Originally posted by Doggy Styles
View Post

If you hadn't bought the first house, you'd have to start with paying a lot more for the second now inflated house. So you are £100K better off than somebody who didn't buy, because they would have had to pay £200K whereas you'd only ever paid £100K and got another £100K for free.
I think what xog says is that to move from one house to an identical house somewhere else, it would cost you roughly 25% on the national rise in house prices, which is about threefold over the past 15 years.
An average 70,000 house in 1999 is worth 180,000 today, so for the poor sod who wants to move to work in another city it will cost £28,000 extra.
So the longer you've lived in a house, the worse off you'll be. I don't see how that is equitable at all.
An average 70,000 house in 1999 is worth 180,000 today, so for the poor sod who wants to move to work in another city it will cost £28,000 extra.
So the longer you've lived in a house, the worse off you'll be. I don't see how that is equitable at all.


Leave a comment: