Do baby boomers feel guilty about shafting younger generations?

Malcolm.

Do baby boomers feel guilty about shafting younger generations?

Born between 1970 and 2000?

Then you’re stuffed, pal. Accept it.

You can certainly forget about retiring at a reasonable age, on a decent pension, or buying a half-decent house at a half-decent price.

You can’t you see, because the old folk have it all sown up.

Yep that’s right, they’re all happily sitting in their luxurious houses bought many moons ago for the price of a pack of peanuts, and raking in their stupendously-generous pensions.

And you’re paying for it, young mug, through higher taxes and that eye-wateringly large mortgage.

That - more or less - was the thesis put forward by Shadow cabinet minister David Willetts at a speech to the London School of Economics yesterday, reported on the front page of today’s Financial Times.

I say more or less because he didn’t actually put it in those words. But the basic facts are pretty much the same, albeit with a Money Blog twist.

Willetts - the Tories’ universities and skills spokesman - estimates that no less than a third of all UK pension benefits are held by those aged 55 to 64.
Those aged between 45 and 54 claim another quarter of the pension pot.
Housing wealth, too, remains overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of the grey and nearly grey.

The aggregate value of housing held by those aged between 50 and retirement age now stands at close to £1.3 trillion - more than twice the amount of any other group.
The next most property-rich age group were those 75 and over.

Younger people, meanwhile, are footing the bill, through paying a disproportionately heavy tax burden, not to mention those massive mortgages.
Generations X and Y, Willetts calls them.

Willetts is so concerned about the problem of intergenerational inequality that he has written a book about it. He blames the problem on globalisation, which has had the effect of depressing wages for younger workers, thus making it harder for them to save to invest or buy their own homes.

Increased longevity has also had an effect by reducing benefits, he notes, before adding rather optimistically:
‘My view is that boomers are not so selfish that they will not make sacrifices.’

Hmm.

So what do you think then, are the younger generations really in such a bad position?

Has a (semi-) young pup any chance of a decent house and pension these days, certainly without working like a dog into their 70s and even then relying on an inheritance?

If so, how did we get to this sorry state of affairs? Are you young and angry, and if so why?

Did the baby boomers feather their own nests and leave the younger generations (apart from their own offspring, of course) to sort the mess out?

Or was it impossible to predict this state of affairs? Are the boomers really ready to make some sacrifices, as the shadow minister suggests?

If so, what would you give up, Mr and Mrs Boomer?

Some of your pension, perhaps?

Greater inheritance tax?

Or a tax on the profits from the sale of your home?

Thoughts please.

(another excellent artile from the citywire blog)

treliac

You can have DH's personal pension and the liabilities that went with it - unpaid mortgage and all. Only not the paltry redress he got for its misselling. Sorry, but we're keeping that.

StevieJ

Malcolm. wrote: »

Do baby boomers feel guilty about shafting younger generations?


Willetts - the Tories’ universities and skills spokesman - estimates that no less than a third of all UK pension benefits are held by those aged 55 to 64.
Those aged between 45 and 54 claim another quarter of the pension pot.
Housing wealth, too, remains overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of the grey and nearly grey.

I wonder what pension benefits those aged 0 to 10 have got is it me or would you not expect older age groups to have larger pension pots?

This is an interesting statement, I can't quite work out who are not the BB's own offspring, is this a post from a Martian

Did the baby boomers feather their own nests and leave the younger generations (apart from their own offspring, of course) to sort the mess out?

tartanterra

Malcolm. wrote: »

Willetts is so concerned about the problem of intergenerational inequality that he has written a book about it.

Thank god for that. That's bound to sort it out then!

baby_boomer

I think the younger generation should get out and vote - which they currently don't. "In my day" students took their politics far more seriously. Nowadays they foolishly think it makes no difference.

Until they do vote, democratic politicians are unlikely to take their concerns seriously. And who's fault is that?

But the generational thing can be exaggerated against the baby_boomers. Each new generation gets benefits from the ongoing technological revolution & ongoing economic growth which previous generations were "denied".

Cheap computers, cheap phone calls, online shopping, online cashback sites, cheap overseas flights, MSE, affordable laser eye surgery, botox are just eight recent developments that spring to mind. I'm sure that everyone here could add to this list.

And then there's the thousands of things that haven't even been invented yet which will benefit youngsters but not us.

Not to mention the ongoing sexual revolution that was supposed to happen in the 1960s but didn't really get going properly until the 1990s IMHO.

It's not so bad, being young .

Guilty? No. Envious? Yes .

Sure the baby_boomers have done well relative to previous generations, but this doesn't mean that they will be better off in their own lifetimes than those born 40 years later.

Nor does it imply any collective intention to "shaft" later generations. I think this is an important point and I take issue with the OP for putting it in those terms. It's both provocative and incorrect.

StevieJ wrote: »

This is an interesting statement, I can't quite work out who are not the BB's own offspring, is this a post from a Martian

Did the baby boomers feather their own nests and leave the younger generations (apart from their own offspring, of course) to sort the mess out?

:rotfl::rotfl: :rotfl:

Exactly. Who is going to inherit our wealth?

The next generation . And the ones after that . And the one after that . Wealth cascades downwards. And we didn't benefit from this as much as we might have done because our parents had their financial lives ruined by World War 2.

We are growing collectively richer as a country and as a world. Current economic & fiscal setbacks should not blind us to this long term reality.

CLAPTON

Willetts is worth a few million and I understand that Cameron and Osbourne aren't short of a bob or two.... and they are not baby boomers so it must be alright then

Malcolm.

baby_boomer wrote: »

I think the younger generation should get out and vote - which they currently don't.

Until they do, democratic politicians are unlikely to take their concerns seriously.

You received a mention in the thread title.

tartanterra

Malcolm. wrote: »

Willetts - the Tories’ universities and skills spokesman - estimates that no less than a third of all UK pension benefits are held by those aged 55 to 64.
Those aged between 45 and 54 claim another quarter of the pension pot.
Housing wealth, too, remains overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of the grey and nearly grey.

Now there's a shock.
Older people (who have had more time to save) have more than younger people (who have had less time to save).
Just as well this "rocket scientist" is in Parliament really.

Malcolm.

I would be interested to see an (anonymous) wealth distribution by age poll on here. However I think people would tell fibs.

Malcolm.

tartanterra wrote: »

Now there's a shock.
Older people (who have had more time to save) have more than younger people (who have had less time to save).
Just as well this "rocket scientist" is in Parliament really.

It's the extent of the distribution which is being highlighting, not simply the trend.

treliac

Malcolm. wrote: »

I would be interested to see an (anonymous) wealth distribution by age poll on here. However I think people would tell fibs.

Umm.... in my 20's I had nothing. I now have a little more than nothing, by dint of hard work and careful money management.

I'm not sure what that tells anyone about age and relative entitlement though. Nor what lies ahead for the 20 somethings of today.