Home prices
-
Them with money move to the Rural Areas. As mentioned above the exception is London, where it is all higher. But generally anywhere on the M25 Feeder Corridors or Main line rail networks are going to be expensive, Luton has both (M1 and Rail). Move to Virginia Water[^] and watch Millions disappear as you buy a shed. Or Burford[^], poshest village in the Cotswolds.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
I guess it's a different market. We live 20 min drive from the city centre, and that's considered so far that it pushes our prices down. We live on 11 acres, river views, it's magic. The population of Tasmania is around 500k people, around half in and around the capital.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
martin_hughes wrote:
It's a sad state of affairs where people can't actually afford a home, however rude, and almost the entirety of their income is spent paying for it.
I own two homes outright, so I am perhaps speaking a little out of turn, but I don't see any issue with a world where minimum wage earners cannot own their own home and have to rent, so long as some of the taxes taken from the wealthy are used to provide affordable public housing and places in nursing homes that meet a basic standard of care.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
I know what you mean, there is no stigma in renting. But the banks don't see it quite that way. They would much rather have mortgage payments going to them (an effective rental), than see money pass to private individuals. This is why they, and Government in collusion, offer these silly mortgage terms; they may get some of the collateral back, but for the most part they own the property, earn interest on it so long as the tenant pays up and then repossess and "resell" the property on the same terms when the tenant cant repay. I disagree that minimum wage earners shouldn't be able to own their own homes. There are many essential, but low paid, jobs that you and I rely on - rubbish collection, post delivery, road sweeping... people are employed to do these things, should they all be doomed to public housing? I say not: people should be able to afford a place to live, without state funding. After all, state funding admits there is a fundamental inequity in society.
-
I know what you mean, there is no stigma in renting. But the banks don't see it quite that way. They would much rather have mortgage payments going to them (an effective rental), than see money pass to private individuals. This is why they, and Government in collusion, offer these silly mortgage terms; they may get some of the collateral back, but for the most part they own the property, earn interest on it so long as the tenant pays up and then repossess and "resell" the property on the same terms when the tenant cant repay. I disagree that minimum wage earners shouldn't be able to own their own homes. There are many essential, but low paid, jobs that you and I rely on - rubbish collection, post delivery, road sweeping... people are employed to do these things, should they all be doomed to public housing? I say not: people should be able to afford a place to live, without state funding. After all, state funding admits there is a fundamental inequity in society.
martin_hughes wrote:
I disagree that minimum wage earners shouldn't be able to own their own homes. There are many essential, but low paid, jobs that you and I rely on - rubbish collection, post delivery, road sweeping... people are employed to do these things, should they all be doomed to public housing?
Everyone who has a job, is doing something useful to somebody, and there's no shame, in my mind, in having a low paying job. I don't mean that I think we should aim for them to not afford housing, I'm saying that if someone does not make much money, they can't expect a new car, or a trip around the world, they perhaps cannot expect to own a home. It is just the way life works, society does not OWE people the right to own a home, is really my point.
martin_hughes wrote:
I say not: people should be able to afford a place to live, without state funding. After all, state funding admits there is a fundamental inequity in society.
There is always inequity. Any attempt to readjust that, is obviously a form of socialism. The question becomes, do we hate socialism so much that we don't help, or do we help ? And if we help, we have three choices: 1 - try to interfere with the market to force down house prices 2 - subsidise the purchase price of housing for people who have less money ( which, ironically, just causes prices to go up to absorb the subsidy, as we've seen in Australia ), or 3 - provide public housing Of those three, I think the last option is the best one all around. Of course, if the market moves in ways that make housing affordable to people on lower incomes, that would be better, but, you can't count on it, or expect to change it and have things work out exactly as you'd hope.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
In that case, bloody hell. I'd have expected wages to be lower in country areas and prices to drop as a result. That's how it works here. Our house would be worth a ton in the city, being 20 minutes out lowers the value, even with the river view. Not that I care, I chose to live here, we love it.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
I don't think there can be a basis for comparison, outskirts of Tasmanias capital and the outskirst of one of the worlds mega cities is just a little too much of a stretch for me. We looked at buying something (small) in the uk a while back, when the pound was reasonably strong but the numbers just didn't add up. The UK have some quite draconian laws for offshore investors. If you were going to do some sort of comparison you would need to pick some backwater in Scotland... What gets me is the return on investment, in Oz I can expect 7-10% return, in Singapore they are getting less than half that on properies in the 1.5m to 5m range, astonishing.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
martin_hughes wrote:
Secondly, regulations were relaxed and where previously individuals or couples could only borrow three times their annual income, suddenly the banks were prepared to lend ten times (and more) that amount and on an interest only basis.
