Genie

£180,000 mortgage over 25 years at 1.8% = £750 per month £120,000 mortgage over 25 years at 10% = £1100 per month Even at 6% £120,000 mortgage over 25 years is more than £180k at 1.8%.

I’m pretty sure the maths is fine. I’m not sure if this link will work, it was only a quick search but with the basic input of £8k (5%) deposit on a house worth £160k it generated lots of lenders, including the one I mentioned from Barclays at £709 a month fixed for 5 years. If the house price goes up 2.5% in a year then you’d only need another £200 on the deposit. Obviously £160k gets different levels of quality in different areas. Where I live it’s gets a 2 bed semi in a reasonable part of town. I apologise if I suggested it was easy to get on as a first time buyer, it’s harder than it was, it’s reasonably doable in my opinion with a bit of willing. If you’re in rented and saving a deposit it’ll be harder than if you were living with parents.

The BBC has a good article here of the virus data in a variety of graphs and charts. Well worth a look

I think the best case is a stagnation of house prices so that wages catch up a bit because a collapse or reduction is not ideal for the majority either. Large scale building of social housing could be a lever to achieve that as @chrisp65 mentioned.

It sounds quite tricky and not “oven ready” to me. I initially thought when you said a million homes it was a million social / council homes but it sounds like “normal” housing estates that the government will have an option to take a small percentage of at a discount if they wish? This could be the problem, the government is being drawn into the house builder shenanigans and things are stalled. Do the government build any full on council estates any more?

The story is that the clause was for the player, not the club. It would be a master stroke by the lawyer who wrote it if true. It helps Liverpool with the net spend cup too, so they’ll be happy about that.

But the route of HS2 is “approved” isn’t it? Building lots of houses might slow down the rate of house price inflation, and a delay of a potential bubble burst which is clearly good news. I mentioned it not being easy because it’s not just the houses, it’s the roads, noise, schools, hospitals, doctors, dentists, traffic, pollution etc. These things also need to be introduced alongside the houses. I imagine this is probably a contributing factor why the government is struggling to get their target number of houses built. It may well be a valid way to stop prices going to high and then collapsing, but it’s not easy (hence why it isn’t happening).

It’s too big for me to get my head around tbh. The implications of building so many houses is monumental. It would make a simple strip of train track between Leeds and London look easy.

Over a billion new houses?

Why is there always 0-1 min of injury time in the first half and then 4-6 mins in the second half? No stoppages of note in this game but 5 minutes added on.

Just a loan till Christmas would do it.

No magic yet from the front three of PSG.

What’s the alternative? If you were in charge, what would you do?

Galaxy ripple and cup of tea or coffee, something to make the mouth hot so the chocolate melts

Bayern are all over PSG like a rash on the edge of the PSG box. It’s only a matter of time until they win the ball and score.

Now you got me tempted!!

I remember seeing some on Facebook marketplace for silly money. I doubt I’d try one even for 50p. The regular twirl is too good to tarnish.

The internet is brilliant isn’t it Obviously if you only do 4 hours a week delivering Avon books then you’re not going to be able to buy a house in the real world. However, I have shown that even low earners with full time jobs can get on the housing ladder with a bit of effort / saving etc if they really want to own a property.

IIRC there was a mad scramble for them and people were selling them for hugely inflated prices.

It’s outrageous to suggest 2 people on minimum wage spend around 25% of their monthly take home pay on mortgage payments, then barely survive on a pittance of £2100 a month. Instead of putting in a bit of effort/sacrifice to buy a house and pay their bills they could just opt out and get one for free. That sounds much fairer.

Where is the **** you economics? A couple of low/minimum wage earners want to buy their first home. They save £8k for the deposit from whatever means (savings, family, gifts, onlyfans etc) now they can afford a 5% deposit on a £160,000 starter home which has a fixed price of £703 a month for the next 5 years. I really can’t see the problem.

I buy my wife one every year... you might be onto something.

Terrys chocolate orange is an exception at Christmas (like drinking before mid 10am) but otherwise I’m not a fan of orange flavour chocolate.

Life is about balance. People choose what they value which is absolutely fine. Renting might free up more monthly cash for “living” but leaves you vulnerable to changes out of your control. Buying might be more financially restrictive (not always) but gives more control if your home. Each to their own, but I personally don’t agree with the line that buying is impossible or extremely difficult. It’s a life choice, like having a brand new car or a 15 year old car. Or going to America or going go Blackpool.

It was a bit of an extreme example tbh because nobody earning minimum wage would realistically look to buy a house on their own, it’s unrealistic. A couple earning relatively low incomes could get on the ladder if they cut their cloth accordingly. The option is available in most places. The problem is if 1) said couple don’t want to reduce the amount they spend on socialising / clothes / holidays etc 2) said couple don’t want to live in the areas they could afford to buy