Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Boomer Wealth
Options
Comments
-
Leilani Fast Windbreak wrote: »I would imagine applicant refers to the application which could be either one or two people.
Yes, I can't find any definition, but I suspect the data is average per application.
Interesting data.0 -
Average deposit per mortgage application
FTB
Dublin = 78.7k
Outside Dublin = 49.4k
SSB
Dublin = 192k
Outside Dublin = 112.6k
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/publications/household-credit-market-report/household-credit-market-report-2019.pdf?sfvrsn=60 -
How pleasant.
Its just as normal not to.
Why "should" you? Surely it depends on your income and how much you have saved?
Previous generations often lived at home until getting married and buying a house, with two incomes.
Sorry but you're a joke.
It's absolutely ludicrous that you called me 'entitled' for wanting to buy a one bed flat, but you think it's the norm to live at home while working full time and save up.
Being able to live at home as an adult is a privilege. Having family who live close enough to a major job market where you can get a decent job is a privilege.
As ALWAYS happens with these types of threads, it eventually turns out that people who benefitted from family wealth and help and had an easy ride lecture those less fortunate on what they should have done differently. Spouting off about lattes and avocado toast and bragging about how they made 'sacrifices' while conveniently forgetting the tens of thousands of euros they saved while living at home with Mammy.
Comical.0 -
lainey_d_123 wrote: »Sorry but you're a joke.
It's absolutely ludicrous that you called me 'entitled' for wanting to buy a one bed flat, but you think it's the norm to live at home while working full time and save up.
Being able to live at home as an adult is a privilege. Having family who live close enough to a major job market where you can get a decent job is a privilege.
As ALWAYS happens with these types of threads, it eventually turns out that people who benefitted from family wealth and help and had an easy ride lecture those less fortunate on what they should have done differently. Spouting off about lattes and avocado toast and bragging about how they made 'sacrifices' while conveniently forgetting the tens of thousands of euros they saved while living at home with Mammy.
Comical.
Where did I say you were entitled?
I'm laughing at you thinking that you should be able to afford *anything* in D6, just because you have a job.
Priviledge, I'm not so sure, I would guess that most people have one or more parents that they could live with, if they had/wanted to.
tl;dr
Everyone other than you is privileged and the world should somehow enable you to buy a home in the same location as someone else who has been saving far more than you have.0 -
lainey_d_123 wrote: »
Being able to live at home as an adult is a privilege. Having family who live close enough to a major job market where you can get a decent job is a privilege.
.
Ah now come on, being able to live at home is not privilege nor is home being close to job markets. They are just facts of life, most people could stay living at home if they wanted - you couldn’t and you had very good reasons but people who move out generally so so by choice. Moving out at 18 and fending for you self would be exceptionally rare in my experience so I surely would not consider the norm of being dependant on parents long past this as a previlage.
Privilege is a different thing altogether, like having a 50 million trust fund and never needing to worry about working etc
I don’t really like this condescending tone that some people take towards those living at home either - this whole “mammy this” and “mammy that” stuff and basically complaining that they have more money because of living at home and it’s “not fair”.0 -
Advertisement
-
Leilani Fast Windbreak wrote: »Ah now come on, being able to live at home is not privilege nor is home being close to job markets. They are just facts of life, most people could stay living at home if they wanted - you couldn’t and you had very good reasons but people who move out generally so so by choice. Moving out at 18 and fending for you self would be exceptionally rare in my experience so I surely would not consider the norm of being dependant on parents long past this as a previlage.
Privilege is a different thing altogether, like having a 50 million trust fund and never needing to worry about working etc
I don’t really like this condescending tone that some people take towards those living at home either - this whole “mammy this” and “mammy that” stuff and basically complaining that they have more money because of living at home and it’s “not fair”.
+1
being able to live away from home at 18 is equally a privilege.0 -
Lainey, I wouldn't bother any further with these two. They're on a windup at this juncture and will gainsay anything anyone puts forward on the matter.
You're talking to the wall when you to reply to them.0 -
Former Former wrote: »It's not more favorable to them. I understand that.
The average earnings of a full time employee in Ireland is 49k. Two average people will earn 98k.
