<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Percentage of Income Spent on Mortgage Payments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk/blog/mortgages/percentage-of-income-spent-on-mortgage-payments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk/blog/mortgages/percentage-of-income-spent-on-mortgage-payments/</link>
	<description>Simplifying Finance, Housing and debt</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:38:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ColinR</title>
		<link>http://www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk/blog/mortgages/percentage-of-income-spent-on-mortgage-payments/comment-page-1/#comment-2648</link>
		<dc:creator>ColinR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:28:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk/blog/?p=294#comment-2648</guid>
		<description>@trevor: Assuming this is household income then you are more than likely correct.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@trevor: Assuming this is household income then you are more than likely correct.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trevor Bacon</title>
		<link>http://www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk/blog/mortgages/percentage-of-income-spent-on-mortgage-payments/comment-page-1/#comment-2354</link>
		<dc:creator>Trevor Bacon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:46:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk/blog/?p=294#comment-2354</guid>
		<description>I was wondering how much the tables would turn if you were to evaluate the historical % data with with the modern example using only one wage earner. Surely the % may actually be  much higher. The point being that the % may have remained stable but the effort has doubled. Not to mention the cost of childcare and loss of free quality time. Or am I wrong?

Also at what date were spouses wages first used in mortgage calculations?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was wondering how much the tables would turn if you were to evaluate the historical % data with with the modern example using only one wage earner. Surely the % may actually be  much higher. The point being that the % may have remained stable but the effort has doubled. Not to mention the cost of childcare and loss of free quality time. Or am I wrong?</p>
<p>Also at what date were spouses wages first used in mortgage calculations?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching using apc
Object Caching 362/391 objects using apc

Served from: www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk @ 2012-02-12 16:02:46 -->
