Jump to content
G0ldfinger

UK House prices: News & Views

Recommended Posts

In a fair world those guys would have been bankrupted and their 750 houses (or however many it is) be distributed out to normal people at cheap prices. Instead they are now essentially lords of the manor.

 

An article here on increasing credit, the 95% mortgage is back again.

 

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16167615

 

From the article,

 

"Low-deposit mortgage deals are back on offer for first-time buyers after the financial crisis left many struggling to get on the property ladder.

But there is concern that a surge in 95% loans could lead to lending spiralling out of control as it did before the crash."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a fair world those guys would have been bankrupted and their 750 houses (or however many it is) be distributed out to normal people at cheap prices. Instead they are now essentially lords of the manor.

 

Yep, and the banks too.

 

Then again, in a truly fair world, we in the UK (& West) would all be very very much poorer, as our "wealth" was spread around the whole world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Low-deposit mortgage deals are back on offer for first-time buyers after the financial crisis left many struggling to get on the property ladder.

But there is concern that a surge in 95% loans could lead to lending spiralling out of control as it did before the crash."

 

This puzzles me - in the madness, money to lend was unlimited because (according to my high level take on it) banks effectively lent the same money over and over again by way of parcelling up debt into CDOs and MBSs (etc.) and using the packages as security for more loans between each other - and more lending to 'us' - the tossers.

 

Now the madness is over, where is the money to lend coming from? Surely a lot of cash in the banks has been spent on housing - savings rates are laughable - where are the banks getting the money from to lend 95% mortgages and for lending to spiral out of control as it did before the crash. Surely, now, the money lent is real - not 'made up'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hmm.

Is that really such a bad thing? Delaying starting families?

 

Well, on the one hand it would appear we have a spike in birth rate at the moment. Read that recently - saw something on the box about shortage of midwives and primary school places. So, despite FTBs being nearly 40 and putting off families etc. - it seems there are plenty of other people just having kids.

 

Is it a bad thing to delay a family? Yes, it's a terrible thing. The young pay the pensions and health care costs of the old (this has how it has always been - even in primitive societies - so no need to get upset about that) and we have an ageing population that is going to put a greater burden than usual on the younger generations. If we were to have a diminishing population, that would make things even worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it a bad thing to delay a family? Yes, it's a terrible thing. The young pay the pensions and health care costs of the old (this has how it has always been - even in primitive societies - so no need to get upset about that) and we have an ageing population that is going to put a greater burden than usual on the younger generations. If we were to have a diminishing population, that would make things even worse.

Yeah,

But population growth (along with debt growth and economic growth) may be just another Ponzi scheme that is headed to a crack-up.

 

Why do I say that?

Because the world is running out of resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah,

But population growth (along with debt growth and economic growth) may be just another Ponzi scheme that is headed to a crack-up.

 

Why do I say that?

Because the world is running out of resources.

 

I don't believe that. Who's to say that the planet cannot support 7bn, or 10bn, or 20bn, or more?

Better energy efficiency can sustain higher populations without consuming more resources.

 

As for issues of land, Milton Friedman pointed out that given the trend of population migration rural to urban, most land outside of our cities now has a lower human density than it did 100 years ago, despite higher overall population. We are concerned about the environment because we have reached a level of development where we can afford to be concerned.

 

I like Friedman in general; he has great wisdom and grativas when speaking about free market economics (even if he supports fiat money).

 

See my thread on global warming for human perceptions on problem that may not even exist in reality: http://www.greenener...showtopic=15931

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe that. Who's to say that the planet cannot support 7bn, or 10bn, or 20bn, or more?

Better energy efficiency can sustain higher populations without consuming more resources.

Are you not familiar with the Peak Oil argument?

 

There's also: Peak Copper, Peak Food, Peak Resources, Peak Everything

 

I think the best evidence in favor of Peak Oil, is the progressive impoverishment of the USA, with its suburban living arrangement, and resultant expensive addiction to imported oil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you not familiar with the Peak Oil argument?