The average wage for a full time employee in Ireland is 39k, not 49k.
Two average people would earn 78k, which would entitle said couple to a mortgage of €273k. The average house in my area costs 300k, so they’d still be short.
Average workers not being able to afford average homes is a problem.
And again, everyone applying as part of a couple is a lovely pipe dream but not realistic or practical. Some people remain single indefinitely and those people need reasonably priced accommodation too.
This attitude that the only people who deserve the opportunity to access reasonably priced accommodations are couples needs to go.0 -
The average wage for a full time employee in Ireland is 39k, not 49k.
Two average people would earn 78k, which would entitle said couple to a mortgage of €273k. The average house in my area costs 300k, so they’d still be short.
Average workers not being able to afford average homes is a problem.
And again, everyone applying as part of a couple is a lovely pipe dream but not realistic or practical. Some people remain single indefinitely and those people need reasonably priced accommodation too.
This attitude that the only people who deserve the opportunity to access reasonably priced accommodations are couples needs to go.
Average salary doesn't cut it when it comes to demand and price, nearly half the field is ahead of you.0 -
Leilani Fast Windbreak wrote: »Ah now come on, being able to live at home is not privilege nor is home being close to job markets. They are just facts of life, most people could stay living at home if they wanted - you couldn’t and you had very good reasons but people who move out generally so so by choice. Moving out at 18 and fending for you self would be exceptionally rare in my experience so I surely would not consider the norm of being dependant on parents long past this as a previlage.
Privilege is a different thing altogether, like having a 50 million trust fund and never needing to worry about working etc
I don’t really like this condescending tone that some people take towards those living at home either - this whole “mammy this” and “mammy that” stuff and basically complaining that they have more money because of living at home and it’s “not fair”.
It really is a privilege that not everyone is so lucky to have.
I live at home atm and I know I’m damn lucky to do so because there is literally zero chance I’ll ever come up with the funds for a deposit if I was still paying my extortionate rent costs.
I’m in my late 20’s and my parents are subsidising my existence by letting me live here and not charging me market rate rent. That is a fact.
I would be in a far worse financial position if they either a) charged me market rate or b) didn’t let me move back in in the first place.
So I’m privileged and very lucky to be here.
I said earlier on the thread that the government is counting on the good grace of Irish parents to allow their adult children remain in the family home well into their 30’s as a temporary fix to this problem.
If all these adults were forced to leave mammys house at say, the age of 24 (when most get their first full time job after college), there would be a LOT more demand for housing which we already can’t meet, and a lot more homeless young adults.
Culturally Irish parents are generally happy to do this for their children but not everyone is so lucky and some people’s family situations and home lives make this impossible.
This makes an already difficult task even harder, and this needs to be acknowledged.0 -
Advertisement
-
Leilani Fast Windbreak wrote: »Ah now come on, being able to live at home is not privilege nor is home being close to job markets. They are just facts of life, most people could stay living at home if they wanted - you couldn’t and you had very good reasons but people who move out generally so so by choice. Moving out at 18 and fending for you self would be exceptionally rare in my experience so I surely would not consider the norm of being dependant on parents long past this as a previlage.
Privilege is a different thing altogether, like having a 50 million trust fund and never needing to worry about working etc
I don’t really like this condescending tone that some people take towards those living at home either - this whole “mammy this” and “mammy that” stuff and basically complaining that they have more money because of living at home and it’s “not fair”.
No, it isn't.
I have paid so much out in rent since I was 18 that I could have bought a flat OUTRIGHT by now. Rent is most young people's biggest expense by a long way. Not having to pay rent while earning a full time decent wage is like being handed a deposit on a plate. Where's this 'hardship' people are banging on about? What's hard about putting what you would have paid in rent straight into savings while you also probably get free food, dinner cooked for you, etc.? You'd have a deposit in under 3 years without even having to make any real sacrifice at all.
Your perspective is completely skewed because you hang out with people who are exactly like you. The majority of people may not come from families as dysfunctional as mine, but most adults cannot stay with their families well into adulthood for a variety of reasons, whether it's being from a rural area with a poor job market (how are you going to get on with your investment banking career if your parents live in the arse end of Kerry?) or parents moving overseas or parents simply not wanting grown children living with them later in life.
I have lived and worked all over the world and the idea of grown adults moving out to go to college and to work is definitely not 'exceptionally rare'.0 -
Average salary doesn't cut it when it comes to demand and price, nearly half the field is ahead of you.
And again, we go back to my previous point. People on low and average salaries are still deserving of fairly priced accommodation.
They are completely priced out and this is unacceptable.
Not everyone can earn high wages, society needs lower paid workers too or it wouldn’t function. These people also need housing and are also deserving of our consideration.
I’m not saying they should be entitled to the same lifestyle or housing opportunities as a solicitor or accountant but it’s insanity denying a person on a low wage a mortgage repayment that would cost €700 pm on the grounds that they ‘don’t earn enough’, and then sending them off to the private market where they can expect to pay upwards of €1800 pm for a house that they will never own.
That traps low paid workers in a cycle that they can’t escape cause the majority of their already modest income is gone on rental costs.
Meanwhile a much higher earner is enjoying the security of owning their property and a much lower monthly repayment, leaving them with significantly more disposable income each month.
This is absolutely ridiculous and completely unfair. It makes no sense whatsoever.
It’s not just high earning degree educated couples that are entitled to housing. A fairer market for all members of society is in everyone’s best interests.0 -
The average wage for a full time employee in Ireland is 39k, not 49k.
Two average people would earn 78k, which would entitle said couple to a mortgage of €273k. The average house in my area costs 300k, so they’d still be short.
Average workers not being able to afford average homes is a problem.
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2019/
I am quoting average earnings.
Note that this is not average income, and it is not average basic pay.
See table 5.
Average earnings for FT workers = 48,946.0 -
Average workers not being able to afford average homes is a problem.
And again, everyone applying as part of a couple is a lovely pipe dream but not realistic or practical. Some people remain single indefinitely and those people need reasonably priced accommodation too.
+1000% agree.0 -
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2019/
I am quoting average earnings.
Note that this is not average income, and it is not average basic pay.
See table 5.
Average earnings for FT workers = 48,946.
We're back to the old fun circular of average vs median. For the purposes of affordability, economists and data crunchers almost always refer to the median (which will quite naturally fall a good bit lower than the average), and with good reason. For whatever reason, median earnings (and indeed median FT salary) is intermittently reported in Ireland and fudged by the CSO. It's extremely frustrating and this point eventually crops up. The average you quote is distortative to the conversation. If you threw an avacado at everyone between 20-40 and the 'average' skull was earning 49k, we wouldn't be having this conversation.0 -
And again, we go back to my previous point. People on low and average salaries are still deserving of fairly priced accommodation.
They are completely priced out and this is unacceptable.
Not everyone can earn high wages, society needs lower paid workers too or it wouldn’t function. These people also need housing and are also deserving of our consideration.
I’m not saying they should be entitled to the same lifestyle or housing opportunities as a solicitor or accountant but it’s insanity denying a person on a low wage a mortgage repayment that would cost €700 pm on the grounds that they ‘don’t earn enough’, and then sending them off to the private market where they can expect to pay upwards of €1800 pm for a house that they will never own.
That traps low paid workers in a cycle that they can’t escape cause the majority of their already modest income is gone on rental costs.
Meanwhile a much higher earner is enjoying the security of owning their property and a much lower monthly repayment, leaving them with significantly more disposable income each month.
This is absolutely ridiculous and completely unfair. It makes no sense whatsoever.
It’s not just high earning degree educated couples that are entitled to housing. A fairer market for all members of society is in everyone’s best interests.
Risk isn't calculated solely on repayment amounts and income. You know this. If the banks were handing out mortgages to the same people on 700 the last few years, we'd be back in 2008 now. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Sorry but anyone who can afford 700 on a mortgage won't be looking at locations where properties start at 1800 rental.
