Unemployment & FTBs

the_ash_and_the_oak

80%

question is whether 80% in work is a healthy sign or not. for the economy in general. and what those 80% are earning.

also kinda feeling contextual/directional figures are more important than absolute here. just at 15% IR aren't high if you borrowed at 12%, and 5% figures are very high if you borrowed at 3%, then 92% employment is a bad sign for an economy that has been used to 97% employment, whereas 85% employment is a good sign for one that has been used to 65% employment

don't wish to appear too 'doom-mongering' here but not really feeling 20% employment of this particular age group reflecting too well, and also not really feeling that relying on the remaining 80% is going to be able support house prices (w/out changes in wage levels, savings levels and access to finance changing).

cant really see how those 80% can be counted as future FTBs (nor should they). a proportion of that 80% should be counted that way. the 80 may or may not be in (and needs to be broken down further). the 20? out completely

wolfman

Really2 wrote: »

Is it? Question 1 out of 5 18-24 year old's are unemployed who will be the next FTB's

My answer is a simple answer based on the fact.
The fact is over the age of 25 -30 the numbers in employment increases as a percentage.
So are we pretend unemployment get higher as a percentage the older you get

Don't let fact' wreck a good froth though.

Hmmm true, but by having a lot of younger people, firstly with large debts from education, but then not having a job. This stops them paying off the debt (which can take a while), and secondly stops them saving for a deposit.

Would the future implications be, that come their late 20's (in 5 years time maybe?) a lot of them won't be in a position to buy. And this will push the average FTB age up even further. Would we effectively have a gap of FTB's for that generation?

In the short term, FTB's will obviously be affected. Unemployment will cut down the numbers, and even those that are employed may not be in the best job of their choosing, so saving is harder. Salary increases and bonuses are also harder to come by. It all affects people's saving power.

So until either house prices drop, or lending improves (probably a mix of the two), FTB's will be a bottleneck.

Really2

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

don't wish to appear too 'doom-mongering' here but not really feeling 20% employment of this particular age group reflecting too well, and also not really feeling that relying on the remaining 80% is going to be able support house prices (w/out changes in wage levels, savings levels and access to finance changing)

Neither do I but the age group contains. People going to, uni, college, training, having years out and also those who can not be bothered people in that age group can be a bit "unreliable" somtimes (I know i was)
So it is usually historicaly higher than other older age groups

As any one got any figures on what the historical average for unemployment is for this age group?

But more will be working as they get older that is a fact.

Really2

wolfman wrote: »

Hmmm true, but by having a lot of younger people, firstly with large debts from education, but then not having a job. This stops them paying off the debt (which can take a while), and secondly stops them saving for a deposit.
.

I agree with what you are saying. The debts students bring them I belive is already affecting the FTB age.

Is the average FTB age now around 30. With the debts students have the FTB age will remain higher.

I am not saying 80% of 18-24 year old's can buy a house. I am saying that of that 80%+ they will become potential future FTB's (well not all of them).
But not while they are in that age group (most probably in the 25-30 age group).

the_ash_and_the_oak

Really2 wrote: »

I agree with what you are saying. The debts students bring them I belive is already affecting the FTB age.

Is the average FTB age now around 30. With the debts students have the FTB age will remain higher.

I am not saying 80% of 18-24 year old's can buy a house. I am saying that of that 80%+ they will become potential future FTB's (well not all of them).
But not while they are in that age group (most probably in the 25-30 age group).

im not saying they will buy aged 18-24!! but that they will be on the path


a) 18-24 are formative career years. the 20% that are unemployed aged 18-24 are less likely to be in a buying space aged 25-30

b) average FTB age is surely not in the 25-30 age bracket?

martin8_2

Really2 wrote: »

As any one got any figures on what the historical average for unemployment is for this age group?

Something like this perhaps?

National Statistics - Unemployment: Trends since the 1970s

therein has a link to a PDF with the report and within that it has some info + a pretty graph with unemployment trends sorted by age-groups...

the_ash_and_the_oak

differing ways of calculating unemployment + huge expansion of further education makes direct comparison difficult here tho

Really2

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

ok but im not totally convinced of that either.

a) 18-24 are formative career years. the 20% that are unemployed aged 18-24 are less likely to be in a buying space aged 25-30

b) average FTB age is surely not in the 25-30 age bracket?

a) Home ownership is 70% not 100%. So yes the 20% are less likely to own, that a fact and one I never disagreed with.

b) Average FTB is about 30 so as many will buy before 30 as will after 30. I was using 25-30 as that was the next step in employment terms.
I would say average FTB age is 25-35 personally.

chucky

Really2 wrote: »

No worries, not like you to start abuse and then moan about it later in the day:rolleyes:.
I know there is no point discussing things you do not want to hear.

Just like the Nationwide graph on "real prices" you want it to mean "nominal prices" and won't hear otherwise.:rolleyes:

You keep going, question if 1 in 5 under 24's are out of work how many are left in work as a percentage?:rolleyes:

Also what does that mean on their future employability (after leaving uni etc.) I presume most think they will carry on with 20% being unemployed?

ignore him - you know what he's like.

him and his online loser buddies are all the same.

a bit entertaining though

Really2

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

differing ways of calculating unemployment + huge expansion of further education makes direct comparison difficult here tho

Could not agree more on that. The age group is a nightmare to work out unemployment on.:beer:

Out of interest it seems the official stats have it down to about 5%. So I presume this article includes the non-financial active.