 

There's also: Peak Copper, Peak Food, Peak Resources, Peak Everything

 

I think the best evidence in favor of Peak Oil, is the progressive impoverishment of the USA, with its suburban living arrangement, and resultant expensive addiction to imported oil

 

I don't think the lack of jobs is for want of cheaper gasoline. Some cars now do what, 6 times more mpg than they did during the 70s? The impoverishment of the US is a result of the US Dollar reserve system, socialism, militarism and international wage arbitrage. The suburbs are just a pleasant living arrangement that you seem to really hate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This puzzles me - in the madness, money to lend was unlimited because (according to my high level take on it) banks effectively lent the same money over and over again by way of parcelling up debt into CDOs and MBSs (etc.) and using the packages as security for more loans between each other - and more lending to 'us' - the tossers.

 

Now the madness is over, where is the money to lend coming from? Surely a lot of cash in the banks has been spent on housing - savings rates are laughable - where are the banks getting the money from to lend 95% mortgages and for lending to spiral out of control as it did before the crash. Surely, now, the money lent is real - not 'made up'.

 

QE?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you not familiar with the Peak Oil argument?

 

There's also: Peak Copper, Peak Food, Peak Resources, Peak Everything

 

I think the best evidence in favor of Peak Oil, is the progressive impoverishment of the USA, with its suburban living arrangement, and resultant expensive addiction to imported oil

 

To be honest, I find peak theory less and less convincing. Commodity prices have risen because of money printing moreso than exhausting supply. Western middle classes are getting poorer because of their governments' profligacy, over-extended trend towards social democracy, and the slow death of real capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Higher wages next?

 

German wages should be raised by more than 2 percent this year, Labour Minister Ursula von der Leyen said in an unusual appeal to employers on Sunday that was quickly criticised by leaders of her own ruling coalition.

 

Von der Leyen, sometimes mentioned as a candidate to succeed Chancellor Angela Merkel, told Bild am Sonntag newspaper that workers in Germany deserved a pay raise above the inflation rate, currently 2.1 percent, after years of settling for less.

 

Wages for some 9 million workers are up for negotiation in the weeks ahead and Germany's two biggest unions are seeking 6.5 percent pay rises: the powerful IG Metall for the 3.6 million workers in the engineering sector and Verdi for 2 million public sector workers. Employers dismiss the demands as exaggerated.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/12/germany-wages-idUSL5E8DC3J420120212

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... The suburbs are just a pleasant living arrangement that you seem to really hate.

Why?

They are bankrupting the country.

What a massive waste of (now-scarce) capital. What an empty way of living !

 

This isn't just my point of view, check out: http://www.KunstlerCast.com

 

"The greatest malinvestment of capital in history"

"A tragi-comedy"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me for being presumptuous, but I honestly don't think he is the kids type.

You all are "my children", some in need of... / haha, just kidding

 

I think my partner my have some of her own thoughts about that idea.

 

Actually, do people here really think the suburbs are a good place to raise children?

If so, did you grow up there? (as I did) If not, I suggest you think again.

What a horrible and mind-deadening place to live.

 

The suburbs DESTROYED a good portion of America's WEALTH through:

 

+ Requiring the use of oil-guzzling autos for transport

+ Providing a low density, and hence low rate of return for required infrastructure

+ Destroying bank balance sheets when home values plummetted

+ Creating a large base of voters who favored the wealth-destroying living arrangement

+ Fostering a selfish "my-home-is-my-castle" mentality

+ Making it difficult to turn the country around

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You all are "my children", some in need of... / haha, just kidding

 

:lol: very good :D

 

I think my partner my have some of her own thoughts about that idea.

 

Actually, do people here really think the suburbs are a good place to raise children?

If so, did you grow up there? (as I did) If not, I suggest you think again.

What a horrible and mind-deadening place to live.

I grew up in a smelly tower block (well the lifts and staircases smelt).

 

I would love to have grown up where my child is now growing up (in suburbs, but right on the edge of the countryside).

 

Then again, I guess the grass is always greener and she'll hate it :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You all are "my children", some in need of... / haha, just kidding

 

I think my partner my have some of her own thoughts about that idea.

 

Actually, do people here really think the suburbs are a good place to raise children?

If so, did you grow up there? (as I did) If not, I suggest you think again.

What a horrible and mind-deadening place to live.

 

The suburbs DESTROYED a good portion of America's WEALTH through:

 

+ Requiring the use of oil-guzzling autos for transport

 

On the other hand, people just voted with their wallets. Oil exists to be guzzled, no?

+ Providing a low density, and hence low rate of return for required infrastructure

 

But added more value to the purchaser.

 

+ Destroying bank balance sheets when home values plummetted

 

This is not just a suburban phenomenon. Inner city 'executive' flats are shaky as hell in the UK, figuratively and literally for all I know. Anyway, the Fed wanted it, encouraged it and they got it. It may as well have been shares in the South Sea Company.

 

+ Creating a large base of voters who favored the wealth-destroying living arrangement

+ Fostering a selfish "my-home-is-my-castle" mentality

+ Making it difficult to turn the country around

 

I think you're right to an extent there, but what about Spain? HK and China? Perhaps even the housing bubbles in Australia and Canada? They're not suburban phenomena.

 

After being a city-dweller for 12 years now, if I was to have kids the idea of a nice suburb is appealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You all are "my children", some in need of... / haha, just kidding

:lol: :lol:

 

There are suburbs and there are suburbs. The fact that you can't get around without a car, is I think, peculiarly a North American trait, fuelled(pardon the pun)by cheap Saudi oil . The suburbs of London are comparatively well supplied with public transport and the retail areas are still mostly accessible without a car.

 

I grew up in a city a suburb and in the country. I much preferred the country to the city and the suburbs were a nice compromise, considering employment options for my Father. I now live on the edge of suburb/country, and I think this is the perfect compromise for adults and children alike.

 

The fact that they may or may not be bankrupting the USA is not the overriding criteria for them being the first choice of families trying to bring up the next generation.

 

It is the fact that you can, to a certain extent, control you immediate environment ,privacy and security that makes suburbs a good choice for families, rather than trying to run the gamut of air and noise pollution caused by the high density of people and vehicles in inner city areas. Not to mention the low income ,low aspiration, crime and drug ridden ghettos that scar all cities around the globe.

 

The suburbs are not to blame for some of America's ills. It is the malinvestment and lack of planning for dwindling resources that makes them a liability, and that is not the fault of the families that live there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: :lol:

 

There are suburbs and there are suburbs. The fact that you can't get around without a car, is I think, peculiarly a North American trait, fuelled(pardon the pun)by cheap Saudi oil . The suburbs of London are comparatively well supplied with public transport and the retail areas are still mostly accessible without a car.

 

Yes, that's a really good point. I think the UK suburbs are probably quite different from the US "burbs".

 

For example, where I am, there are two rail stations within 10 to 15 min walk and bus route closer than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's a really good point. I think the UK suburbs are probably quite different from the US "burbs".

 

For example, where I am, there are two rail stations within 10 to 15 min walk and bus route closer than that.

 

Yeah my understanding of a US suburb is that it's typically a small town that is located near a major city, which could mean 10, 20 miles from that cities boundary. In the UK a suburb is generally an actual district of a large city and usually tends to refer to a middle class/upper class area located a bit away from the inner city. The UK isn't big enough and our cities (bar London) aren't really big enough to have US style suburbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah my understanding of a US suburb is that it's typically a small town that is located near a major city, which could mean 10, 20 miles from that cities boundary. In the UK a suburb is generally an actual district of a large city and usually tends to refer to a middle class/upper class area located a bit away from the inner city. The UK isn't big enough and our cities (bar London) aren't really big enough to have US style suburbs.

Not quite.

A US suburb has less attractions (for me) than a small town -

See the NEW THREAD about What makes a good suburb?:

http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showtopic=15972

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be the last straw for the UK property market.?

http://www.home.co.uk/asking_price_index/HAPIndex_FEB12.pdf

Optimistic Sellers Raise Supply and Prices.

Summary

Asking prices for homes on the market in England and Wales have risen 0.5% since January, despite poor market fundamentals.

Average time on market has dropped back significantly to 230 days: market activity is increasing but this is due mainly to new vendors.

 

Hey, that's not going to work !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A list here of the world's most overpriced housing markets, the UK is placed near the top at more than 30 percent overvalued.

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-most-overpriced-housing-markets-in-the-developed-world-2012-2#

 

Interesting to see Japan being listed as severely underpriced, when priced in pounds at today's exchange rate of 123, Tokyo is still nearly as expensive as London. Shows the overvaluation of the yen maybe, or the continued migration from the country to the city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×