Yes, that is happening here, too. With no disrespect to anyone, my impression locally is that most people who are losing their houses, are losing them b/c they thought that low interest rates would last forever, when we were plainly in a period of unreasonable rates due to external pressures.
martin_hughes wrote:
There's a real, and dangerous, disconnect between what a house costs and what it's actually worth.
I'm not sure how easy it is to calculate what a piece of land is worth, I guess you could measure it in terms of wages in the area ( that is, what you can earn by living there ), but apart from that....
martin_hughes wrote:
I'm glad I'm not a first-time buyer getting saddled with a huge mortgage, which realistically most of them won't be able to pay off and that I don't have a mortgage.
Yes, we own our house, and it's perhaps the best thing to come out of us making some money, to know we own where we live. I used a mortgage calculator this morning. If someone has no debts ( unheard of in our society, and has saved $50k, they could buy an entry level house in todays market, on the average wage, which is $45k. Very few young people make that much money, most make something in the low 30s, or less. It's a tough market. I intend to use our rental property to help my kids save to buy a home, without having to live at home, that's one reason I want to buy a second rental property. I'm just waiting for the bubble to burst before I jump in.
martin_hughes wrote:
potentially leaving hundreds of thousands unable to keep up with their mortgages and homeless.
The bit I don't get, and have never got - if I have a stable job and I make my payments, who cares what the market says my house is worth right now ? Is the issue that the bubble has meant people need to borrow more than they should to even have somewhere to live ? I drive every day past a house that was on the market when we were looking, but it was $500k then, ours was $300k. We could have afforded it, and could have owned it now, but at the time, I simply
Christian Graus wrote:
I'm just waiting for the bubble to burst before I jump in
You might look at the Cairns market, we have just bought there and if our track record holds then the bubble is about to burst there sometime in the next 3 months. Last time we bought in Sydney and exchanged contracts the day the first rate reduction, marking the start of the GFCs effect in Sydney. I remember buying tech shares early 2000 just in time to see them lose 90% of their value :sigh: . Then when we decided to diversify into funds, the entire market crashed, we only lost 70% of our equity that time. As I said I have a history with markets...
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
When I bought my first home, it cost $65k. When we sold it, about 7 years later, housing here went through the roof. We sold for $140k, and I wish we hadn't, it would be worth a good $300k now. We bought for $150k, and a year later were offered $250k for the same house, no renovations. We kept it, and bought the house we are in for $300k. Our house is now worth at least $500k, perhaps nudging $600k. It's a bigger house ( 27 square ) and on 11 acres, with a river view. The paper advertised on the weekend that housing in our state is the most affordable in the nation with some suburbs having a median price of $295k. So, we are still a cheaper place to live, but housing prices have gone up, and the response to the story has mostly been from people saying they can't afford to buy a house, and have a right to own one. I think that's retarded. I expect prices to drop ( I have money ready to buy another when they do ), but, the market sets the price, and it's not the governments job to intervene. If they did, then the people who worked hard and invested money would lose out, why should they lose out so people who don't make much, or don't even work, can get their stuff ? I wondered how housing affordability is, and has changed, where other people live.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I don't think there can be a basis for comparison, outskirts of Tasmanias capital and the outskirst of one of the worlds mega cities is just a little too much of a stretch for me. We looked at buying something (small) in the uk a while back, when the pound was reasonably strong but the numbers just didn't add up. The UK have some quite draconian laws for offshore investors. If you were going to do some sort of comparison you would need to pick some backwater in Scotland... What gets me is the return on investment, in Oz I can expect 7-10% return, in Singapore they are getting less than half that on properies in the 1.5m to 5m range, astonishing.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
outskirts of Tasmanias capital and the outskirst of one of the worlds mega cities is just a little too much of a stretch for me.
It's obviously very different. That's why I was asking for comparisons of average wage, because that is what defines how reasonable the average house price is.
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
What gets me is the return on investment, in Oz I can expect 7-10% return, in Singapore they are getting less than half that on properies in the 1.5m to 5m range, astonishing.
