There is no crisis. Buying your own home is a luxury, not a right

[BrilloPad]

Brillo that points bollocks mate and goes against the principals of capitalism. Do you not think investing in stocks and bonds which are raping 'emerging markets' are more morally wrong than BTL??

I just agree with maggie - everyone should aspire to owning a house.

Nothing wrong with raping emerging markets or btl - whatever atw says - I just don't like people jumping on the btl bandwagon bubble - putting down 10k (probabl;y borrowed on a credit card) then thinking their pension sorted.

Maggie said we should all be rewarded for hard work - I agree.

Still I think soon chickens coming home to roost.

[BrilloPad]

If houses can only be owned by the people who live in them, where are the people that can't afford/don't want to buy supposed to live?

Alternatively, why is it ok for corporates to own and profit from renting out houses but not OK for individuals to do the same?

tim

I see no difference between corperations/individuals - I believe one third of btls owned by companies with over 100 houses?

Take your point some people want to rent - that is what Diver is there for!

[bogeyman]

btl is morally wrong

Oh, really?

Any other types of investment that you'd also like banned, while you're at it?

Why is property investment 'morally wrong' exactly.

Are you some sort of Maoist?

[Sockpuppet]

Well I'm firmly looking at rentals now.

Looking at the houses I can get a £550pcm rent on a house worth (the one next to it is selling) £175,000.

Now an 7% mortgage on say £150,000 is £850 interest only.

Is someone wants to try and make £550 finance £850 worth of debt then be my guest. Even if they own it outright I can't see how not having the £175k in a bank account can pay more than just getting interest on it.

Plus the amount of people willing to let me agree to a 6 month term is quite high. I'd say they were fairly desperate.


On of my mates (bless her) came out with a good quote the other day. She said "It must be so easy to buy a house at the moment, compared to when we (her and her husband) were doing it. You'd view a house and it'd be sold by the time you phoned the agent the next day".

Yes, but houses were half the price that they are now. Also the next time I hear someone mention 15% interest rates I may smack them. 15% of £7k is a lot less than 7% of £175k even accounting for inflation.

[tim123]

Take your point some people want to rent - that is what Diver is there for!

??????

tim

[Cyberman]

Well I'm firmly looking at rentals now.

Looking at the houses I can get a £550pcm rent on a house worth (the one next to it is selling) £175,000.

Now an 7% mortgage on say £150,000 is £850 interest only.

Is someone wants to try and make £550 finance £850 worth of debt then be my guest. Even if they own it outright I can't see how not having the £175k in a bank account can pay more than just getting interest on it.

Plus the amount of people willing to let me agree to a 6 month term is quite high. I'd say they were fairly desperate.


On of my mates (bless her) came out with a good quote the other day. She said "It must be so easy to buy a house at the moment, compared to when we (her and her husband) were doing it. You'd view a house and it'd be sold by the time you phoned the agent the next day".

Yes, but houses were half the price that they are now. Also the next time I hear someone mention 15% interest rates I may smack them. 15% of £7k is a lot less than 7% of £175k even accounting for inflation.

It obviously makes sense to rent now, when the market is falling. It just does not make sense to rent all of the time. When house values are rising it makes sense to buy because your investment is then increasing in value, and eventually you will have paid off the mortgage and not have to pay any rent at all.
Rental payments are dead money and while a mortgagee has paid his mortgage and owns an extremely valuable house probably by 55 years of age the renter continues paying until they die.... perhaps for another 30 years or more!! That is a real worry if you have only an average depreciating pension to live on as inflation bites and rents rise.

I agree totally with your point on rather paying 15% interest of the smaller capital sum that 7% on the much larger sum. New Lie have always pulled the wool over the eyes of their less intelligent followers!!

[HRH]

[QUOTE=BrilloPad;516642]I just agree with maggie - everyone should aspire to owning a house.

Nothing wrong with raping emerging markets or btl - whatever atw says - I just don't like people jumping on the btl bandwagon bubble - putting down 10k (probabl;y borrowed on a credit card) then thinking their pension sorted.

Maggie said we should all be rewarded for hard work - I agree.

Still I think soon chickens coming home to roost.[/QUOTE


No but is gambling on the stock exchange hard work? No. Thatcher was a capitalist and her policies were all about empowering people to better thamselves. If a contractor has worked hard and chooses to invest his money in BTL good luck to him if it works out. I certainly won't be sat back laughing at the ones who get in the financial hole.

[Bagpuss]

Thatcher was a capitalist and her policies were all about empowering people to better thamselves.

Really? a real working class hero!

[tim123]

It obviously makes sense to rent now, when the market is falling. It just does not make sense to rent all of the time.

Agreed

When house values are rising it makes sense to buy because your investment is then increasing in value,

Disagree. You are assuming that just because prices are rising today that they will rise tomorrow. This is not always the case. Deciding to buy because house prices are rising is not the correct strategy, you could be buying at the top of the cycle.

and eventually you will have paid off the mortgage and not have to pay any rent at all.
Rental payments are dead money and while a mortgagee has paid his mortgage and owns an extremely valuable house probably by 55 years of age the renter continues paying until they die....

This assumes that the renter and the buyer pay the same amount of costs for their house. If renting costs less than buying then the renter has spare money that they can invest which after 30 years of investment may put them in a better position than the buyer.

Nope. The criteria that you should use to decide whether to buy or rent is which costs you the least overall. Mortgage interest is dead money if the house that you buy doesn't appreciate by as much as you could have made by inveting the money elsewhere.

Assuming that house prices go on rising forever has been proven not to work, why do people persist in using it as the basis for buying.

tim

[VectraMan]

It obviously makes sense to rent now, when the market is falling. It just does not make sense to rent all of the time. When house values are rising it makes sense to buy because your investment is then increasing in value, and eventually you will have paid off the mortgage and not have to pay any rent at all.
Rental payments are dead money and while a mortgagee has paid his mortgage and owns an extremely valuable house probably by 55 years of age the renter continues paying until they die.... perhaps for another 30 years or more!! That is a real worry if you have only an average depreciating pension to live on as inflation bites and rents rise.

It's amazing how many people really believe that. Mortgage interest is dead money, and certainly at the moment mortgage interest is far more dead money than renting. The homeowner can pay a mortgage for 25 years and they own a house yes, but then a renter can save for 25 years and pay for a house with cash - so no advantage either way. However whilst the renter can choose different forms of investment to make the money grow, the homeowner is stuck with only one.