I agree with your sentiment, the system is broken, a fairer system would indeed be better for everyone, but that's the system of consumerism, growth and the reliance on consumption we have and live by when it suits us.0 -
We're back to the old fun circular of average vs median. For the purposes of affordability, economists and data crunchers almost always refer to the median (which will quite naturally fall a good bit lower than the average), and with good reason. For whatever reason, median earnings (and indeed median FT salary) is intermittently reported in Ireland and fudged by the CSO. It's extremely frustrating and this point eventually crops up. The average you quote is distortative to the conversation. If you threw an avacado at everyone between 20-40 and the 'average' skull was earning 49k, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
There is no published info for the median so this is the best we can do.0 -
Former Former wrote: »There is no published info for the median so this is the best we can do.
Average is quite useless towards the argument in all honesty. Again, if your typical Tom or Mary was pulling 49k, (never mind the demographic struggling with rent and cobbling together a deposit with property inflation, where the median will in all likelyhood be lower again) this thread wouldn't last two pages.0 -
We're back to the old fun circular of average vs median. For the purposes of affordability, economists and data crunchers almost always refer to the median (which will quite naturally fall a good bit lower than the average), and with good reason. For whatever reason, median earnings (and indeed median FT salary) is intermittently reported in Ireland and fudged by the CSO. It's extremely frustrating and this point eventually crops up. The average you quote is distortative to the conversation. If you threw an avacado at everyone between 20-40 and the 'average' skull was earning 49k, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
I agree, and I wonder why median earnings aren't published.
I have searched for them.
What I have found is the following:
(1) Structural Earnings - I have not read up on these enough, and I'm not clear how they differ from the Annual Earnings data.
https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/structuralearnings/
This series does have median earnings.
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-eaads/earningsanalysisusingadministrativedatasources2018/
(2) Eurostat publishes the SES - Structural Earnings Survey??? - every four years.
Median earnings are in that.0 -
It seems that the EHECS is a survey of firms: Earnings, Hours and Employment Costs Survey
That produces a mean annual earnings, but no median.
Whereas the Structural Earnings data does have a median earnings figure.
https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/structuralearnings/
This series is not based on a survey of firms, it is based on:
Methodology
The results presented in this release are based on a data-matching exercise of three administrative data sources:
The P35L files (employer end-of-year returns) of the Revenue Commissioners.
The Central Records System of the Department of Social Protection.
The Central Statistics Office’s Business Register.
Maybe I should start quoting the Structural Earnings data instead?0 -
Advertisement
-
The average wage for a full time employee in Ireland is 39k, not 49k.
Two average people would earn 78k, which would entitle said couple to a mortgage of €273k. The average house in my area costs 300k, so they’d still be short.
Average workers not being able to afford average homes is a problem.
And again, everyone applying as part of a couple is a lovely pipe dream but not realistic or practical. Some people remain single indefinitely and those people need reasonably priced accommodation too.
This attitude that the only people who deserve the opportunity to access reasonably priced accommodations are couples needs to go.
Even at the lower average you can still afford the 300k as you are not taking the deposit into account.
You don’t mortgage the full amount of a property, the 3.5 times salary is only for the amount you borrow which in the case of a 300k house with the minimum deposit of 10% would be 270k.
If you have bigger deposit of 20% then a lower combined wage can afforded the 300k house and so on.0 -
I agree, and I wonder why median earnings aren't published.
I have searched for them.
What I have found is the following:
(1) Structural Earnings - I have not read up on these enough, and I'm not clear how they differ from the Annual Earnings data.
https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/structuralearnings/
This series does have median earnings.
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-eaads/earningsanalysisusingadministrativedatasources2018/
(2) Eurostat publishes the SES - Structural Earnings Survey??? - every four years.
Median earnings are in that.
That second link is useful and not something I had come across before.
A couple of interesting nuggets with regard to median earnings (2018) for demographics chasing their tails on housing.
Median for 25-29: 544 p/w (28.2k per year)
Median for 30-39: 667 p/w (34.6k per year)
Not exactly a pretty picture and puts the afforability situation in a different light.0 -
Risk isn't calculated solely on repayment amounts and income. You know this. If the banks were handing out mortgages to the same people on 700 the last few years, we'd be back in 2008 now. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Sorry but anyone who can afford 700 on a mortgage won't be looking at locations where properties start at 1800 rental.