You mean return on rents ? I can't cover the mortgage with rent here. If you mean on property values, that bubble will burst soon enough. I'm waiting for it to before I invest again.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I'm just waiting for the bubble to burst before I jump in
You might look at the Cairns market, we have just bought there and if our track record holds then the bubble is about to burst there sometime in the next 3 months. Last time we bought in Sydney and exchanged contracts the day the first rate reduction, marking the start of the GFCs effect in Sydney. I remember buying tech shares early 2000 just in time to see them lose 90% of their value :sigh: . Then when we decided to diversify into funds, the entire market crashed, we only lost 70% of our equity that time. As I said I have a history with markets...
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Sounds like your ability to predict markets is far better than my advisors, I just need to do the opposite of what you advise :P
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
But the cost of a house is not the sale price it's the cost once you finally own it. If credit is cheap people will pay more for property and governments usually have some control over the credit market.
It's true that interest rates decide what you actually pay. And it's true that governments have some control over that. But, I still think anyone who does not take a high rate into account when they buy, is asking for trouble. In any case, the average wage in AU is $45k or so. It's less in Tassie, and average by definition means many people earn a lot less. Based on the prices in the paper ( houses still available under 300k ), I worked out that someone on $45k could buy a house in Tassie if they have no other debts ( so, own their car, have no credit cards, etc ), and have saved a $50k deposit. I'm not sure how a young person who has to pay to live, assuming they manage to make $45k, can then save roughly 18 months worth of their wage to get the money together to buy, assuming that they also don't have a degree, otherwise they'd have HECS debt.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Sounds like your ability to predict markets is far better than my advisors, I just need to do the opposite of what you advise :P
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
far better than my advisors
That always makes me chuckle, we got talked into going to a Westpac "Financial Adviser" a few years ago and some pimply little 23yo tried to tell us how to invest our money. Mind you he did no worse than I have and may have done better.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Christian Graus wrote:
far better than my advisors
That always makes me chuckle, we got talked into going to a Westpac "Financial Adviser" a few years ago and some pimply little 23yo tried to tell us how to invest our money. Mind you he did no worse than I have and may have done better.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
I missed a lot of the upswing in the market when I had money to invest because Westpac's advice was just 'buy into a fund' and then they didn't even do that. They were uniformly useless.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
outskirts of Tasmanias capital and the outskirst of one of the worlds mega cities is just a little too much of a stretch for me.
It's obviously very different. That's why I was asking for comparisons of average wage, because that is what defines how reasonable the average house price is.
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
What gets me is the return on investment, in Oz I can expect 7-10% return, in Singapore they are getting less than half that on properies in the 1.5m to 5m range, astonishing.
You mean return on rents ? I can't cover the mortgage with rent here. If you mean on property values, that bubble will burst soon enough. I'm waiting for it to before I invest again.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
You mean return on rents
I use a rough guestemate where I take the value of the property to the weekly rent $500k vs $500 rent is a reasonable return, I can't remember what the actual % is when properly worked out but that is a good yardstick when looking for Oz investment properties. I think it applied pretty well anywhere, it is certainly valid for both Sydney and Cairns. I then take thos numbers and apply it to our accommodation in Singapore where the appartment is worth $2.8m and the rent is $1,250 per week. The return is just not there!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
When I bought my first home, it cost $65k. When we sold it, about 7 years later, housing here went through the roof. We sold for $140k, and I wish we hadn't, it would be worth a good $300k now. We bought for $150k, and a year later were offered $250k for the same house, no renovations. We kept it, and bought the house we are in for $300k. Our house is now worth at least $500k, perhaps nudging $600k. It's a bigger house ( 27 square ) and on 11 acres, with a river view. The paper advertised on the weekend that housing in our state is the most affordable in the nation with some suburbs having a median price of $295k. So, we are still a cheaper place to live, but housing prices have gone up, and the response to the story has mostly been from people saying they can't afford to buy a house, and have a right to own one. I think that's retarded. I expect prices to drop ( I have money ready to buy another when they do ), but, the market sets the price, and it's not the governments job to intervene. If they did, then the people who worked hard and invested money would lose out, why should they lose out so people who don't make much, or don't even work, can get their stuff ? I wondered how housing affordability is, and has changed, where other people live.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Leuven, Belgium. Our house is 4 meters wide and about 15 meters deep with two floors and a little garden: > 200 000 € 4 years ago. We're not sure, but I think we'll sell it for about 225 000 - 250 000. In the city centre the same house would cost 300 000 €. two bedroom appartments go up to 180 000 - 200 000 easily.
V.
-
When I bought my first home, it cost $65k. When we sold it, about 7 years later, housing here went through the roof. We sold for $140k, and I wish we hadn't, it would be worth a good $300k now. We bought for $150k, and a year later were offered $250k for the same house, no renovations. We kept it, and bought the house we are in for $300k. Our house is now worth at least $500k, perhaps nudging $600k. It's a bigger house ( 27 square ) and on 11 acres, with a river view. The paper advertised on the weekend that housing in our state is the most affordable in the nation with some suburbs having a median price of $295k. So, we are still a cheaper place to live, but housing prices have gone up, and the response to the story has mostly been from people saying they can't afford to buy a house, and have a right to own one. I think that's retarded. I expect prices to drop ( I have money ready to buy another when they do ), but, the market sets the price, and it's not the governments job to intervene. If they did, then the people who worked hard and invested money would lose out, why should they lose out so people who don't make much, or don't even work, can get their stuff ? I wondered how housing affordability is, and has changed, where other people live.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Bruges / blankenberge in Belgium As it happens I was looking for a house last year. (I'm still alone so taking that into account) It was impossible to buy a house for me (prices go up from 200 000€ and with only 1 pay-check that's just not possible) So had to 'settle' for a apartment at the coast (50m away from the beach), the only reason I could buy it was because it was completely neglected and needed to be renovated (which I'm doing myself because of budget reasons). I payed 85 000€ and when it's done it should be worth close to 250 000€ in today's market. (2 bedroom apartment, about 90 square meters, 2 floors) K that was what I bought, here is what I saw while looking. On average in Bruges you can expect to pay up to 200 000€ for a small house / middle sized-apartment (1 bedroom / small bathroom / kitchen & living room). Anything bigger than that prices go up fast. There are apartments sold for 1mil a piece (but I guess those exist everywhere) The further away from the city the cheaper (of course), but for a decant house (2 bedrooms / a small garden ) you can still expect to pay more than 200 000. The moment you go above 2 bedrooms it goes up to 350 000 (at the very least) Normally the closer to the coast you go the more expensive (I just got lucky with my apartment) Anyway, what I saw allot while looking where houses that the owners didn't have to sell at all but they put it on the market at insane prices. If someone is crazy enough to buy it they just move and take there winnings otherwise they just stay. So as long as those exist I doubt prices will go down, especially since there are still a allot of houses for sale. I should probably mention that Bruges and area is considered to be one of the cheapest area's for houses so the rest of Belgium it's gonna be even more expensive. Average wage is around 20 000€ (I think)
-
I feel sorry for the first time buyer. As Dalek Dave would tell you, if the first time buyers cannot afford to purchase even modest priced property, it has the effect of creating problems further up the chain where higher priced property just cannot sell. Unless property company's can be persuaded to build first time buyers homes as subsidized under some dual ownership scheme, the first rung on this ladder will remain missing (or not properly afixed in place).
I do wonder when I'm going to get my foot on the ladder, I'm currently earning "average wage" as described above, my gf slightly over minimum wage (we're both 23). Burning money on rent sucks, but we have no choice, unless one of us can pull a deposit from our arse.
He who makes a beast out of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man.
-
Bruges / blankenberge in Belgium As it happens I was looking for a house last year. (I'm still alone so taking that into account) It was impossible to buy a house for me (prices go up from 200 000€ and with only 1 pay-check that's just not possible) So had to 'settle' for a apartment at the coast (50m away from the beach), the only reason I could buy it was because it was completely neglected and needed to be renovated (which I'm doing myself because of budget reasons). I payed 85 000€ and when it's done it should be worth close to 250 000€ in today's market. (2 bedroom apartment, about 90 square meters, 2 floors) K that was what I bought, here is what I saw while looking. On average in Bruges you can expect to pay up to 200 000€ for a small house / middle sized-apartment (1 bedroom / small bathroom / kitchen & living room). Anything bigger than that prices go up fast. There are apartments sold for 1mil a piece (but I guess those exist everywhere) The further away from the city the cheaper (of course), but for a decant house (2 bedrooms / a small garden ) you can still expect to pay more than 200 000. The moment you go above 2 bedrooms it goes up to 350 000 (at the very least) Normally the closer to the coast you go the more expensive (I just got lucky with my apartment) Anyway, what I saw allot while looking where houses that the owners didn't have to sell at all but they put it on the market at insane prices. If someone is crazy enough to buy it they just move and take there winnings otherwise they just stay. So as long as those exist I doubt prices will go down, especially since there are still a allot of houses for sale. I should probably mention that Bruges and area is considered to be one of the cheapest area's for houses so the rest of Belgium it's gonna be even more expensive. Average wage is around 20 000€ (I think)
Tom Deketelaere wrote:
So had to 'settle' for a apartment at the coast (50m away from the beach)
Took a moment to remember you are European, I thought 50 Miles from the beach is hardly 'Coast'. :)
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
Tom Deketelaere wrote:
So had to 'settle' for a apartment at the coast (50m away from the beach)
Took a moment to remember you are European, I thought 50 Miles from the beach is hardly 'Coast'. :)
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
:laugh: yeah it's 50 meters ;P The funny part of it all is that (before I bought the place) I never went to the beach (I think in my whole life I went like maybe 5 times). But well it was the only apartment that met my criteria and was still affordable so... :)
-
I do wonder when I'm going to get my foot on the ladder, I'm currently earning "average wage" as described above, my gf slightly over minimum wage (we're both 23). Burning money on rent sucks, but we have no choice, unless one of us can pull a deposit from our arse.
He who makes a beast out of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man.
Yeah, I did not buy until in my 30s, and htat sucks. All that money wasted. That's why I want to help my kids get their start, but, I'm lucky that I can. My parents sure did not have that option.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
When I bought my first home, it cost $65k. When we sold it, about 7 years later, housing here went through the roof. We sold for $140k, and I wish we hadn't, it would be worth a good $300k now. We bought for $150k, and a year later were offered $250k for the same house, no renovations. We kept it, and bought the house we are in for $300k. Our house is now worth at least $500k, perhaps nudging $600k. It's a bigger house ( 27 square ) and on 11 acres, with a river view. The paper advertised on the weekend that housing in our state is the most affordable in the nation with some suburbs having a median price of $295k. So, we are still a cheaper place to live, but housing prices have gone up, and the response to the story has mostly been from people saying they can't afford to buy a house, and have a right to own one. I think that's retarded. I expect prices to drop ( I have money ready to buy another when they do ), but, the market sets the price, and it's not the governments job to intervene. If they did, then the people who worked hard and invested money would lose out, why should they lose out so people who don't make much, or don't even work, can get their stuff ? I wondered how housing affordability is, and has changed, where other people live.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
but, the market sets the price, and it's not the governments job to intervene. If they did, then the people who worked hard and invested money would lose out, why should they lose out so people who don't make much, or don't even work, can get their stuff ?
What utter crap. Worked hard and invested their money? You just stated you made 100 K in a year doing NOTHING to a house. How they hell is that working hard? And if you dont think that paople have a basic right to live in property that is decent, and affords them a provacy, with somewhere for their kids to play, and buy all that on an average wage then you are a fool. Because you are inviting social tension by excluding people. The ONLY reason your house has gone up in value, and lets face it, it doesnt actually do you any good does it, is because of stupid lending policy that very nearly destroyed the UK. And I mean it was close to complete melt down. So if houses were cheaer, and ability to take on debt limited, you would live in the same house, but pay less per month for it. And so would everyone else. So whats your beef? Oh, and please stop showing off about how much moiney you have. Its getting quite nauseating.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Christian Graus wrote:
but, the market sets the price, and it's not the governments job to intervene. If they did, then the people who worked hard and invested money would lose out, why should they lose out so people who don't make much, or don't even work, can get their stuff ?
What utter crap. Worked hard and invested their money? You just stated you made 100 K in a year doing NOTHING to a house. How they hell is that working hard? And if you dont think that paople have a basic right to live in property that is decent, and affords them a provacy, with somewhere for their kids to play, and buy all that on an average wage then you are a fool. Because you are inviting social tension by excluding people. The ONLY reason your house has gone up in value, and lets face it, it doesnt actually do you any good does it, is because of stupid lending policy that very nearly destroyed the UK. And I mean it was close to complete melt down. So if houses were cheaer, and ability to take on debt limited, you would live in the same house, but pay less per month for it. And so would everyone else. So whats your beef? Oh, and please stop showing off about how much moiney you have. Its getting quite nauseating.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
I wish I were rich ... :sigh: