• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
That would require living in Sunderland though.

And working in Sunderland.

At which point, could one afford to live in Sunderland?
Click to expand...
Depends on how far one is willing to commute I suppose.

I know I could earn a lot more money in London if I didn't mind leaving the house at 5am and getting home at 8pm. As with everything it's a choice - I choose to earn a lot less and have a family life that is good for me and good for my family (although my wife would probably prefer it some days!) I quite like London but living there would mean giving up a lot of house size and a lot of garden space (probably parking too). The lifestyle changes required to live there outweigh any benefit in my eyes.
 
Last edited:
Point being, its just not that simple, is it?

My family is near by, my friends, my work - yet I cant afford to live here.

The irony being, I pay more in rent that I would in mortgage anyway.

I think house prices should be relative to the cost of living/earning potential in any given area. Problem I have is Im outer London, so prices are driven up.
 
We need more homes and options for people. But that’s a separate issue to Brexit causing the housing market to slump or in the future decline. Our economy and culture is tied to home ownership. If house prices fall it’s a sure sign our economy is not as strong as it was.

Having people trapped in homes they can’t sell paying off mortgages that are worth more than their home is political suicide.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
SpurMeUp said:
We need more homes and options for people. But that’s a separate issue to Brexit causing the housing market to slump or in the future decline. Our economy and culture is tied to home ownership. If house prices fall it’s a sure sign our economy is not as strong as it was.

Having people trapped in homes they can’t sell paying off mortgages that are worth more than their home is poetic justice.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...

Made my own little tweak to that.
 
Gutter Boy said:
Doesn't matter if they don't sell it. They just have to see out the rest of the repayments on the 8x salary basis they signed up to.

It won't happen dramatically anyway. Only a major population drop (might happen slowly after Brexit, but it would need to be plague/famine proportions to have a dramatic affect) or an enormous housebuilding programme (the former should negate this) would cause a sudden and permanent fall.
Click to expand...

The normalisation of interest rates should in theory also exert such an effect - one reason why rises will strictly be kept to a minimum IMO.
 
scaramanga said:
House prices should be what supply and demand deem them to be. Lots of people want houses, not many are available - therefore houses cost a lot.

There's no housing affordability problem, there's a lack of readiness to move problem. Pretty much anyone can afford a house in Sunderland - if owning a house means that much then people would move. I want to own a Ferrari GTC4Lusso - the lifestyle choices I'd have to make in order to do so mean I have to choose something else. Many people want to own houses but choose to live in London or the South East instead.
Click to expand...
That's a false comparison and you are smart enough to know it.
People want to own a secure family home with the freedom to treat it as such.
Treating standard housing as a luxury or investment is the post Thatcher British disease.
People better watch those investments, because in 15 years when those home owners need help to take a tinkle, you might just find a generation that says "why should I care...?"
 
monkeybarry said:
Made my own little tweak to that.
Click to expand...

I personally have no issues with people owning their own home. Buy to let millionaires...couldn't agree more (and I'm not blaming them they are just making money - without doing anything). One silver lining of Brexit would be seeing property portfolios half in value. But to middle class voters seeing the value of their house whimper would not be taken well.
 
monkeybarry said:
That's a false comparison and you are smart enough to know it.
People want to own a secure family home with the freedom to treat it as such.
Treating standard housing as a luxury or investment is the post Thatcher British disease.
People better watch those investments, because in 15 years when those home owners need help to take a tinkle, you might just find a generation that says "why should I care...?"
Click to expand...
Home ownership is only a necessity when there's no alternative. Home ownership is rare in plenty of other countries that do just fine.

Everyone has the right to a roof over their heads - that's not the same as a right to home ownership.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
Home ownership is only a necessity when there's no alternative. Home ownership is rare in plenty of other countries that do just fine.

Everyone has the right to a roof over their heads - that's not the same as a right to home ownership.
Click to expand...

That is what does happen in Britain.
What shoish happen is a secure roof over your head that are you able to treat like a home. That does not happen in the Britain rental market
 
My big issue with the housing crisis is as follows

Councils and the government are required to provide affordable housing. Therefore property developers are required to incorporate affordable housing in their planning applications, however the % or ratio of these properties is nearly always ridiculously low.
The property developers then exploit legal loopholes to further reduce the proportion of affordable properties, in some cases down to 0% on the grounds that the development would be unaffordable (gonads). This is all approved by councillors who are no doubt coining it in on bribes. Yet another instance of the public being screwed over by supposed public servants who are either corrupt or incompetent!!!
 
Parklaner81 said:
An alternative explanation is that the market is finally waking up to the fact that interest rates are not going to stay where they currently are forever, and that the widely-signalled rate increases will exert (some would say much needed and/or long overdue) downward pressure on prices if and when they occur.
Click to expand...

Interest rate rises will make homes just as unaffordable if not more so.

I'm a remainer but the drop in some parts of London is probably due to Osbourne's tax changes to buy to let. Which has meant that buy to let is not really economically viable in the capital. But still is up north.... where you have seen the rises in property
 
Also people who were (over) exposed to property are cashing in in case Brexit hits home. Don’t want all your eggs in one basket.

But there is still more demand than supply which keeps it all inflated.

Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
DTA said:
Interest rate rises will make homes just as unaffordable if not more so.
Click to expand...

Interest rate rises will of course make mortgage payments more unaffordable, but the general rule of thumb in terms of asset prices is that they fall in response to rising interest rates.
 
So, talking of politics, which would we prefer: an enforced summer of rest for Harry, Dele and Eric while we sit out the World Cup, or the state seizure of Chelsea FC and its immediate sale to a non-Russian opportunist?
 
StephenH said:
Pull out of the World Cup.
Torres return all Russian donation AND apologies to the British people!
Strip all U.K. held assets from Russia oligarchs.
Click to expand...


Just the ones who are close to Putin, perhaps. But that would certainly include Abramovich. And Torres may not have played at Chelsea for a while but yeah, why not, force him to apologise.
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
Just the ones who are close to Putin, perhaps. But that would certainly include Abramovich. And Torres may not have played at Chelsea for a while but yeah, why not, force him to apologise.
Click to expand...

Torries!!!
Bloody spell thingy on the iPad is a total pain.
Mind he should apologise :D
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
So, talking of politics, which would we prefer: an enforced summer of rest for Harry, Dele and Eric while we sit out the World Cup, or the state seizure of Chelsea FC and its immediate sale to a non-Russian opportunist?
Click to expand...

The latter, but we must also force the dildo brothers to sell West Ham so that we can flog them Chelsea for a pound -- all Chelsea's debt to Abramovich now owed to The Treasury.

As for donations to political parties, imo the rules should all be changed for everybody. Get the money out of politics. Donations by individuals only and limit that to a very small amount per year. Limit the size of membership fees too, if they aren't already (as no doubt you'd get the Tories offering a membership for 50 grand if you limited their donations). No individual or entity should be able to buy our democracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back