Mortgages look like they are getting more difficult to get.

[Bozza]

it is better for people to own and have a potential asset whatever the way they chose to do this as opposed to just paying money into a black hole called rent.

I'm not debating that at the moment. I'm just backing up Lord B on the Bank v Building Society line. People were able to own their own property years ago. And they didn't have to go to a shareholder-serving bank to do so.

 

[Beach Hut]

So are you proposing that people should be less concerned with pension provision if they own their property?

If so - incredibly naive on many, many levels.

What is naive about having a mortgage and ending owning something of higher value that helps later in life when you down size.

 

[Beach Hut]

I'm not debating that at the moment. I'm just backing up Lord B on the Bank v Building Society line. People were able to own their own property years ago. And they didn't have to go to a shareholder-serving bank to do so.

Sorry Bozza but this anti shareholder thing baffles me totally.

What does it matter where you can go to finance a mortgage when there are more options than previous thus enabling more people to do it ?

Are you so anti people owning shares in the bank ?

 

[Bozza]

What is naive about having a mortgage and ending owning something of higher value that helps later in life when you down size.

I'll ask again:

Are you proposing that home-owners should not be concerned with pension provision?

 

[Beach Hut]

I'll ask again:

Are you proposing that home-owners should not be concerned with pension provision?

Nope but then by investing in property with a good rate of return helps them so what is the problem with that ?

Is it profiteering you hate so much ?

 

[Bozza]

Sorry Bozza but this anti shareholder thing baffles me totally.

What does it matter where you can go to finance a mortgage when there are more options than previous thus enabling more people to do it ?

Are you so anti people owning shares in the bank ?

I work for a company that exists soley to provide services to shareholders. My bread-and-butter work over the years has been large demutualisations, where millions of mutual members have received 'free' shares and/or cash. So, to answer your last question first - no. No, I'm not.

Can you really not see the vastly differing priorities between a bank, with shareholders, and a mutual building society, with none.

And do you really think there are more options now than there were?

One example, a few years back there was...

Barclays Bank
Woolwich Building Society
Gateway Building Society

Now, there is only Barclays Bank.

Another one. There used to be:

Halifax Building Society
Birmingham Midshires Building Society
Bank of Scotland.

Now there is only HBOS.

More choices my great arse.

 

[Bozza]

Nope but then by investing in property with a good rate of return helps them so what is the problem with that ?

Is it profiteering you hate so much ?

Where have I said I have a problem with profiteering? I'm a good old right wing capitalist by heart.

Are you now suggesting all property always goes up in value? Is this the latest of your poorly thought-out and naive financial preachings?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

When I first bought a house, it was affordable on a modest joint income which was about a third of the price of the property. And that modest income was what a teacher and a not very senior local government officer earned.

Equivalent incomes today do not secure an affordable mortgage.

The only way that my children will ever "get on the housing ladder" is through inherited wealth - the legacy of deceased home owners. But I have no intention of dying just yet. So the kids will just have to wait.

Yet Beach Hut seems to be suggesting that homeowners should be looking to use their accumulated housing equity as a "pension". How will his kids get on the housing ladder?

 

[Beach Hut]

OK so perhaps we should just turn back the clock and just have building societies.

Naturally the owners of the building socities should never have accepted the millions they got when the banks bought them ?

Perhaps they should have refused for the good of their wallets.

Progress and moving on is hard especially when it opens up the market.

 

[Beach Hut]

Yet Beach Hut seems to be suggesting that homeowners should be looking to use their accumulated housing equity as a "pension". How will his kids get on the housing ladder?

Because I am making provision for them now to ensure they either have no student debt or if they opt out of uni (which I did) they have cash for a deposit.

All part of being a responsible parent.

 

[Beach Hut]

Where have I said I have a problem with profiteering? I'm a good old right wing capitalist by heart.

Are you now suggesting all property always goes up in value? Is this the latest of your poorly thought-out and naive financial preachings?

Property has been proven to go up in value over a period of time.

You like to have a constant dig at my financial preaching just because I once got a pricing wrong. Trust me I am streets ahead on the share game.

 

[Bozza]

OK so perhaps we should just turn back the clock and just have building societies.

Naturally the owners of the building socities should never have accepted the millions they got when the banks bought them ?

Perhaps they should have refused for the good of their wallets.

Progress and moving on is hard especially when it opens up the market.

Once again, vague and non-specific ramblings.

Let's leave the bank v building society debate for now - you seem hopelessly lost in that one. Let's look at your "you don't really need a pension if you have a home" line. There was a good article in The Sunday Times on this recently. The simple fact is that, yes, you may end up with a nice mortgage-free property worth hundreds of thousands of pounds but you still need somewhere to live. You can read it for yourself:

Can you rely on a property for a pension? - Times Online

 

[Beach Hut]

Bozza I am really not prepared to be lectured by you on what you percieve to be your values on financial issues where as mine are different.

I suspect at the end of the day we are both comfortable financially but by different routes and they both have their merits however we perhaps both believe the way we got there was the right one.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Because I am making provision for them now to ensure they either have no student debt or if they opt out of uni (which I did) they have cash for a deposit.

All part of being a responsible parent.

I think my point was (partly) that I could afford to buy a house in the seventies, regardless of whether my parents were "responsible".

 

[Bozza]

Property has been proven to go up in value over a period of time.

You like to have a constant dig at my financial preaching just because I once got a pricing wrong. Trust me I am streets ahead on the share game.

I can only judge you from what I've read from you on here. And, I'm afraid, the label I'd apply is something like "typical Daily Mail reading middle Englander". You'll have a minor obsession with property prices, particularly property price appreciation and have some sort of strange belief that property prices rising by 20%+ per year is a good thing, based only on the fact that you feel "richer" as your home is worth more day by day, week by week.

 

[Beach Hut]

I think my point was (partly) that I could afford to get on the housing ladder in the seventies, regardless of whether my parents were "responsible".

And I got there in the 80s through my own hard graft and I have no issue with helping my two kids by making provision for them now.

Are we nearly in agreement ?

 

[Bozza]

Bozza I am really not prepared to be lectured by you on what you percieve to be your values on financial issues where as mine are different.

I suspect at the end of the day we are both comfortable financially but by different routes and they both have their merits however we perhaps both believe the way we got there was the right one.

That's OK - I knew you'd bail out at some point.

Before you do though, please humour me one last time and let me know what route you think I travelled to get to my comfortable financial position.

 

[Beach Hut]

That's OK - I knew you'd bail out at some point.

Before you do though, please humour me one last time and let me know what route you think I travelled to get to my comfortable financial position.

Smugness beyond belief and very patronising and disappointing - Daily Mail reader my arse.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

And I got there in the 80s through my own hard graft and I have no issue with helping my two kids by making provision for them now.

Are we nearly in agreement ?

No.

My point is that no amount of hard graft today is going to be enough to let a couple in their twenties buy a house without the support of parents or some other external source of good fortune.

That wasn't the case when I got into home ownership. Nor was it the case a generation earlier.

Having said that, I am not, of course, against "making provision". But you need to recognise that not everyone can do that. And where it can't be done, the kids will be living in rented accommodation for a very much longer time than they might have imagined.

 

[Beach Hut]

Having said that, I am not, of course, against "making provision". But you need to recognise that not everyone can do that. And where it can't be done, the kids will be living in rented accommodation for a very much longer time than they might have imagined.

No we don't yet but never mind.

Quite a few could if they make life style changes so that is up to them.