Conservatives to introduce full-term fixed rate mortgages

Robert Jenrick (on LBC now) seems to be saying that properties sold at the 30% discount will have that applied in perpetuity so they cannot be sold on at a huge profit.

tories opening a bank to sell debt?

is this a javid idea?

will they chop it up and flog it to unsuspevting investors?

hes got form for that!

I think they're proposing to get private banks involved. Either they will charge a rate at a significant premium above the current base rate or the government will have to subsidise borrowers if there is a spike in interest rates.

why do we need this if our economy is doing so well and interest rates at near zero ?

There is no housing crisis ,there is an immigration crisis.

Homes built really means houses turned into flats.

not much decent available beyond 10 years last i looked.

youd need a decent deal to lock in for 10 years, and 25 years might be a step too far for
banks to offer anything worth while.

government guarantees might be fun, ....next ppi, ...but why not, at the right price?

interest rates might start going up again one day.

how can the government guarantee anything when we are over one and a half trillion pounds in debt and still going up,crazy world

was in halifax bank other day, and saw they did a ten year job at 2.2% with £1k arrangement

ive paid my mortgage, but remember seeing 18% quoted back in late 80 s when i was looking
around......later got on .39 under base rate with halifax, whilst they gave me 10% for my savings

happy days !

flushgordon is correct, and everyone knows it really.

Slight difference between "introducing full-term fixed term mortgages" and the loose promise contained within the tory manifesto which states:

"We will encourage a new market in long-term fixed rate mortgages which slash the cost of deposits, opening up a secure path to home ownership for first-time buyers in all parts of the United Kingdom."

encourage
give support, confidence, or hope to (someone).

The government routinely issues 30-year gilts at fixed rates, so they could presumably use these to fund fixed-rate 30-year mortgages.

(Note for Corbyn - gilts are bonds, i.e. debt or borrowings, and have to be actually paid back, with interest; that was the scariest thing in the Andrew Neil interview - Grandpa Hate genuinely didn't know this.)

why just Corbyn,they all talk like they dont know we have over one and a half trillion pounds in debt which knowing governments means its probally closer to double that

Gilts are routinely repaid with the proceeds of new gilts

The official figure you refer to is £2 trillion but if you add in the current public sector pensions deficit and other types of debt such as PFI, it is around SEVEN TRILLION pounds.

It's scary stuff when you stop and think about it. But not many people do.

seven trillion and we are being fed that everything is rosy

All we have to do is get Brexit done

if our debt goes from 2 to 7 trillion with add ons the american real debt must be terrifying

we must have some assets too, that can be offset, ...how much is uk industry worth, how much could
the tories sell the nhs for ?

thinking about this....

government issued 25 year mortgages at 2.5% would be a great idea

when you look at how much they charge on student debt ...6%+ , thats a more
likely offer, and a poor deal, imo.

On the other hand most student debt will never be paid back, as the students concerned will never earn enough to be liable for repayment.

I'd bite your hand off for that deal on a mortgage, even at 6%-plus.

I've never understood people who insist on adding things like future pension liabilities to the national debt, and then proclaiming we're doomed.

When you leave school at 18, with 50 years of having to look after yourself ahead of you, you don't look at the average wage (£29,000/year), multiply that by 50 and consider yourself immediately £1,450,000 in debt.

ZERO I SAY ZERO

Chance of building a million homes by 2024

6% would have been a great deal when i took out my mortgage


interest rates have been low for over 10 years now, and suggestions
are they have a good chance of remaining low for some time.



not all student debt will be repaid, indeed you need a good salary when
only repaying 9% over a certain amount when interest is added at 6%

if your debt is 40k the interest is £2,400 a year.

if you repay 9% of salary over £19 k then you repay £90 per k you earn over 19k

if interest is 2400 then at £90 per k  ...if you earn £46k you will just about be repaying
the interest and a small amount of the debt...

I've never understood people who insist on adding things like future pension liabilities to the national debt, and then proclaiming we're doomed.

When you leave school at 18, with 50 years of having to look after yourself ahead of you, you don't look at the average wage (£29,000/year), multiply that by 50 and consider yourself immediately £1,450,000 in debt.


I think the reality of the situation is that the working population's NI contributions are funding today's State Pension payments rather than their own to be paid on retirement.

But how could it be any other way? The law was passed for a state pension in August 1908, and the first pension, to anyone aged 70 or over earning less than £31/year, was paid on 1 January 1909.

By your reckoning nobody would have received a penny on 1 January 1909, because they hadn't paid in. In fact, with the school leaving age being 14 at that time, nobody would have expected to receive a full pension until 1965.

You can't introduce a state pension, then point out that nobody's going to get it in full for another half a century.

That's a good point which I will have to consider.

I guess the difference is that today you have an increasing proportion of the population of pensionable age and drawing it for longer.

You're right - it couldn't be any other way but the fact remains that you have an unfunded, growing commitment to pay a future pension to today's workers.

On that basis does your 18yo school leaver work?  His salary will be funding his own living expenses.

...happy to corrected though. You're a very shrewd cookie, sfbtw.

**** On that basis, does your 18yo school leaver analogy work?

Well, the point of the 18-year-old school-leaver analogy is that life itself, for every individual, consists of unfunded commitments (unless you live every day on the assumption you're going to either drop dead or get a Lucky 15 up the next).

You know, if you stop to think about it, by continuing to breathe you're making a financial commitment, for the next however many decades, which for the vast majority of us is unfunded.

So, what do you do? Do you calculate how many hundreds of thousands of pounds you're going to need to get through to state pension age, and go and live in a cardboard box under the flyover eating dandelions for however many years it takes to get that sum together? Or do you live normally, trusting that by becoming part of the economy you'll not only get by day-by-day, but by partaking in that economy, and leading a full, normal life, by turns productive and wasteful, enough wealth will be generated to see you right?

Governments, by not including decades of pension commitments in their borrowing figures, take the latter view. And the resources thus released into the economy take care of that commitment.

But if those commitments were calculated right now, and added to the debt, then that money is removed from the economy and we'd all be basically living in cardboard boxes under the flyover.

Hope that makes sense.

A. Shrewdie

The NHS is not paid for by todays workers taxed today, st Bartholomews hospital for example was founded in 1123

The NHS is not paid for by todays workers taxed today, st Bartholomews hospital for example was founded in 1123

In a similar way pensions are not funded by todays workers taxed today, the money is only there to be taxed because of wealth and infrastructure built up by previous generations of workers

you see if you are working for rolls Royce, it was other people, not you, who started and invested in and worked in and built rolls Royce the company, over many years,
that's a difficult thing to do
im not sure we can still do this

so as I say, if you are workingfor rolls Royce, and paying ni tax

it is because of the generations before you

that's what people don't understand when they immigration is a good thing and needed to pay tax, well yes
and no, it depends what they do and achieve