be able to afford this -- even in the event of unplanned and costly life events like illness, children, the dwelling needing costly and unexpected repair etc. Highly leveraged buy-to-let empires are, on the other hand, the paragon of financial sensibility? Much as private landlords are famed for keeping their properties in good repair?
- mafribe 10y ago
  Highly leveraged buy-to-let empires No, au contraire, house-acquisition should always come with a substantial deposit.

by mafribe 10y ago

Nursie 10y ago

>> It's good that younger people can't easily buy property. No, it's not, and it's not even to the owner-occupier's benefit that the market inflates so much. >> Dwellings should be purchased only by those who are very likely to be able to afford this Young people can afford this, who the hell do you think is paying the buy-to-let mortgage crowd's mortgage? The fecking fairies? >> That's why stable job with good career prospects, married with children, being able to afford substantial deposit, being older, are good heuristics for who should by property. They're good heuristics for who should already have property, and already have a substantial sum paid down. Something unachievable if people cannot get started in their 20s. >> Giving a mortgage to everyone encourages financial rectlessness, which lead to the financial crisis of 2007–2008. I'm not advocating giving a mortgage to everyone, I'm advocating giving out fewer mortgages to those who wish to buy more homes - they're effectively leveraging cheap mortgages to get someone else to buy them a huge asset, and at the same time making that asset further out of reach for the person who is really paying for it.

mafribe 10y ago
who the hell do you think is paying Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing a long-term investment like a dwelling. should already have property Why? What's wrong with renting? As I said in a previous post, Chancellor Merkel in Germany rents. I'm advocating giving out fewer mortgages I'm advocating building enough dwellings, not doctoring with symptoms like restriction on mortgages, rent control, draconian building codes, zoning laws and the like. I find it supremely baffling that the obvious solution seems to be deeply unpopular.
- Nursie 10y ago
  >> Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing a long-term investment like a dwelling This is less frequently the case in the UK, as the inflated market keeps people renting for longer. >> Why? What's wrong with renting? A lot, if that's not where you want to be, and have seen the market mutate in the space of a few years from somewhere that was inclusive for most people earning a decent wage, to something reserved for few, or those who already have property. >> I'm advocating building enough dwellings, Good luck with that. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" when easing up on certain mortgage categories has been a major cause. I haven't mentioned those other methods, I have no opinion on them.
  - mafribe 10y ago
    keeps people renting for longer. That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. A lot, This has nothing to do with renting vs owning, or even with second mortgages, but is primarily because supply of dwellings did not keep up with demand. The UK, especially the greater London area, has seen a lot of immigration, and on top of that there is the ongoing reduction in family size. So more and more dwellings are needed, but supply has not kept up. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings.
    - Nursie 10y ago
      >> That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. So what? People who don't want to move a lot find they must keep paying someone else's mortgage as they can't get their own. >> Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings. If buying up housing is made, by whatever means, financially less attractive to those who already own homes then of course this tackles demand for purchases and allows more people who are forced into renting the ability to buy their own home.
      - mafribe 10y ago

djmobley 10y ago

> Dwellings should be purchased only by those who are very likely to be able to afford this -- even in the event of unplanned and costly life events like illness, children, the dwelling needing costly and unexpected repair etc. Highly leveraged buy-to-let empires are, on the other hand, the paragon of financial sensibility? Much as private landlords are famed for keeping their properties in good repair?

mafribe 10y ago
Highly leveraged buy-to-let empires No, au contraire, house-acquisition should always come with a substantial deposit.