I agree with your sentiment, the system is broken, a fairer system would indeed be better for everyone, but that's the system of consumerism, growth and the reliance on consumption we have and live by when it suits us.
I know that’s not what it’s calculated on, but the point remains. We are resigning a large section of society to a life of spending the majority of their income on a sh*tty rental property, which then hinders their ability to buy a home or to better themselves.
It hiders their ability to have a family, and for those who have children regardless, it hinders their ability to support the next generation and give them a leg up when the time comes.
They suffer while those lucky enough to have high paying careers and a partner reap the rewards.
Reasonably housing should not be solely for the rich and successful.
The 3.5 rule as well as the astronomical cost of housing eliminates the eligibility of the vast majority of people. Shrugging our shoulders and defending it, blaming it on consumerism just isn’t good enough.
It’s a crap, broken, prejudiced system that needs to go.
If Irish parents suddenly kicked out their adult children in their 30’s there would be a massive amount of homeless young people because the housing supply just isn’t there, and what is there is barely affordable.
We have a huge ticking time bomb on our hands here because in the next 30/35 years we will have lifetime renters reaching retirement age who will no longer be able to sustain the high rental costs they were just about able to manage when working.
What will happen to those people, where will they go? How can we expect someone in their 70’s/80’s to pay just under 2k a month on rent out of their pension?
This is why something must be done now, and why there is need for change.
Of course it won’t happen overnight and of course no system is ever perfect, but anything would be an improvement on the current sh*tshow that we are dealing with.0 -
That second link is useful and not something I had come across before.
A couple of interesting nuggets with regard to median earnings (2018) for demographics chasing their tails on housing.
Median for 25-29: 544 p/w (28.2k per year)
Median for 30-39: 667 p/w (34.6k per year)
Not exactly a pretty picture and puts the afforability situation in a different light.
Anecdotally these statistics are far more reflective of the real world, and would be quite accurate for those I know offline.
I don’t know a single person my age (late 20’s) on 49k, let alone a couple both earning that.0 -
lainey_d_123 wrote: ».
I have lived and worked all over the world and the idea of grown adults moving out to go to college and to work is definitely not 'exceptionally rare'.
I didn’t say it was exceptionally unusual for people to move out when going to college, I said it was exceptionally rare for people of 18 (or a few years after that) to be supporting themselves and it definitely is.
Be that living at home, parents paying rent for them etc. As far as I’m aware I don’t know a single person who was supporting themselves at 18 or for a few years after it either. And it’s not just college, people doing apprenticeships etc too.0 -
And again, we go back to my previous point. People on low and average salaries are still deserving of fairly priced accommodation.
They are completely priced out and this is unacceptable.
Not everyone can earn high wages, society needs lower paid workers too or it wouldn’t function. These people also need housing and are also deserving of our consideration.
I’m not saying they should be entitled to the same lifestyle or housing opportunities as a solicitor or accountant but it’s insanity denying a person on a low wage a mortgage repayment that would cost €700 pm on the grounds that they ‘don’t earn enough’, and then sending them off to the private market where they can expect to pay upwards of €1800 pm for a house that they will never own.
That traps low paid workers in a cycle that they can’t escape cause the majority of their already modest income is gone on rental costs.
Meanwhile a much higher earner is enjoying the security of owning their property and a much lower monthly repayment, leaving them with significantly more disposable income each month.
This is absolutely ridiculous and completely unfair. It makes no sense whatsoever.
It’s not just high earning degree educated couples that are entitled to housing. A fairer market for all members of society is in everyone’s best interests.
Is 200k not reasonable to live in the capital city in s 1 bed?0 -
The average wage for a full time employee in Ireland is 39k, not 49k.
Two average people would earn 78k, which would entitle said couple to a mortgage of €273k.
Fair enough. Not going to argue with that.The average house in my area costs 300k, so they’d still be short.
Average workers not being able to afford average homes is a problem.
But this is worth arguing about. 300k is not average. If the average in your area is 300k, and you're unable to afford it, then you should't be living there.
