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

ukcarper

FATBALLZ wrote: »

I'm not quite clear which part of my post you are disagreeing with.

For the record I'd happily wear cardboard shoes for a year or two if it meant I could buy a house without borrowing 8 times my salary and could have a fat non-contributary pension. It's not my fault trainers are cheaper - this is what I'm getting at, you are angry because yesterday's luxuries have become cheaper due to advancements in technology, ignoring that this is how it has always worked for centuries.

Another myth I'm a babyboomer and keep in contact with 5 of my old school friends I'm the only one lucky enough to have a final salary pension and it wasn,t non-contributary

ukcarper

DaddyBear wrote: »

I put this to the baby boomers:
1. Take the current 'value' of your house.
2. Take your wage when you purchased the house.
3. Adjust your wage for inflation to the current year.
4. Calculate the salary multiple of your house value.

Is that an affordable wage multiple??

I've done that and posted it on here before. My first house in 1972 was 5.3x average wage now the same house is 7.2x if i had bought it in1973 it would have been 6.5x.
Better I admit but not as much difference as some would have you believe.

Mr_Matey

Really2 wrote: »

I know it includes over 85s,

65+ now = 9.6M (of which only 1.1M over 85)

In 2031

2.5M will be over 85.

I am not trying to be difficult but the average of nearly all 65s hitting 83ish does not seem to mount up.

Perhaps help the aged are taking the survial figures from current mortality rates (including the war), otherwise the 85+ figure has to be higher.

off your first post in 2031 the average life expectancy for a male should be 86 so nearly all of the people of 65 or slightly over should hit that, I make that about 8-10 million.

Sorry if you're still editing (this is becoming an edit-fest!).

Yes, most should reach 83 if they are 65.
But most who are 80 now probably won't reach 100.

So most over 85 in 20 years will be those who are 65-75 now. Those 75-84 now will most likely be dead.

That's the problem with looking at an age range, mortality rates increase the older you get.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I personally think we should all therefore join together to make damn sure he never gets a roof, or if he does, he has to at least spend 40 years working hard going without a life to get it. That should teach him for being born later than us.

urrrr you are a STRer! You are trying to profit at this generations expense! You still own part of your old houses garden so you can sell it at the maximum amount to some poor folk who currently have only a yard. You are renting in the" hope" that you can buy cheap.I think you are exactly the Baby Boomer that this book about. YOU ARE why you son can't afford a house.:rotfl:

You really don't get it do you?

FATBALLZ

ukcarper wrote: »

Another myth I'm a babyboomer and keep in contact with 5 of my old school friends I'm the only one lucky enough to have a final salary pension and it wasn,t non-contributary

Ok, perhaps not 100% of them have final salary pensions, but everywhere I've worked the older staff have fat pension agreements while the younger ones have money 'pay for it yourself' purchase ones.

Interestingly I was speaking to somebody today about changes to their companies graduate scheme, basically they have slashed the pay awards available to graduates in a big way in the 6 monthly checkpoints of the 2-year scheme, which saves peanuts in comparison to the older overpaid staff (inherited from other companies or on high salaries from the olden days of age-based pay) who often earn twice what their younger counterparts do for doing the same (or sometimes worse) jobs. Of course these oldies are just being left to dodder along and not have their large and unjustified salaries reviewed, because it's so much easier (and mentally ingrained) to steal from the pockets of the young :rotfl:

blueboy43

Really2 wrote: »

got you. Well if I see 83 years I will be a happy old man.

Still does not match the forcast figures though (so wit war compleatly out of the equation)

2031= 15.3M over 65 and only 2.5M @ 85 or over.

That is still only 16-17% of 65 year olds getting to 85+.

Even in 2071 it will only look like 24%.

Not sure who is right but I don't think nearly everyone who hits 65 will hit at least 82 like the ONS stats state.

Your maths and logic is way out here.

Amongst plenty of the reasons that you are in error is that the number of people over 85 is included in the group over 65.

If life expectancy at 65 was really only '6-7 years, then annuity rates would be something like £22k per year per £100k of pension pot. As it is its more like £4k.

ukcarper

FATBALLZ wrote: »

Ok, perhaps not 100% of them have final salary pensions, but everywhere I've worked the older staff have fat pension agreements while the younger ones have money 'pay for it yourself' purchase ones.

Interestingly I was speaking to somebody today about changes to their companies graduate scheme, basically they have slashed the pay awards available to graduates in a big way in the 6 monthly checkpoints of the 2-year scheme, which saves peanuts in comparison to the older overpaid staff (inherited from other companies or on high salaries from the olden days of age-based pay) who often earn twice what their younger counterparts do for doing the same (or sometimes worse) jobs. Of course these oldies are just being left to dodder along and not have their large and unjustified salaries reviewed, because it's so much easier (and mentally ingrained) to steal from the pockets of the young :rotfl:

We can all point to unfair things in the workplace when I took early retirement I didn’t bother to get another job because all that was open to me was basic pay jobs in B&Q etc. Once you get to fifty no one wants to retrain you.

ninky_2

chaostheory wrote: »

You having a laugh!?

When I was a kid we worried about where food was coming from. When my shoes wore out, I used card board until my parents had saved up enough money to buy me a new pair. I prayed it wouldn't rain. I was allowed chocolate once a week and I had one pack of crisps per week. My clothes were mostly hand-me-downs. When I was a kid we had no central heating and most of the house was freezing except around the fire.

So don't talk to me about not having access to technology - in my day having technology in the house was owning a pencil and that was sharpened by my dad with a chisel because we weren't posh enough to own a pencil sharpener.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:is this a wind up?

abaxas

ukcarper wrote: »

We can all point to unfair things in the workplace when I took early retirement I didn’t bother to get another job because all that was open to me was basic pay jobs in B&Q etc. Once you get to fifty no one wants to retrain you.

So you were lazy. You could retrain yourself, but obviously training is someone else's resposibility.

FATBALLZ

ukcarper wrote: »

We can all point to unfair things in the workplace when I took early retirement I didn’t bother to get another job because all that was open to me was basic pay jobs in B&Q etc. Once you get to fifty no one wants to retrain you.

When I get to 50 nobody will want me either. The only difference is I wont have a fat FS pension and free £100k of housing wealth to fall back on. I also won't get a state pension until I'm 70 in all likelihood.