How do we interpret those numbers though ? Total household income is only half the equation as it excludes debt. Some of the highest income households have the biggest mortgages and so are being disproportionately effected by the interest rate increases. For everybody else there is such a variation in debt levels as to make the overall figure pretty meaningless.
Both of my kids have recently bought houses (up north). They did it by saving for their deposits just like I did a generation ago. Perhaps your issue with the housing market is a consequence of your location in the SE of England. It is not the fault of an entire generation who just did what you want to do but can’t because of all those well paid people in London moving South and also inflows of global investment money.
Yes definitely. That’s the problem with somewhere like Brighton- the housing market is driven by the wealth of London, but it’s very difficult to earn that kind of money in Brighton.
……should be rephrased perhaps to;
Not forgetting those affected roll straight from the “60% rate” onto the 45% rate now
Your billions and trillions are a bit askew. Yes, the rich 1% have £2.8 trillion or £4m each on average. But the 70% have £2.4 trillion according to Credit Suisse, not billion. £2.4 billion among 48 million would be net £50 per head over 70% of the population. £50,000 per head is the true figures, and that's the average per man, woman and child.
That's just a UHNW definition for the purposes of mortgage regulation though isn't it ? (in turn meaning some of the usual criteria can be ignored when considering applications). Most banks and WMs have their own UHNW (vs HNW and affluent) definitions.
Importing food will be £7B more outside the EU. Stick that on the side of ya poxy red bus.
Being rich is being able to do this in Waitrose.