You're talking about reasonable accomadation for people, but you're talking about areas where the average person shouldn't be considering for their first investment.
I bought a house for 230k (just prior the boom era, but yeah, banks were enthusiastic). I was 26 and got a decent mortgage agreement. Quite lucky there. But it wasn't my first place. I'd rented, and saved... so that I could invest in a low property, renovated it, and resold, rented further, saved, and finally reached the point where I could barely afford the house, with mortgage. It's not a glorious house. It's a three bedroom townhouse (in a place I don't live), which I hope to sell again when I can make a bit of profit off it... and then, I'll hopefully have enough to buy a place I can be happy with. (and due to all of that I have a wonderful credit rating, should I want another loan, yay!)
I think this is the difference with generations. I'm in my 40s now, and we knew that we wouldn't be able to afford the better houses. It was understood that there was a ladder to climb. From the posts here, I'm seeing a lot of posters expecting decent houses to be made available to them, in high priced areas, without the necessary income. I know I could never afford to buy a property in many areas of Dublin... I knew that 20 years ago, and I know it now.
If you can't afford to buy in the city, get out into the countryside, and commute. Plenty of houses there for 150k.And again, everyone applying as part of a couple is a lovely pipe dream but not realistic or practical. Some people remain single indefinitely and those people need reasonably priced accommodation too.
Yup. It's called renting, investment, and working towards a distant future.This attitude that the only people who deserve the opportunity to access reasonably priced accommodations are couples needs to go.
Except it's not there. The expectation is that couples have greater buying power and they can afford bigger houses. Single people, unless they have an amazing income, can't afford similar places. Which is why there's a market for smaller houses/apartments which cater to single people, with a lower price tag. Unless you want to stay in a high priced area, which cities typically are, especially as time goes by.
There's a reason why suburbs pop up around cities, with lower income groups pushed outwards. They can't afford to live inside the city areas, without help from the State.0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »Fair enough. Not going to argue with that.
But this is worth arguing about. 300k is not average. If the average in your area is 300k, and you're unable to afford it, then you should't be living there.
You're talking about reasonable accomadation for people, but you're talking about areas where the average person shouldn't be considering for their first investment.
I bought a house for 230k. I was 26 and got a decent mortgage agreement. Quite lucky there. But it wasn't my first place. I'd rented, and saved... so that I could invest in a low property, renovated it, and resold, rented further, saved, and finally reached the point where I could barely afford the house, with mortgage. It's not a glorious house. It's a three bedroom townhouse (in a place I don't live), which I hope to sell again when I can make a bit of profit off it... and then, I'll hopefully have enough to buy a place I can be happy with.
I think this is the difference with generations. I'm in my 40s now, and we knew that we wouldn't be able to afford the better houses. It was understood that there was a ladder to climb. From the posts here, I'm seeing a lot of posters expecting decent houses to be made available to them, in high priced areas, without the necessary income. I know I could never afford to buy a property in many areas of Dublin... I knew that 20 years ago, and I know it now.
If you can't afford to buy in the city, get out into the countryside, and commute. Plenty of houses there for 150k.
Yup. It's called renting, investment, and working towards a distant future.
Except it's not there. The expectation is that couples have greater buying power and they can afford bigger houses. Single people, unless they have an amazing income, can't afford similar places. Which is why there's a market for smaller houses/apartments which cater to single people, with a lower price tag. Unless you want to stay in a high priced area, which cities typically are, especially as time goes by.
There's a reason why suburbs pop up around cities, with lower income groups pushed outwards. They can't afford to live inside the city areas, without help from the State.
I would happily buy a property for 230k, and I would happily buy a property for 150k.
For those prices I could get a house probably within 30/45 mins of my parents place.
It would be ideal.
There would be no complaints whatsoever if this was the case. I would buy one and be grateful and probably stay there forever. I have no interest in upsizing or selling for profit, I just want my own roof over my head. As soon as I’m lucky enough to be able to buy a property it will be my forever home.
The problem? I’m still priced out.
3.5 times my income, which I believe to be only slightly lower than the median, is still a lot less than 150k. It’s significantly less than 230k.
To be entitled to a mortgage for either of those houses I’d have to be earning 42k/65k respectively, which is a lot more than average.
So even if I significantly lower my expectations down from the average house, resign myself to commuting in and out every day and move away from my family and friends, I’m still excluded.
I’m still priced out.
And the solution seems to be to send these people off to rent privately or put them into house shares for extortionate sums of money, getting them stuck in a cycle they can’t get out of unless they’re lucky enough to have parents that they can move back in with.
It just seems to me to be a total cop out to tell someone they should get a boyfriend or that they should just get a higher paying job if they want access to fairly priced accommodation.
Affordable housing shouldn’t just be for the successful and the attached.
There should be options there for all earners. So far the current system f*cks over the low earners at an astronomical level.
Whether that means making mortgages more accessible to low earners, or whether it means providing long term secure rental tenancies for a fair price, I don’t know.
But all the current system does is exclude those who arguably need the security most.0 -
I would happily buy a property for 230k, and I would happily buy a property for 150k.
For those prices I could get a house probably within 30/45 mins of my parents place.
It would be ideal.
There would be no complaints whatsoever if this was the case. I would buy one and be grateful and probably stay there forever. I have no interest in upsizing or selling for profit, I just want my own roof over my head. As soon as I’m lucky enough to be able to buy a property it will be my forever home.
The problem? I’m still priced out.
3.5 times my income, which I believe to be only slightly lower than the median, is still a lot less than 150k. It’s significantly less than 230k.
To be entitled to a mortgage for either of those houses I’d have to be earning 42k/65k respectively, which is a lot more than average.
Because you've skipped my point completely. You're relying entirely on your salary as a way to buy a property. Your ability to gain a mortgage is limited by your credit rating, which won't increase much until banks recognise you as a reasonably safe bet... and the best way to do that, is to invest in a property for resale. Not only does it increase your credit rating, it will [hopefully] provide a profit which you can put towards your deposit, or towards paying off a chunk of the mortgage early..
You're priced out because you don't want to climb the ladder. You want your last home to be your first home. It's a nice dream but it's not realistic, and was never realistic, except for people with wealthy parents, or those lucky enough to land an early incredible job.
You will not be able to afford a decent home based entirely on your salary, unless you're willing to wait and seriously save for a long time. Which is possible. I know people who did just that... but I get the feeling that you're not prepared to wait the time needed for that to happen. (think waiting 20 years)So even if I significantly lower my expectations down from the average house, resign myself to commuting in and out every day and move away from my family and friends, I’m still excluded.
I’m still priced out.
Significantly lower your expectations from a 300k or 200k property, which is apparently an average house?
for a single person relying entirely on her salary and savings? Good lord. You have to be joking.And the solution seems to be to send these people off to rent privately or put them into house shares for extortionate sums of money, getting them stuck in a cycle they can’t get out of unless they’re lucky enough to have parents that they can move back in with.
Or you could do what I said earlier. Rent, save, invest, and work towards obtaining the funds needed to secure a mortgage. Not secure to buy the house outright. The funds needed to get the mortgage for thirty plus years.It just seems to me to be a total cop out to tell someone they should get a boyfriend or that they should just get a higher paying job if they want access to fairly priced accommodation.
Except I didn't. The problem is that you don't want to compromise.
This is about dealing with reality. You're single.. You have a single salary. That decreases your buying power (and also increases your risk to a bank, and your insurance will be higher in costs). If you were a couple, you would have two salaries.
It's not discrimination. It's basic economics.Affordable housing shouldn’t just be for the successful and the attached.
There should be options there for all earners. So far the current system f*cks over the low earners at an astronomical level.
Whether that means making mortgages more accessible to low earners, or whether it means providing long term secure rental tenancies for a fair price, I don’t know.
But all the current system does is exclude those who arguably need the security most.
Now you're just repeating yourself and not dealing with what I directed your way.0 -
Advertisement
-
Save 20 years to buy your dream home I hope your being facetious. GTFO if all you have is trite rhetoric. The situation for young people is dire with respect to homeownership. The sooner we generate the public will to change things the better. They will wake up one day with SF in power plundering them from all angles wondering where it all went wrong.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement