Perhaps the return of the sausages referred to another of the freebies given to the Starmers, but they sent them back because they were not expensive enough?
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Colston Bassett blue stilton with Okanagan strawberry chilli jam???
Who knew???
Fuck. That's good
Strawberry jam with chilli, what kind of an animal came up with that?
What's wrong with membrillo?
Membrillo, yawn
This is NEW - to me at least -I just put the two together as an experiment (on the same principle as fig jam and your quince jelly etc). It REALLY works, better than any chutney or jam I've had yet, you get the sweetness of the strawberry and the sting of the chili and then the deep fatty flavours of the Stilton. MMMMM
This is as revelatory a moment as when someone showed me how mustard works with hard cheese, or black pepper and balsamic on strawberries, a long time ago
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Tighten the inheritance tax rules and you incentivise giving early and often.
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
His other great piece of psychological projection (straight from the Trump playbook) was when he said he was going to root out bigots from Reform. Quite how he would retain his membership under such a requirement remains a mystery.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a mushroom omelette, but in a much bigger skillet?
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Well its not £30k but 20K, 10% of £200k.
Or £10k each as its for a couple.
And yes, it does assume a few years living at home. Which is what all the teenagers I know do who get a job at 18 (and even more so for those who leave school at 16).
Sorry, I was being an idiot. I initially wrote that £20k was the equivalent of £30k before tax. So you needed to save up the equivalent of a whole year's pretax income. But then I edited the comment, and made it wrong.
On the subject of parents, that does mean that said child gets a job close to the parents. That's not always that easy.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
Thanks for all the positive comments on my article on Iran.
One snippet I didn't put in is that 50,000 mosques in Iran are reported as having closed because so few people go any more. I guess that living under a theocracy isn't good for religious belief. I suspect the regime is as unpopular or more so than the Shah was when he was overthrown.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
You're deaf is what I'm hearing.
How can you hear that someone is deaf.
e.g. Cookie (to Ben) "Ben, Topping is deaf".
Ben (to Topping): "You're deaf is what I'm hearing."
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
You're deaf is what I'm hearing.
How can you hear that someone is deaf.
e.g. Cookie (to Ben) "Ben, Topping is deaf".
Ben (to Topping): "You're deaf is what I'm hearing."
And this is a killing insult is it.
Just trying to work out the intent as well as the mechanics here.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum that statistic is total bullshit as it just measures age. Controlling for age there is no significant difference whatsoever.
Owner occupiers, especially owner occupiers without a mortgage, are disproportionately elderly people without children living with them as their children have moved out of the house.
A young couple renting a home or buying a home of their own has no net change in housing supply.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
Colston Bassett blue stilton with Okanagan strawberry chilli jam???
Who knew???
Fuck. That's good
Oh ffs. It's grub. Get a grip.
Your miserablism is a joy. Labour are such a disappointment. It's delicious to watch
Tho not as delicious as Colston Bassett stilton with Okanagan chili jam
I can well imagine. I have had a similar combination with Stilton, and it's magnificent.
What are you eating this concoction on? For a long time I sidestepped cheese as vaguely unsatisfactory but it turned out what was actually unsatisfactory was the cracker or oatcake or otger taste vacuum it sat on. My solution is a digestive or hovis biscuit.
Thanks for all the positive comments on my article on Iran.
One snippet I didn't put in is that 50,000 mosques in Iran are reported as having closed because so few people go any more. I guess that living under a theocracy isn't good for religious belief. I suspect the regime is as unpopular or more so than the Shah was when he was overthrown.
I forgot to add my appreciation. A really good, intelligent, informative threader (and well done to the mods for commissioning it)
One thing I may add from friends that know Iran, is the horrendous extent of drug abuse there. Because the regime has successfully obliterated alcohol consumption (apart from the odd home made and awful bottle poteen or "sherry") the Iranians have not gone sober, they are doing an awful lot of heroin, plus speed, downers, benzos, and the rest
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
Not quite.
10 renters looking, 5 houses on market
2 (now ex) renters buy 2 of the houses
Now 8 renters looking, 3 houses on market
So ratio of looking : houses on market rises
There's 5 insufficient houses either way in either scenario and the 2 richest (ex) renters would have offered to pay more rent to get the homes anyway in the renting scenario so there's no real difference.
The only way to solve the shortage is to build at least 5 more homes.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Tighten the inheritance tax rules and you incentivise giving early and often.
Doesn't work if the family money is tied up in parents home...
Thanks for all the positive comments on my article on Iran.
One snippet I didn't put in is that 50,000 mosques in Iran are reported as having closed because so few people go any more. I guess that living under a theocracy isn't good for religious belief. I suspect the regime is as unpopular or more so than the Shah was when he was overthrown.
Imagine that you try to force teenagers to go to Church and shout Death to Iran every day. By state fiat.
What would that produce, given the average teenager?
Colston Bassett blue stilton with Okanagan strawberry chilli jam???
Who knew???
Fuck. That's good
Oh ffs. It's grub. Get a grip.
