| > And you haven't got a hope of being able to buy any decent family home in London on this salary. You haven't got a hope of being able to buy a decent family home in central London on that kind of salary. If people can be bothered to commute just a little bit further out, you can in fact get a decent family home in Croydon for example, for 200k-300k. My 3 bedroom house with a garden cost use 208k when I bought it in 2004. The market has gone up, but it's still "only" valued at around 270k. When we did buy, I was paid only a little bit out of that range, and it was only my income, and we lived very comfortably on my salary despite that mortgage. For years before that, I rented properties that cost me more per month even on salaries closer to the bottom of the 40k-60k range. The issue, in my experience, is that younger people tends to want to live in areas that are more hip and closer to the centre, despite not having built up any equity, and if they can't, they often prefer to rent. And then years down the line they're still complaining that they can't afford to buy, when competing with people who spent the last decade living somewhere cheaper and building up equity that lets them put up higher total amounts and gives them access to cheaper mortgages. |
Right, so for a single person earning £35k going to a bank and getting 3.5 times earnings they'll have £105k to spend. How is a 200-300k property in a frankly awful outskirt of London (sorry) considered an acceptable situation?
The quicker the correction comes the better for everyone, this ongoing speculation/bubble of London property is disgusting.