'Baby-boomers own half of Britain's wealth' telegraph article today.

Edale

David Willet is in his 50s. Who exactly is moaning? (apart from yourself moaning about people apparantly moaning!)

Pagg

I imagine the 2% who own 80% of all wealth are probably over 30.

Pobby

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Younger generation are just too apathetic & hedonistic to do anything about it - they should be making their voices heard in Parliament rather than leaving it to the current lot of self-interested fossilised MPs

Have to agree on that. At teachers training college in the late 60`s there seemed to be a lot more debate ( and action ) from folk in their late teens then I ever see or hear now. Certainly a lot of the the kids in my large extended family are hedonistic and act on it. I doubt that few of them even know what Parliament is really about. As for going on a march......lol!

Jonbvn

ukcarper wrote: »

I get really fed up with this is a surprise that older people have more assets than younger I’ve been paying my mortgage for nearly forty years is it strange that own more of my house than someone who is 20 years younger.

That is one hell of a mortgage you have there, and still not paid of yet. I think you should go to the MFW board ASAP.:cool:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Edale wrote: »

'But Mr Willetts argues that the baby boomers have amassed an unfairly large share of the national wealth, and that many rules and policies are currently tilted against their children taking a larger share of that wealth.'.

We already have a method of redistributing that wealth to the younger generations, with a 100% success rate over the long term.

It's this little thing you may have heard of, called "death".;)

Davesnave

Pobby wrote: »

Have to agree on that. At teachers training college in the late 60`s there seemed to be a lot more debate ( and action ) from folk in their late teens then I ever see or hear now. Certainly a lot of the the kids in my large extended family are hedonistic and act on it. I doubt that few of them even know what Parliament is really about. As for going on a march......lol!

I disagree in the sense that the young people I know are better informed than I was at a comparable age, but agree that knowing more does not necessarily lead to action.

In the 60s I went on demos and made speeches denouncing this & that, but I had the luxury of a free Uni education and my 'knowledge' was pretty shallow. Most students I know now are well in debt, and working hard to service it, so they have less time or energy for protest, and this may not be entirely accidental. Also, with a history of past demos and what they achieved behind them, they have some reason to be cynical!

Both our views here are just personal 'snapshots' and not necessarily the 'truth.' Certainly, at my teaching college, 5/6 of the students being women, many of them separated from home -based boyfriends, priorities at the weekend were far from militant, while back home, most of my non-college men friends were preoccupied with things like the diameter of the silencer (sic) on their Cooper S, or the dimensions of the other type of Mini!

Really2

Is it really surprising that the eldest part of the working population / half of the working population own half of the wealth.

So anyone over 45-65 that is no surprise they should be almost mortgage free now savings pension etc.

It will be the same when the current generation are 45-65, very poor journalism if you ask me.

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

chaostheory wrote: »

WOW - how did the most spoilt generation EVER manage to make themselves into victims!?

They have had more material things than any other generation, more educational & job oppotunities, better health care, everything and they are MOANING!

If they gorged themselves on debt, they only have themselves to blame.

Have to agree.
I was born in 1955 so fit right in the middle and yes we're comfortable but that's through hard work.
No one gave us anything.My husband did'nt go to Uni he could'nt,his parents could'nt afford it so he started at the bottom and worked his way to the top.
A lifetime of hard work gave us what we have.

Also why do we hear so much moaning these days from young people,when we were young you just accepted and understood that older people had the most because they had been around and had been working longer to amass their wealth.
Also we may have a house that has increased in value but it's worthless to us because we don't intend to sell it,we live in it it's our home.
We did'nt buy it to make money but to have somewhere to live our lives in.

In this life no one owes you anything,so when did it become expected that you got it handed to you on a plate.
When I die my kids will be able to enjoy what's left over but until then they can get their own,just like we had to.

marklv

It's no surprise that the over-45s are hugely richer than the rest of the population - what's the big deal? It takes 25 years to pay off a standard mortgage, and even if you start at 25 it won't be until 50 when you've paid it off. And by then you'll probably want a bigger house too, so it goes on etc. My in-laws are in their 70s and 80s and have a net worth of around £1M including the value of the house.

marklv

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

We already have a method of redistributing that wealth to the younger generations, with a 100% success rate over the long term.

It's this little thing you may have heard of, called "death".;)

LOL! :rotfl:

No, not really any more. Oldies are no longer dying, they are just fading away in old people's homes, paid for by their savings and houses, and when they finally die at 105 there is nothing left.