Your miserablism is a joy. Labour are such a disappointment. It's delicious to watch
Tho not as delicious as Colston Bassett stilton with Okanagan chili jam
I can well imagine. I have had a similar combination with Stilton, and it's magnificent.
What are you eating this concoction on? For a long time I sidestepped cheese as vaguely unsatisfactory but it turned out what was actually unsatisfactory was the cracker or oatcake or otger taste vacuum it sat on. My solution is a digestive or hovis biscuit.
Crusty French bread, which is pretty good as it soaks up the more liquid jam (which a biscuit might not). But small amounts of bread: it is just a vehicle
Chili jam is wonderful. I now find it hard to enjoy ordinary jam. I like the pep
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Well its not £30k but 20K, 10% of £200k.
Or £10k each as its for a couple.
And yes, it does assume a few years living at home. Which is what all the teenagers I know do who get a job at 18 (and even more so for those who leave school at 16).
Sorry, I was being an idiot. I initially wrote that £20k was the equivalent of £30k before tax. So you needed to save up the equivalent of a whole year's pretax income. But then I edited the comment, and made it wrong.
On the subject of parents, that does mean that said child gets a job close to the parents. That's not always that easy.
Sure, it will vary in difficulty with a range of factors.
Location being even more relevant with what the local house prices are.
It would be very difficult to do in London for example.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
You're deaf is what I'm hearing.
How can you hear that someone is deaf.
e.g. Cookie (to Ben) "Ben, Topping is deaf".
Ben (to Topping): "You're deaf is what I'm hearing."
And this is a killing insult is it.
Just trying to work out the intent as well as the mechanics here.
Don't know about the intent - I'm just clarifying the mechanics.
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
He's really not. The only time I have met Farage was at random.... in a beer garden of a pub after a match at the Oval. And he was quaffing a pint, contentedly. He was convivial and happy to chat
Farage is what he is. It is part of his appeal. He doesn't pretend to be a working class guy, nor does he pretend to be ultra-posh, nor does he affect to be anything other than - a certain kind of middle class Englishman who goes into the City and wears cords and Barbour but also has strong political views and enjoys a pint of a Sunday
And sucking up to an election denying would-be dictators and other haters of democracy and the rule of law. A certain type of middle class Englishman who would be very comfortable wearing a black shirt, doing a funny Roman salute and giving succour to our vilest enemies. That type of Englishman, God preserve us.
Thanks for all the positive comments on my article on Iran.
One snippet I didn't put in is that 50,000 mosques in Iran are reported as having closed because so few people go any more. I guess that living under a theocracy isn't good for religious belief. I suspect the regime is as unpopular or more so than the Shah was when he was overthrown.
I forgot to add my appreciation. A really good, intelligent, informative threader (and well done to the mods for commissioning it)
One thing I may add from friends that know Iran, is the horrendous extent of drug abuse there. Because the regime has successfully obliterated alcohol consumption (apart from the odd home made and awful bottle poteen or "sherry") the Iranians have not gone sober, they are doing an awful lot of heroin, plus speed, downers, benzos, and the rest
Evidence:
"Opium in Iran is widely available, and the country has been estimated to have the highest per capita number of opioid addicts in the world"
Thanks for all the positive comments on my article on Iran.
One snippet I didn't put in is that 50,000 mosques in Iran are reported as having closed because so few people go any more. I guess that living under a theocracy isn't good for religious belief. I suspect the regime is as unpopular or more so than the Shah was when he was overthrown.
I forgot to add my appreciation. A really good, intelligent, informative threader (and well done to the mods for commissioning it)
One thing I may add from friends that know Iran, is the horrendous extent of drug abuse there. Because the regime has successfully obliterated alcohol consumption (apart from the odd home made and awful bottle poteen or "sherry") the Iranians have not gone sober, they are doing an awful lot of heroin, plus speed, downers, benzos, and the rest
On topic: Mehdi Bazargan may turn out to be not the only Prime Minister brought down by a sausage crisis.
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
He's really not. The only time I have met Farage was at random.... in a beer garden of a pub after a match at the Oval. And he was quaffing a pint, contentedly. He was convivial and happy to chat
Farage is what he is. It is part of his appeal. He doesn't pretend to be a working class guy, nor does he pretend to be ultra-posh, nor does he affect to be anything other than - a certain kind of middle class Englishman who goes into the City and wears cords and Barbour but also has strong political views and enjoys a pint of a Sunday
And sucking up to an election denying would-be dictators and other haters of democracy and the rule of law. A certain type of middle class Englishman who would be very comfortable wearing a black shirt, doing a funny Roman salute and giving succour to our vilest enemies. That type of Englishman, God preserve us.
For sure. That is arguable. Personally I think you overdo it, but your point is not without merit
What is without merit is saying he is a fake who "doesn't go to pubs". He really DOES. This is his shtick. WYSIWYG
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
He's really not. The only time I have met Farage was at random.... in a beer garden of a pub after a match at the Oval. And he was quaffing a pint, contentedly. He was convivial and happy to chat
Farage is what he is. It is part of his appeal. He doesn't pretend to be a working class guy, nor does he pretend to be ultra-posh, nor does he affect to be anything other than - a certain kind of middle class Englishman who goes into the City and wears cords and Barbour but also has strong political views and enjoys a pint of a Sunday
And sucking up to an election denying would-be dictators and other haters of democracy and the rule of law. A certain type of middle class Englishman who would be very comfortable wearing a black shirt, doing a funny Roman salute and giving succour to our vilest enemies. That type of Englishman, God preserve us.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Keith Floyd would have given it a damn good try. Glass of wine, glass of brandy, glass of wine. Then on with the cooking!
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
You're deaf is what I'm hearing.
How can you hear that someone is deaf.
e.g. Cookie (to Ben) "Ben, Topping is deaf".
Ben (to Topping): "You're deaf is what I'm hearing."
And this is a killing insult is it.
Just trying to work out the intent as well as the mechanics here.
Don't know about the intent - I'm just clarifying the mechanics.
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
He's really not. The only time I have met Farage was at random.... in a beer garden of a pub after a match at the Oval. And he was quaffing a pint, contentedly. He was convivial and happy to chat
Farage is what he is. It is part of his appeal. He doesn't pretend to be a working class guy, nor does he pretend to be ultra-posh, nor does he affect to be anything other than - a certain kind of middle class Englishman who goes into the City and wears cords and Barbour but also has strong political views and enjoys a pint of a Sunday
And sucking up to an election denying would-be dictators and other haters of democracy and the rule of law. A certain type of middle class Englishman who would be very comfortable wearing a black shirt, doing a funny Roman salute and giving succour to our vilest enemies. That type of Englishman, God preserve us.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
You're deaf is what I'm hearing.
How can you hear that someone is deaf.
e.g. Cookie (to Ben) "Ben, Topping is deaf".
Ben (to Topping): "You're deaf is what I'm hearing."
And this is a killing insult is it.
Just trying to work out the intent as well as the mechanics here.
Don't know about the intent - I'm just clarifying the mechanics.
Yep thanks that would work.
But why did you tell him I was deaf.
Someone had to. Or else the mechanics wouldn't have worked.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
Not quite.
10 renters looking, 5 houses on market
2 (now ex) renters buy 2 of the houses
Now 8 renters looking, 3 houses on market
So ratio of looking : houses on market rises
There's 5 insufficient houses either way in either scenario and the 2 richest (ex) renters would have offered to pay more rent to get the homes anyway in the renting scenario so there's no real difference.
The only way to solve the shortage is to build at least 5 more homes.
We need a 1950s style mass building programme of social housing to properly reset the housing market. Nothing else will be sufficient.
Colston Bassett blue stilton with Okanagan strawberry chilli jam???
Who knew???
Fuck. That's good
I think loads of people knew. I seem to remember it on a John Torode show about 10 years ago. Possibly it was Adam Liaw. Either way...
Did they? I just did a google and there are about two obscure/tangential references to "chili jam and stilton" in the first five google pages
I am not trying to claim some copyright, I am merely pointing out it is an unusual combo, and not widely-known
Bloody good
Now that I think about it - I'm possibly confusing two different 'wandering about SE Asia trying nice food' shows. Cheese in S.Korea and Cheese in Japan - both times with chilli jam/sauce/condiment. US army bases being a connection.
Now I need to rewatch both series just to be sure. And not just to ogle the cheese and chilli.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
Not quite.
10 renters looking, 5 houses on market
2 (now ex) renters buy 2 of the houses
Now 8 renters looking, 3 houses on market
So ratio of looking : houses on market rises
There's 5 insufficient houses either way in either scenario and the 2 richest (ex) renters would have offered to pay more rent to get the homes anyway in the renting scenario so there's no real difference.
The only way to solve the shortage is to build at least 5 more homes.
We need a 1950s style mass building programme of social housing to properly reset the housing market. Nothing else will be sufficient.
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
He's really not. The only time I have met Farage was at random.... in a beer garden of a pub after a match at the Oval. And he was quaffing a pint, contentedly. He was convivial and happy to chat
Farage is what he is. It is part of his appeal. He doesn't pretend to be a working class guy, nor does he pretend to be ultra-posh, nor does he affect to be anything other than - a certain kind of middle class Englishman who goes into the City and wears cords and Barbour but also has strong political views and enjoys a pint of a Sunday
And sucking up to an election denying would-be dictators and other haters of democracy and the rule of law. A certain type of middle class Englishman who would be very comfortable wearing a black shirt, doing a funny Roman salute and giving succour to our vilest enemies. That type of Englishman, God preserve us.
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
He's really not. The only time I have met Farage was at random.... in a beer garden of a pub after a match at the Oval. And he was quaffing a pint, contentedly. He was convivial and happy to chat
Farage is what he is. It is part of his appeal. He doesn't pretend to be a working class guy, nor does he pretend to be ultra-posh, nor does he affect to be anything other than - a certain kind of middle class Englishman who goes into the City and wears cords and Barbour but also has strong political views and enjoys a pint of a Sunday
And sucking up to an election denying would-be dictators and other haters of democracy and the rule of law. A certain type of middle class Englishman who would be very comfortable wearing a black shirt, doing a funny Roman salute and giving succour to our vilest enemies. That type of Englishman, God preserve us.
