On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 14:34:28 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 14:21:58 -0000, Yellow
wrote:

I wonder how much of that is due to the explosion of housing for sale in
London and the South East? A disproportionate increase here drags up the
national average without the effect being as big for individuals.

Huh? Housing prices have risen excessively in most/all areas, not
just London and the SE. Take for example my area. The average house
price is £329,075 and the average income is about £25K, which makes it
about 13x salary. And this is nowhere near London or the SE.

Where the logic here fails is the idea that someone on a median wage is
going to buy an an averagely priced house.

Or any (decent) house.

Yet I have one.



I for example earned around that average wage but my 2 bed home is worth
less than your £329,075. And I live in the south east.

Move to the nearby city and you would be lucky to get a flat for
£329,000 and even basic three bed houses go for half a million quid now,
but along the coast a bit where I am, your £329,000 could buy you three
or four beds and a garden.

Not in many areas. Around here the cities, towns and countryside
alike are horrendously expensive.

I live in a very expense - on average - area and yet I have a home. I
wish it was cheaper as it would mean I could afford nicer other things,
but I can afford to live here, never-the-less.

The proof being that I do. :-)

As does everyone else with average jobs. We cannot afford to live in the
city, but the prices along the coast do not seem to rise above what
people can borrow and afford to pay for.



And in London, £329,000 probably would not buy you anything at all.

Probably, and not just in London.

Meanwhile, go to some of the northern cities and houses can go for
£50,000.

Could you really get a reasonable house for this?

I expect a place that cheap would need work but so what? My home needs
work, you just do it over time as and when you can afford it.


But it's irrelevant for those who need to live elsewhere.

But it is relevant when examining what the phrase "an averagely prices
house" means. There are really cheap houses out there and there are
homes even in my town that go for a couple of million quid - and these
prices all go into the pot when we work out the "average".




I bought a modern 3-bed house (four years old) in Q3 1977 for £7,000.
This was in the S Lancs plain. Today, the same house might be worth
£65,000 (but only if a subsequent owner has installed a better kitchen
plus central heating). The house is completely acceptable as a
residence, with a large corner plot and parking for several cars.

I am very surprised that such a house could be bought for this kind of
amount, anywhere, unless it had very serious problems like subsidence.

It is interesting to watch Home Under The Hammer and some areas are
astonishingly inexpensive to live in - relatively speaking.

I don't watch such shows, but I do find it hard to believe that
anywhere is really "inexpensive".

If you do "watch such shows" then it would explain that you are unaware
what can be purchased for what price and where.



£65,000 is still only about 2.5 times the average salary for the
sub-region (according to various online sources which estimate local
earnings at between £25,000 and £26,000). Without those improvements,
you'd expect a price lower by about £10,000 and a 2.2 ratio to average
local earnings.

Around here you couldn't get a shed for £65K and average earnings are
around the same.

Yet somehow, people can afford to pay.

*Some* people. Most cannot.

Again - on my average wage, I have a home in the south east of England.