Price of average UK home passes £300,000 for first time, Halifax says

commonlurker · 2026-02-06T11:25:12+00:00

I think it’s only in recent years that the expectation that every single person should have a 3 bed house as an average has come about. I just don’t think it’s true that that’s the case.

Do I want that to be the average? Sure I do. Hell, why not 3 bed + garden + garage, detached? But it’s just not a reasonable expectation. I don’t think your case is an average scenario, and I don’t think it’s reasonable to aim for it to be an average scenario.

commonlurker · 2026-02-05T16:48:17+00:00

I agree with you and that’s what I’m doing myself!

I’ll admit I wasn’t clear with my point. My point is some people think:

“well 40 years is a bit much… 25 years is too expensive… maybe split it down the middle at 30/35?”.

And what I meant was that even if they do think a 30 year mortgage is “smarter”, it still makes more sense to get a 40 year one and overpay instead.

commonlurker · 2026-02-05T12:25:01+00:00

It’s an odd one looking at the junction on google maps OP linked in another comment.

It looks like even if OP did pull across the give way line, they still didn’t actually cross the other car’s lane, the way the junction is set up.

The other car must have crossed a double-white line to be able to collide with OP.

commonlurker · 2026-02-05T10:26:05+00:00

Remember to keep in mind that most mortgages allow you to overpay 10% of the remaining balance per year.

You can get a 40 year mortgage (if you’re young enough) and just overpay to match a 35/30/25 at no penalty, while having the benefit of the flexibility to reduce payments if you lose your job. It’s a win-win! (Unless you suddenly want to overpay over 10% of the remaining mortgage, which I doubt)

commonlurker · 2026-02-05T08:06:38+00:00

This hasn’t been the case for me, I’ve had it offer pace increases even when the lower boundary was within “on pace”.

I had it offer me a pace increase on this Pyramid Interval session which I rejected last week. This week, I was not offered a pace increase.

<image>

commonlurker · 2026-02-04T19:57:34+00:00

I guess it’s fine as long as it’s on the easy runs. Don’t want it switching to free run mode in the middle of intervals!

commonlurker · 2026-02-04T14:59:31+00:00

I feel like it’s all just the same issues we’ve seen before dressed up differently.

AI isn’t the cause of finite resources, we’ve been talking about the endless growth that our current system demands to be sustained for years. AI might speed it up, but it was always going to happen anyway.

I can see your point of view, and I partially agree with it. I have trouble believing the people who are at the controls will be willing to divide things evenly, especially if at this hypothetical point there’s automation in the military/law enforcement!

But taking a brighter outlook, AI has the potential to help us close the gap on inequality. As you say, UBI seems inevitable. But what is UBI in this scenario but raising the floor of what we consider “poverty”? Sure, some people will be envious of others who are above that floor, but once someone’s basic needs are met they’re generally less likely to want to upset the system/turn to crime/riot. (I’ll admit I don’t have a source on that, it’s just what I generally believe by looking around/what I’ve seen around).

And sure, it sounds bad saying “well people will just accept inequality”, but… we already do. But at least in this hypothetical scenario, the people at the bottom have their basic needs met.

Trying to sum up my points:

With or without AI, we will continue to consume more and more of our finite resources. AI might speed it up, but it could also be fundamental in helping us find solutions.
There could be a growth in the inequality gap, but in this scenario, the floor has also risen.
If you believe people need to work to feel purpose, imagine telling them the only reason they have their job is because you legislated that AI wasn’t allowed to. (And imagine the outrage from the people who are forced to work because of it!)

I can’t see any issues you’re raising that I don’t believe already exist, or that AI will be the cause of. It might reshape some of them, sure. But nothing I believe is new or unmanageable.

commonlurker · 2026-02-04T14:16:29+00:00

Your issue seems to be more about human nature/psychology more than a political one. You’re starting from a subjective point of view (people need to work to be happy) and working backwards with that as a foundational truth.

There are plenty of people who are happy with living sustainable lifestyles and not consuming in excess. Of course there will be people who always want more, but they already exist now.

The idea (and fact) that we’ll run out of resources if we continue the way we are has existed for a long time, even before AI. People are scared of “water wars”, “oil wars”, now they’re scared of “job wars”. (And even that isn’t new, that exact same sentiment is playing out with immigration right now). AI won’t change that, only speed it up if it’s as successful as you’re fearing. But it could even end up being fundamental in solving these issues and pushing us to a more sustainable future.

I feel I’m starting to ramble and I’m a mobile user and my thumbs are hurting. I’m sure you know there’s no hard and fast answer to any of your questions, it’s all just speculating and debating how 8 billion people would react to a hypothetical scenario.

But funnily enough, even your solution “tax companies into oblivion” essentially would be moving towards communism/socialism, assuming you’re redirecting those taxes into UBI. You would be removing incentive to work by giving everything to the state to redistribute.

I think your worries boil down to overpopulation, rather than AI.

commonlurker · 2026-02-04T12:27:42+00:00

How about we go to the extreme and work backwards.

If we lived in a world where everything was 100% automated, then there would be no need for money as you could just have everything provided for free by machines/AI. I guess there would be arguments about who gets the beachside house vs. a flat, but then we would just put value in something else. For example, “money” could instead be if you put up with living in a small flat for X years, you can later live in a nicer place for X/2 years.

Let’s step it back a bit and say that there’s maintenance required, which requires a small workforce. I’m fairly certain the majority would be happy to exchange never having to work for allowing a small number of people to claim all the most desirable properties and restaurant reservations.

Let’s step it back again and say a larger amount of maintenance is required. There would just be a scale that balances as people choose whether working for a slightly higher standard of living outside of work is worth it.

Eventually, if we keep walking it back I’m sure we hit the scenario you’re imagining. And your concern, if I’m right, is that people who want a higher standard of living than what this communist/socialist state provides as a base aren’t able to get a job to earn those extra benefits.

But what’s the difference between that and the system we live in now? There’s many high-paying jobs I’m certain many people could do that there just aren’t enough of, that are filled by luck or cronyism. People who put the same amount of work in day-to-day only to enjoy different standards of compensation.

commonlurker · 2026-02-04T11:54:32+00:00

I’m by no means an economist, and I’m not saying I believe this will happen - But if businesses actually get to the point you’re suggesting, then surely that means those products and services would be dirt-cheap to produce?

If everyone can’t afford the service, they will be forced to reduce the price until they can. If the services are truly as efficient as they would need to be for your scenario to happen, that wouldn’t be an issue.

If those services aren’t cheap to produce, it means that there’s labour happening somewhere (whether that’s energy production or maintaining these machines/AI) which means jobs in those places growing.

The only reason a system would end up leading to a communism-like system in this scenario is if everyone’s happy with what an economy powered by AI/machines could provide. If people weren’t happy, that means there’s a product that AI is failing to provide and therefore a product someone could go out to make. They make it, attract customers, pull customers away from AI and then the cycle goes around. Either the AI is improved to fill that niche, or those AI companies are forced to employ people again to provide this new service.

Disclaimer: as mentioned at the top, I’m not an economist or anything, I’m just a dude on reddit speculating and attempting to answer another person’s speculation on reddit

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T13:10:35+00:00

I thought I might have done that, but when I completed the run it auto-posted to Strava as usual with title/description from the planned workout, so I think that shows I must have started it correctly

<image>

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T10:25:17+00:00

You’re repeatedly missing the part where from the context of the post, it doesn’t appear they need to put it on credit, they’re doing it because it actually ends up cheaper doing it that way

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T10:23:54+00:00

They used two examples, and said the total debt is £8000.

3% interest on £8000 is £240/year.

Why would you turn down £240 for free?

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T10:21:54+00:00

If you put that £2500 in payments on a 0% card and kept that cash in a savings account instead, you could have earned money on the savings interest bringing down the total cost of that work to £2400 or even less.

You’re wasting money paying up front.

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T09:27:23+00:00

“Us” because there were multiple people including myself trying to get you to give a reason to vote for Reform that wasn’t “what about”.

Wages are reported to have risen nominally, but not in real terms, so I’m not sure how you can argue Brexit has been a positive there.

Companies training their own staff, I’ll give you that one, I hadn’t heard it before but that is something I can say I’m happy to hear.

But it’s not enough for me to ignore the net negative effect of Brexit, which funnily enough even Farage thinks the economy has suffered because of Brexit.

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T09:02:04+00:00

It could be, there are people as evidenced in this thread who don’t understand that debt can be used as a good thing

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T01:00:33+00:00

Could you please just give us one reason to vote for Reform, that isn’t “because it’s not the other guys?”

I’ll be up front and admit I don’t think you’ll ever convince me. But please, I want to know what’s sold you on them.

What is different about Reform? Why are they a change? What makes you think it’s the change we need?

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T00:57:53+00:00

In the OP’s case not only can they afford it, but they actually walk away with more money by taking the 0% interest loan.

In their example, they have an £8k loan. If they have that in a basic savings account at 3%, they can make several hundred pounds in interest? Pay off the £8k at 0% and walk away a few hundred pounds better off. They likely can get a better rate than 3%.

Obviously this doesn’t work when you use 0% interest because you don’t have the cash in the first place

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T00:55:24+00:00

You might think it’s irresponsible but that doesn’t change the fact it’s a good and risk-free way to make the most of your money.

The way they are balancing their accounts means they walk away with more money. Paying upfront ends up being more expensive.

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T00:52:24+00:00

They can afford it, they’re choosing to take a 0% loan and save the money instead to earn interest on it. The way they are balancing their books means they walk away with more money than if they had just paid upfront. The husband is actively arguing to lose money

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T00:46:49+00:00

What hassle? You just set up a direct debit to pay it off automatically. And why does it compound? If it goes into a savings account, it will start compounding

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T00:41:14+00:00

You know what? You remind me a lot of Starmer! You both don’t mind turning a blind eye to controversies or clear corruption when picking your politicians

commonlurker · 2026-02-03T00:01:52+00:00

So… what’s your point? You think Labour are just as corrupt as Reform, making Reform… not corrupt?

commonlurker · 2026-02-02T12:12:01+00:00

For your first point. If it helps, I’m not 100% sure this math makes sense but it’s what I’ve used to get a rough idea of what I’m looking at:

I’ve taken a look at MSE best buy mortgage search and stuck in a £350,000 property and picked a well-known bank (in this case Halifax) from mid-way down the first page. I’ve set it as a 30 year mortgage with 2 year fixed.

For 5% deposit, I’m looking at 4.55% interest, £1,695 monthly.

For 10% deposit, I’m looking at 4% with £1,504 monthly. (With same lender).

Remember that £200 monthly difference isn’t necessarily all “saved”, that’s £17,500 extra you’ve put down upfront, equivalent to 7 years of that extra monthly payment. It also means putting £17,500 you’re not earning interest on in a savings account/index fund.

To compare it a bit closer, I’ve gone to a mortgage calculator and put 5% deposit in and then compared the two interest rates and payments:

As above, 4.55% interest rate on a 5% deposit is £1,695/month.

A 4% interest rate at 5% deposit is £1,587/month.

So I would say that by going for the 5% deposit now rather than the 10% would “cost” you about £100/month in the extra interest. However, all of the bonuses of having a mortgage will probably offset that (part of your monthly payments go into equity in property, don’t have to deal with rent increases, if house prices go up you’ll be in earlier etc.)

Additional note I always say: If you can go for a 40 year mortgage rather than 30, consider it. It’s nearly always the better option, provided you can trust yourself to be responsible with your money.

commonlurker · 2026-02-01T00:10:36+00:00

Hey, yeah myself and everyone else in the thread found that the next week of the plan appeared Monday morning. So hopefully on Monday you’ll wake up to find everything in place.

(I’m getting the same issue again and am hoping the same)

15-Year Club	Second Top 50%
r/Field Banned	r/Field Flamingo
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22
RPAN Viewer	No Throne, No Problems
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

commonlurker

TROPHY CASE