For sure. That is arguable. Personally I think you overdo it, but your point is not without merit
What is without merit is saying he is a fake who "doesn't go to pubs". He really DOES. This is his shtick. WYSIWYG
Farage is Farage, he is what he is
I think you and many others on here thought I "over did it" when I said that Boris Johnson was in an incompetent fool. In reality, the passing of events demonstrated that I didn't over do it regarding Johnson; if anything I underestimated the malign cancerous fungus that he infected the Conservative Party and the country with. Farage ,on the other hand, is, like all populists, a syphilitic disease eating away at the body politics nether regions. Only the bright light of serious investigative journalism will actually uncover who he actually is, and it certainly isn't a "normal bloke" who likes a pint at the Dog and Duck.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum that statistic is total bullshit as it just measures age. Controlling for age there is no significant difference whatsoever.
Owner occupiers, especially owner occupiers without a mortgage, are disproportionately elderly people without children living with them as their children have moved out of the house.
A young couple renting a home or buying a home of their own has no net change in housing supply.
While we may have to agree to disagree on that particular point, I'm in complete agreement with you on the solution to the problem.
Slash planning regulation. Make it easy to build, Japanese style. End the land-banking cartel. Build a lot more houses, and make it as easy as possible to build a lot more houses.
Until that happens, everything is just fiddling round the edges with some winners (houses sold to renters who can afford to buy) and losers (renters left in the market competing for poorer housing stock, or paying more due to increasing regulatory burdens on landlords, passed immediately on to tenants).
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Well its not £30k but 20K, 10% of £200k.
Or £10k each as its for a couple.
And yes, it does assume a few years living at home. Which is what all the teenagers I know do who get a job at 18 (and even more so for those who leave school at 16).
Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..
"...Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..."
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
His other great piece of psychological projection (straight from the Trump playbook) was when he said he was going to root out bigots from Reform. Quite how he would retain his membership under such a requirement remains a mystery.
Yes that shocked me. Telling half his voters to fuck off basically. Not smart politics.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
You're deaf is what I'm hearing.
How can you hear that someone is deaf.
e.g. Cookie (to Ben) "Ben, Topping is deaf".
Ben (to Topping): "You're deaf is what I'm hearing."
And this is a killing insult is it.
Just trying to work out the intent as well as the mechanics here.
Don't know about the intent - I'm just clarifying the mechanics.
Yep thanks that would work.
But why did you tell him I was deaf.
Someone had to. Or else the mechanics wouldn't have worked.
I'm flattered. Then again @Benpointer is a dick so you might as well have saved your breath.
Labour could face a horrific pincer movement at the next GE
Reform in the Red Wall
The Tories in the rest of England and Wales
SNP in Scotland (already the Nats are again in the lead in the polls)
Lib Dems in a few rich seats where Remainers are angry that Starmer has done nothing about the SM/CU
Plus a few heavily Muslim seats lost to the new Corbyn-Palestine nutters
Taken together they really could go from a large majority to a calamitous defeat
Indeed, though in Scotland the SNP are still well down from where they were in 2015 and with the Tories likely to hold the balance of power at Holyrood.
I think Labour could well lose its majority as you suggest but the Tories are unlikely to get a big enough swing to win a majority themselves so we would end up with Davey or Farage holding the balance of power. Probably Davey because their ground operation and less tactical votes against them gets them lots more seats than Reform even on less voteshare
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
Not quite.
10 renters looking, 5 houses on market
2 (now ex) renters buy 2 of the houses
Now 8 renters looking, 3 houses on market
So ratio of looking : houses on market rises
There's 5 insufficient houses either way in either scenario and the 2 richest (ex) renters would have offered to pay more rent to get the homes anyway in the renting scenario so there's no real difference.
The only way to solve the shortage is to build at least 5 more homes.
We need a 1950s style mass building programme of social housing to properly reset the housing market. Nothing else will be sufficient.
Or even better a 1930s style mass building programme of housing.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
Not funny for the families of the British hostages still being kept in God knows what sort of conditions. One is Nadav Popplewell. It would be nice if Starmer or Lammy mentioned their names.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Well its not £30k but 20K, 10% of £200k.
Or £10k each as its for a couple.
And yes, it does assume a few years living at home. Which is what all the teenagers I know do who get a job at 18 (and even more so for those who leave school at 16).
Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..
"...Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..."
Exactly what are you trying to prove there?
she managed to save the £20,000 while living a decent life (3 year old car, multiple holidays abroad) AND paying the market rent for a room. The fact I then gifted some money back so she hit a lower mortgage ratio threshold is irrelevant to the point that saving £20,000 is very achievable.
Labour could face a horrific pincer movement at the next GE
Reform in the Red Wall
The Tories in the rest of England and Wales
SNP in Scotland (already the Nats are again in the lead in the polls)
Lib Dems in a few rich seats where Remainers are angry that Starmer has done nothing about the SM/CU
Plus a few heavily Muslim seats lost to the new Corbyn-Palestine nutters
Taken together they really could go from a large majority to a calamitous defeat
That is quite plausible. That said, I reckon there is a danger of overstating the shallowness of Labour support. If the Tories start looking competitive some of the Lefties who splintered off to other parties in July may go back to Labour. Also most first-term govts do get re-elected. And, of course, the Tories will likely get lumbered with voter-repellent Jenrick as leader.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum that statistic is total bullshit as it just measures age. Controlling for age there is no significant difference whatsoever.
Owner occupiers, especially owner occupiers without a mortgage, are disproportionately elderly people without children living with them as their children have moved out of the house.
A young couple renting a home or buying a home of their own has no net change in housing supply.
My daughter and husband 53 and 64 have I year left on their mortgage and my youngest son 49 and his wife 42 have paid off their mortgage so they do not fit your profile
And my daughter has their 15 year son living with them and my son and his wife have 3 children 12, 10 and 2
I would add that neither had inheritance but a lot of middle age parents do inherit money and pay off their mortgage
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Well its not £30k but 20K, 10% of £200k.
Or £10k each as its for a couple.
And yes, it does assume a few years living at home. Which is what all the teenagers I know do who get a job at 18 (and even more so for those who leave school at 16).
Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..
"...Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..."
Exactly what are you trying to prove there?
she managed to save the £20,000 while living a decent live (multiple holidays abroad) AND paying the market rent for a room. The fact I then gifted some money back so she hit a lower mortgage ratio threshold is irrelevant to the point that saving £20,000 is very achievable.
Its very achievable if you're not paying full market rent as well as full housing costs and have a very specific set of circumstances.
It shouldn't be necessary. In the 1990s you could buy a property at 2-3x income, if that was still possible today and it should be then a deposit would only need to be single figure thousands which is considerably different.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
After a few disappointing polls, this will steady the ship a bit:
Ipsos (National poll, 785 LV, 21-23 Sept):
Harris 50 Trump 44
It's like there are two different factions of pollsters (and the divide extends across the good ones). One camp thinks it's nationally tied (ie Trump is winning), the other thinks Harris is 6 points ahead nationally and she's getting all the Biden states plus NC and possibly even FL (Hi Haitians!)
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum that statistic is total bullshit as it just measures age. Controlling for age there is no significant difference whatsoever.
Owner occupiers, especially owner occupiers without a mortgage, are disproportionately elderly people without children living with them as their children have moved out of the house.
A young couple renting a home or buying a home of their own has no net change in housing supply.
My daughter and husband 53 and 64 have I year left on their mortgage and my youngest son 49 and his wife 42 have paid off their mortgage so they do not fit your profile
And my daughter has their 15 year son living with them and my son and his wife have 3 children 12, 10 and 2
I would add that neither had inheritance but a lot of middle age parents do inherit money and pay off their mortgage
Your daughter and husband are old.
Your youngest is old.
People should be able to get a home in their 20s or 30s, people in their fifties aren't especially relevant to the conversation other than saying that it was affordable for them to get homes decades ago which isn't the case for far too many today.
The point was not that every homeowner is old enough to not have kids living with them, but disproportionately (esp. mortgage-free) it is the case. Controlling for age/children owner-occupied and rentals have the same occupancy rate, the fact they (marginally) do not is simply the age profile averaging.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Well its not £30k but 20K, 10% of £200k.
Or £10k each as its for a couple.
And yes, it does assume a few years living at home. Which is what all the teenagers I know do who get a job at 18 (and even more so for those who leave school at 16).
Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..
"...Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..."
Exactly what are you trying to prove there?
she managed to save the £20,000 while living a decent live (multiple holidays abroad) AND paying the market rent for a room. The fact I then gifted some money back so she hit a lower mortgage ratio threshold is irrelevant to the point that saving £20,000 is very achievable.
Its very achievable if you're not paying full market rent as well as full housing costs and have a very specific set of circumstances.
It shouldn't be necessary. In the 1990s you could buy a property at 2-3x income, if that was still possible today and it should be then a deposit would only need to be single figure thousands which is considerably different.
Except - my example was 1 person doing it in less than half the time that the OP allocated for 2 people to save £20,000.
Now I know there are whole parts of the country where it's simply never going to be possible but saving £10,000 each over 6 years cannot be beyond the wit of most people...
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
His other great piece of psychological projection (straight from the Trump playbook) was when he said he was going to root out bigots from Reform. Quite how he would retain his membership under such a requirement remains a mystery.
Yes that shocked me. Telling half his voters to fuck off basically. Not smart politics.
Quite the opposite
This tellls me Farage is deadly serious about turning Reform into an election winning party (which I did not expect). He is following the path of Le Pen and Meloni. Sacking the nutters and tacking somewhat to the centre (but staying firmly on the hard right when it comes to migration/asylum/kulturkampf, etc)
He really wants to do this. He can sense a unique opportunity. Given that he is arguably the most consequential and successful British politician of the 21st century I would be worried in Labour AND Tory HQs
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
How thick is a whale omelette? And - come to mention it - how does one make a whale omelette, given whales are mammals?
Same way you make a cheese omelette, but with whales.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
Well its not £30k but 20K, 10% of £200k.
Or £10k each as its for a couple.
And yes, it does assume a few years living at home. Which is what all the teenagers I know do who get a job at 18 (and even more so for those who leave school at 16).
Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..
"...Eek twin A managed to save £20,000 in a lifetime ISA in just over 2.5 years - and that in a not brilliantly paying job while living at home and paying for multiple holidays and a car.
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..."
Exactly what are you trying to prove there?
she managed to save the £20,000 while living a decent live (multiple holidays abroad) AND paying the market rent for a room. The fact I then gifted some money back so she hit a lower mortgage ratio threshold is irrelevant to the point that saving £20,000 is very achievable.
Its very achievable if you're not paying full market rent as well as full housing costs and have a very specific set of circumstances.
It shouldn't be necessary. In the 1990s you could buy a property at 2-3x income, if that was still possible today and it should be then a deposit would only need to be single figure thousands which is considerably different.
Except - my example was 1 person doing it in less than half the time that the OP allocated for 2 people to save £20,000.
Now I know there are whole parts of the country where it's simply never going to be possible but saving £10,000 each over 6 years cannot be beyond the wit of most people...
When they're paying full market rent? And full living expenses?
Simply making ends meet takes most people's full income and doesn't leave over thousands for savings. Especially when housing costs are ever-increasing so the amount needed to save escalates proportionately as prices rise.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum that statistic is total bullshit as it just measures age. Controlling for age there is no significant difference whatsoever.
Owner occupiers, especially owner occupiers without a mortgage, are disproportionately elderly people without children living with them as their children have moved out of the house.
A young couple renting a home or buying a home of their own has no net change in housing supply.
My daughter and husband 53 and 64 have I year left on their mortgage and my youngest son 49 and his wife 42 have paid off their mortgage so they do not fit your profile
And my daughter has their 15 year son living with them and my son and his wife have 3 children 12, 10 and 2
I would add that neither had inheritance but a lot of middle age parents do inherit money and pay off their mortgage
Your daughter and husband are old.
Your youngest is old.
People should be able to get a home in their 20s or 30s, people in their fifties aren't especially relevant to the conversation other than saying that it was affordable for them to get homes decades ago which isn't the case for far too many today.
49 is old ?
The average age for a first time buyer is 34
Our son and daughter bought their homes in the last 20 - 25 years which is similar to the average age today
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
So your argument is that we have to stop renters from buying property from landlords, because the only way to house everyone in the country is to force young people to rent in HMOs from landlords instead?
Starmer is starting to make a bit of a habit of making these gaffes. How many times did he call Rishi the PM the other week. But "Return of the Sausage" is top notch.
In this morning's discussion about the £300k mortgage for a couple earning £50k did anyone mention that would be a property price higher than the national average for people barely earning above minimum wage.
But everybody who wants to buy a house under the age of 25 *must* have a 3-bed semi or better.
Its perfectly possible in large parts of the country as well.
Leave school at 18, get a job, learn a skillset and at 25 they'll be earning £30k or more, have savings and no debt.
Then buy a 3 bed semi for £200k with a 10% deposit and a 3x mortgage.
Now that wont suit everyone's life plans but everyone has to make their own choices.
It's not that easy to have saved £30k - a whole year's pretax income - by the time you're 25, especially as you won't be starting on £30k, you'll be starting on £15-20k.
If you are living at home it might be doable, but if you're in shared accommodation, then you're going to be clearing at most £1,500/month (at £20k) and spending at least £500 of that on accommodation and bills. Even if you are able to save 20% of your post tax, post rent and bills income, you will struggle to save more than £2,400 in a year.
Getting to £30k of savings is not impossible, but does requires iron discipline and a very high savings rate.
So no avocados is what I'm hearing.
The deposit is pretty much the reason why all the "well, if government policy forces landlords to sell up, that's good for renters" arguments fall flat.
It's great if you're in a position to save for a 30k deposit (few are), it's even better if you've got family who can stump up the deposit (so, generational wealth).
If you don't have that ability, the war on landlords just means the pool of renters who are unable to buy are competing for a diminishing number of properties at ever higher prices, with the ever increasing regulatory burdens and red tape tacked onto the price of the rental.
We are at a point where the rental trap is more or less impossible to escape without family help, entrenching a two-tier system where those who are able to tap into generational wealth can get on the property ladder, while those without are screwed in perpetuity.
What on earth happens to the houses the landlords are selling? Either go to other landlords or renters. If they are left empty or second homes, tax them punitively. The houses don't disappear because amateur landlord can't make their business work.
Are you completely blind, or just thick as a whale omelette?
As I stated above, landlords selling up is great for those who can afford a 30k deposit.
It kinda sucks for renters who can't.
May I suggest visiting a popular optician for some reading glasses?
Unless the quantity of houses changes landlords selling up has next-to-zero effect on renters.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum, renters tend to occupy more of a property than owners. E.g. a young couple buy a house together, having formerly lived in bedrooms in two fully occupied houses of multiple occupancy, buy a two bed flat with a spare bedroom, thus reducing occupancy levels. This diminishes the pool of rooms available to renters. This has been discussed on this site innumerable times.
As has been discussed on here ad infinitum that statistic is total bullshit as it just measures age. Controlling for age there is no significant difference whatsoever.
Owner occupiers, especially owner occupiers without a mortgage, are disproportionately elderly people without children living with them as their children have moved out of the house.
A young couple renting a home or buying a home of their own has no net change in housing supply.
My daughter and husband 53 and 64 have I year left on their mortgage and my youngest son 49 and his wife 42 have paid off their mortgage so they do not fit your profile
And my daughter has their 15 year son living with them and my son and his wife have 3 children 12, 10 and 2
I would add that neither had inheritance but a lot of middle age parents do inherit money and pay off their mortgage
Your daughter and husband are old.
Your youngest is old.
People should be able to get a home in their 20s or 30s, people in their fifties aren't especially relevant to the conversation other than saying that it was affordable for them to get homes decades ago which isn't the case for far too many today.
49 is old ?
The average age for a first time buyer is 34
Our son and daughter bought their homes in the last 20 - 25 years which is similar to the average age today
Yes it is.
49 is a generation past people who should be looking for homes today, 25 years ago is a totally different era. 25 years ago the average house price in Wales was £51k - to compare 25 years ago with today just shows how broken today is.
49 is well past the age where the NHS warns about dangers for pregnancies. For people to safely settle down, have a family, in their own home, they need to be buying homes in their 20s, early 30s at the latest.
And the average 34 year old today does not own their own home, the average age you're quoting is distorted by excluding those who don't get a home which is far, far, far too many people - way more than it used to be.
Nigel on the other hand is a middle class, middle ranking stock-broker who drinks red wine in high end restaurants.
His other great piece of psychological projection (straight from the Trump playbook) was when he said he was going to root out bigots from Reform. Quite how he would retain his membership under such a requirement remains a mystery.
Yes that shocked me. Telling half his voters to fuck off basically. Not smart politics.
Quite the opposite
This tellls me Farage is deadly serious about turning Reform into an election winning party (which I did not expect). He is following the path of Le Pen and Meloni. Sacking the nutters and tacking somewhat to the centre (but staying firmly on the hard right when it comes to migration/asylum/kulturkampf, etc)
He really wants to do this. He can sense a unique opportunity. Given that he is arguably the most consequential and successful British politician of the 21st century I would be worried in Labour AND Tory HQs
That does require him not to die of liver disease before the next General Election.
It's extraordinary. I feel bad about laughing about it. It feels like a primary school playground pile on on the weird kid without any friends But it is telling that it's gone global. Can't imagine Blair or even Sunak getting this level of kicking
Other thing is his heckler put down. Starmer says something like respect for all. The guy says does that include children in Gaza? I don't think Hur hur 2019 is an intelligent or attractive comeback.
Comments
This is NEW - to me at least -I just put the two together as an experiment (on the same principle as fig jam and your quince jelly etc). It REALLY works, better than any chutney or jam I've had yet, you get the sweetness of the strawberry and the sting of the chili and then the deep fatty flavours of the Stilton. MMMMM
This is as revelatory a moment as when someone showed me how mustard works with hard cheese, or black pepper and balsamic on strawberries, a long time ago
It depends on how crap Jenrick is. He might be the making of Starmer.
If a landlord sells to someone who was a tenant then the supply of landlords houses goes down by 1 and the demand for houses from tenants goes down by one so there is absolutely zero net change in supply versus demand.
Want to affect supply and demand - build more houses.
Ipsos (National poll, 785 LV, 21-23 Sept):
Harris 50
Trump 44
He's more at home in a pub than Stan Ogden was.
His posho banking pretensions are far more vulnerable.
On the subject of parents, that does mean that said child gets a job close to the parents. That's not always that easy.
Thanks for all the positive comments on my article on Iran.
One snippet I didn't put in is that 50,000 mosques in Iran are reported as having closed because so few people go any more. I guess that living under a theocracy isn't good for religious belief. I suspect the regime is as unpopular or more so than the Shah was when he was overthrown.
Ben (to Topping): "You're deaf is what I'm hearing."
https://youtu.be/PuDquo76490?feature=shared&t=168
Just trying to work out the intent as well as the mechanics here.
Owner occupiers, especially owner occupiers without a mortgage, are disproportionately elderly people without children living with them as their children have moved out of the house.
A young couple renting a home or buying a home of their own has no net change in housing supply.
10 renters looking, 5 houses on market
2 (now ex) renters buy 2 of the houses
Now 8 renters looking, 3 houses on market
So ratio of looking : houses on market rises
What are you eating this concoction on? For a long time I sidestepped cheese as vaguely unsatisfactory but it turned out what was actually unsatisfactory was the cracker or oatcake or otger taste vacuum it sat on. My solution is a digestive or hovis biscuit.
Nigel is more your Chateauneuf Du Pape kind of a peasant.
