Generation Whine

StevieJ

the_flying_pig wrote: »

Of course there are also plenty of boomers who don't care and/or who are too stupid to properly cast their mind back to their younger days.

Yes I am stupid enough to remember house prices increasing at an annualised 30% and interest rates of 15% when I bought my first house Oct 1988.

ukcarper

Thing weren’t that easy in 1972 house prices almost doubled interest 8% if I had delayed buying another month I would not have been able to buy.

olly300

ash28 wrote: »

To say there is no affordable housing in the UK is daft - because there is. It just may not be in the area where you live or would like to live.

There is affordable housing in the UK where there is a poorly paid or non-existent job market, and the transport links to other areas with a good job market are poor.

ILW

olly300 wrote: »

There is affordable housing in the UK where there is a poorly paid or non-existent job market, and the transport links to other areas with a good job market are poor.

So what you are saying is that houses cost a lot in expensive areas. Always been the same. You can actually buy a home within 20 or so miles of central london for less than £150k.

Graham_Devon

Regarding the topic of BTL vs FTB's and what you can do to combat this. It's simple...make investors pay the price. CGT increasing would be my favoured route.

Simply because you'd still have real landlords, i.e. those in it for the yield, as CGT doesn't affect them if they are in it for the yield.

Yet you would see those in it for pensions, quick money etc etc stop buying from the day CGT rises, and a load trying to sell quick.

This happens in other markets. The car market being a prime example. If you want something nicer, you pay the price. £1000 showroom tax for a start. Higher congestion zone fee's. Higher tax charges.

Get a car the government would prefer you to have, and you'll find yourself with no tax to pay, and possibly no congestion zone tax to pay.

The government could do this with the housing market pretty easily, favouring those buying a house to live in, and charging those buying housing as investments.

Shouldn't be a problem for real landlords, as the yield is what they are after. Will only be a problem for those trying to make the most of HPI, pricing out other people, while getting those priced out to pay their mortgage.

BTL landlords have previously said on this forum these people don't exist, it's all about the yield. They DO exist, as estate agents saw a big influx in enquries when CGT looked to go up. These are the "parasites" people often refer to.

olly300

ILW wrote: »

So what you are saying is that houses cost a lot in expensive areas. Always been the same. You can actually buy a home within 20 or so miles of central london for less than £150k.

Yes but are the transport links and schools any good?

I know cheaper areas but both the transport links and schools are poor.

This means if you buy a property there it can take you over an hour to get into central London.

Plus if like most people your job changes and the only one you can find is on the other side of London, or just outside London then you face a terrible journey to and from work.

And then I can go on about the schools where the parents use the school as a baby sitting service and aren't interested in their education. A friend of mine moved to Kent to escape the poor schools in the area.

Cleaver

Generali wrote: »

The reason baby boomers hold most of the wealth in the UK is simple, it's compound interest. They've saved through pensions and house purchase but haven't started to run down that wealth through paying for retirement for the most part.

No, I think there's a bit more to it than that (but then I quite like generational theory).

A Baby Boomer was far more likely to stick at a well-paying job they hated, and save 10% of their salary every month because it was the sensible thing to do. A Gen Y kid is far more likely to stuff a job they hate, no matter what the money, and start a jazz band instead.

All generalisations of course, but then that's generation theory for you.

Graham_Devon

Cleaver wrote: »

A Baby Boomer was far more likely to stick at a well-paying job they hated, and save 10% of their salary every month because it was the sensible thing to do. A Gen Y kid is far more likely to stuff a job they hate, no matter what the money, and start a jazz band instead.

I'd tend to agree.

My biggest problem is all I have heard about the swinging sixties

Cleaver

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'd tend to agree.

Well thank f*ck for that.

jamespmg44

Percy1983 wrote: »

Because most of the 1980 onwards children can't afford a single property to raise a family in, never mind think about a second property.

Boomers, can cash in on there £100k house they have a £25k mortgage on.

No - most of the 1980 onwards folk can't afford a big fancy house that they want to live in a lifestyle like Cheryl Cole etc.

I was born in 1981 and have a house, my sister was born in 1980 and has a house, all my friends were born in 1980 or 1981 and all have their own houses.

Some of us have nicer houses than others.

Some folk want everything handed to them on a plate - others go out and work for it. It's the same as every generation that has gone before.