One thing I may add from friends that know Iran, is the horrendous extent of drug abuse there. Because the regime has successfully obliterated alcohol consumption (apart from the odd home made and awful bottle poteen or "sherry") the Iranians have not gone sober, they are doing an awful lot of heroin, plus speed, downers, benzos, and the rest
The only way to solve the shortage is to build at least 5 more homes.
What would that produce, given the average teenager?
Chili jam is wonderful. I now find it hard to enjoy ordinary jam. I like the pep
Location being even more relevant with what the local house prices are.
It would be very difficult to do in London for example.
"Opium in Iran is widely available, and the country has been estimated to have the highest per capita number of opioid addicts in the world"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_in_Iran
What is without merit is saying he is a fake who "doesn't go to pubs". He really DOES. This is his shtick. WYSIWYG
Farage is Farage, he is what he is
But why did you tell him I was deaf.
There's the odd 'some bloke on twatter said' claims but nothing that I've seen widely reported.
And why wouldn't Farage drink red wine with his dinner ?
I can assure you that its not mutually exclusive with drinking beer.
I am not trying to claim some copyright, I am merely pointing out it is an unusual combo, and not widely-known
Bloody good
Now I need to rewatch both series just to be sure. And not just to ogle the cheese and chilli.
Slash planning regulation. Make it easy to build, Japanese style. End the land-banking cartel. Build a lot more houses, and make it as easy as possible to build a lot more houses.
Until that happens, everything is just fiddling round the edges with some winners (houses sold to renters who can afford to buy) and losers (renters left in the market competing for poorer housing stock, or paying more due to increasing regulatory burdens on landlords, passed immediately on to tenants).
https://www.troddenblack.co.uk/shop
(sadly mostly out of stock just now)
And yes she was being charged rent - I did give it back to her as a gifted deposit though..."
I think Labour could well lose its majority as you suggest but the Tories are unlikely to get a big enough swing to win a majority themselves so we would end up with Davey or Farage holding the balance of power. Probably Davey because their ground operation and less tactical votes against them gets them lots more seats than Reform even on less voteshare
It’s going to be at least four years.
she managed to save the £20,000 while living a decent life (3 year old car, multiple holidays abroad) AND paying the market rent for a room. The fact I then gifted some money back so she hit a lower mortgage ratio threshold is irrelevant to the point that saving £20,000 is very achievable.
And my daughter has their 15 year son living with them and my son and his wife have 3 children 12, 10 and 2
I would add that neither had inheritance but a lot of middle age parents do inherit money and pay off their mortgage
It shouldn't be necessary. In the 1990s you could buy a property at 2-3x income, if that was still possible today and it should be then a deposit would only need to be single figure thousands which is considerably different.
https://youtu.be/PuDquo76490?feature=shared&t=129
Your youngest is old.
People should be able to get a home in their 20s or 30s, people in their fifties aren't especially relevant to the conversation other than saying that it was affordable for them to get homes decades ago which isn't the case for far too many today.
The point was not that every homeowner is old enough to not have kids living with them, but disproportionately (esp. mortgage-free) it is the case. Controlling for age/children owner-occupied and rentals have the same occupancy rate, the fact they (marginally) do not is simply the age profile averaging.
Now I know there are whole parts of the country where it's simply never going to be possible but saving £10,000 each over 6 years cannot be beyond the wit of most people...
This tellls me Farage is deadly serious about turning Reform into an election winning party (which I did not expect). He is following the path of Le Pen and Meloni. Sacking the nutters and tacking somewhat to the centre (but staying firmly on the hard right when it comes to migration/asylum/kulturkampf, etc)
He really wants to do this. He can sense a unique opportunity. Given that he is arguably the most consequential and successful British politician of the 21st century I would be worried in Labour AND Tory HQs
Simply making ends meet takes most people's full income and doesn't leave over thousands for savings. Especially when housing costs are ever-increasing so the amount needed to save escalates proportionately as prices rise.
The average age for a first time buyer is 34
Our son and daughter bought their homes in the last 20 - 25 years which is similar to the average age today
"Whale meat again, don't know where, don't know when"
That is a counsel of despair if ever I saw one.
You orca be ashamed of yourselves.
You would cry if all you had to eat was whale meat.
Fin.
49 is a generation past people who should be looking for homes today, 25 years ago is a totally different era. 25 years ago the average house price in Wales was £51k - to compare 25 years ago with today just shows how broken today is.
49 is well past the age where the NHS warns about dangers for pregnancies. For people to safely settle down, have a family, in their own home, they need to be buying homes in their 20s, early 30s at the latest.
And the average 34 year old today does not own their own home, the average age you're quoting is distorted by excluding those who don't get a home which is far, far, far too many people - way more than it used to be.
It's extraordinary. I feel bad about laughing about it. It feels like a primary school playground pile on on the weird kid without any friends
But it is telling that it's gone global. Can't imagine Blair or even Sunak getting this level of kicking
Other thing is his heckler put down. Starmer says something like respect for all. The guy says does that include children in Gaza? I don't think Hur hur 2019 is an intelligent or attractive comeback.
https://news.sky.com/story/starmer-speech-should-have-been-joyous-victory-lap-but-pm-is-already-stumbling-and-there-is-fury-among-backroom-staff-13221396