Selfish Britain

lostinrates

yorkshirekev wrote: »

You didn't have it easy. In your case, just the fact that you were able to buy a house on such an income makes it different from today.

That is not to say that you have not worked hard and had difficulties. Nowadays if you want to buy a house as a FTB, then you will not be able to afford to get married and would have to be a far more senior position in your job.

As for having kids, late thirties would probably be a minimum. It is the timing of events like marriage, first house purchase and first child that has changed.

Mouch of what we have is hand me downs or inheritance.Dh got no money when his mother died but did manage to get some furniture (which his father was giving away rather than dealing with sale or keeping for his children in ''adult life''). Not one thing I'm looking at now bar my laptop was new or bought my us. Our bed is a very disreputable old divan! Our curtains are old ones of my mother's in the main.I made a pair,and in a few rooms we don't have any yet

we bought a new cooker and a new chest freezer. At our age and income I ruddy well think we should have been able to buy that, but we certainly couldn't furnish the house completely and don't expect to. Especially when we've bought a doer upper:structure comes befre furnishing...whether you bought a doer upper now (and they are harder to find) or years ago.

A._Badger

thorsoak wrote: »

Back in 1963 when we did buy our first house (and, for the record, we have only made 3 moves in 47 years) we moved in with a kitchen table & chairs - bought for £5.5s.0d with wedding present money, a second-hand bed (but new mattress) and two armchairs from my parents - and a new cooker bought on HP from Eastern Electricity! No fridge, washing machine, telly. We did have a portable radio (his) and a dansette record player (mine). We commuted into London daily - I worked as a temp - at the princely rate of 8s9d an hour (44p in today's money).

So tell me - how did we have it easy?

Sadly, this forum has been through this argument time and again.

My personal view is that people's lifestyles are so different that comparisons are extremely hard to grasp - particularly for some of the younger element, who seem unable to grasp what life was like in an era before mobile phones, the interweb, extensive foreign holidays, regular new(ish) cars, eating out as a commonplace - and so very much else.

If you try to sit one of these mosquitoes down (think 'high-pitched persistent whine') and take them through life in the (very) slow lane of just 30 or 40 years ago, it rapidly turns into Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen sketch.

They're convinced they're hard done by and nothing will shake that belief - nor their mystifying sense of entitlement.

lostinrates

A._Badger wrote: »

Sadly, this forum has been through this argument time and again.

My personal view is that people's lifestyles are so different that comparisons are extremely hard to grasp - particularly for some of the younger element, who seem unable to grasp what life was like in an era before mobile phones, the interweb, extensive foreign holidays, regular new(ish) cars, eating out as a commonplace - and so very much else.

If you try to sit one of these mosquitoes down (think 'high-pitched persistent whine') and take them through life in the (very) slow lane of just 30 or 40 years ago, it rapidly turns into Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen sketch.

They're convinced they're hard done by and nothing will shake that belief - nor their mystifying sense of entitlement.

I remember this time really well. we got our first family computer when I was inmid-late teens and we all thought it was amazing, but didn't really grasp everything it could do. when my parents were working overseas I spoke to them on the phone once a week, and when I was with themonce a week we went to a phone place to call my sister or grandparents once a week. (it used to take ages to get a phone connected).

I also remember my dad got a work provide mobile phone when he went into the private sector and we were a little embarrassed but the ''bling''. That said,these days dh needed a mobile phone and acomputer to get a job! My dad needed a landline and an address, a pen and some decent writing paper!

I think there are ''young people'' who don't remember this sort of thing,people in their mid twenties possibly don;t? But if people in their late twenties/early thrities don't then they have short memories. Or were exceptionally lucky!

ILW

Anyone on a salary of £30k or more can buy a home. It may not be in the preferred area or it may not be the preferred type of home but they are out there.

ukcarper

yorkshirekev wrote: »

You didn't have it easy. In your case, just the fact that you were able to buy a house on such an income makes it different from today.

That is not to say that you have not worked hard and had difficulties. Nowadays if you want to buy a house as a FTB, then you will not be able to afford to get married and would have to be a far more senior position in your job.

As for having kids, late thirties would probably be a minimum. It is the timing of events like marriage, first house purchase and first child that has changed.

A salary of £20 a week in 1963 is equivalent to about £692 now or £35k a year.

yorkshirekev

ukcarper wrote: »

A salary of £20 a week in 1963 is equivalent to about £692 now or £35k a year.

I am sitting on the sidelines at the moment just looking at how things are going. Moved to London from Yorkshire a few months ago and just about to start again in my old industry.

Just trying to find my feet and see whether it is worth it or realistic for me to fight like hell for five years to try and get my way up in this industry so that when I am 32/33, I will have better options.

I am fairly neutral here. Just want to see whether I can do this, or should I be thinking of emigrating and trying to get a better standard of living somewhere else.

My instinct is that without parental assistance, you would have to get very lucky nowadays to ever achieve the goal of home ownership. But the question would be: If your chances are 10-20% is it worth still going for it?

I would be very interested to read any answers on this topic as I am genuinely undecided. Thank you to anyone who responds.

JonnyBravo

DervProf wrote: »

Good post, and I think we know a few people that post on this forum who "don't give two hoots that young families are forced to live in undersized accomodation if this is the result of high house prices" (:beer:).

In fact, they positively encourage people to "get on the ladder", thus helping the madness to continue.

In a way, their advice is quite sensible, but I think it is often being given with self-interest in mind, rather than a genuine act of being helpful.

Interesting post, esp the highlighted bit.

This is the same paradox as dealing with debt and the economy.

Whilst it may be best for an individual to pay down debt rather than continue to spend it actually would be hugely bad for the economy if everyone in debt stopped spending til their debt was paid off.

Same for your "standpoint".
It may well be for the greater good if everyone stopped buying and prices fell back but this means the individual making a sacrifice for the "greater good".
What if others don't join in and prices go up? This is of course what many of the "don't buy now" crowd want. We've seen it plenty of times on here, people preaching the "don't buy yet" mantra only to re-appear and let people know "not to worry now, cos I've bought already".
People will ultimately do what's best for themselves and if that means buying when it's inconvenient for others still holding out, so be it.

If my past puchases and my rental property add to this situation and mean "young families are forced to live in undersized accomodation", so be it.
I didn't act in the way I did to achieve this, but I'm not prepared to act in a way which will help counteract this if it means one iota in increase of financial risk, reduction in income, sheer inconvenience or personal discomfort for me and my family. Sorry, it's just the way it is for me, and as has been evidenced, countless others.

yorkshirekev

JonnyBravo wrote: »

past puchases and my rental property add to this situation and mean "young families are forced to live in undersized accomodation", so be it.
I didn't act in the way I did to achieve this, but I'm not prepared to act in a way which will help counteract this if it means one iota in increase of financial risk, reduction in income, sheer inconvenience or personal discomfort for me and my family. Sorry, it's just the way it is for me, and as has been evidenced, countless others.

Perfectly rational position to take. Because you have actually done what I personally would love to do in the future, any tips? Because to me the idea of owning a house is pretty much on the same level of realism as going to the moon at the moment.

Not trying to be critical. You guys are entrepreneurs, you took the risks, you claim the benefits.

ukcarper

A._Badger wrote: »

Sadly, this forum has been through this argument time and again.

My personal view is that people's lifestyles are so different that comparisons are extremely hard to grasp - particularly for some of the younger element, who seem unable to grasp what life was like in an era before mobile phones, the interweb, extensive foreign holidays, regular new(ish) cars, eating out as a commonplace - and so very much else.

If you try to sit one of these mosquitoes down (think 'high-pitched persistent whine') and take them through life in the (very) slow lane of just 30 or 40 years ago, it rapidly turns into Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen sketch.

They're convinced they're hard done by and nothing will shake that belief - nor their mystifying sense of entitlement.

When did that awful phrase “your entitled to it” come into common use?

ukcarper

A._Badger wrote: »

Sadly, this forum has been through this argument time and again.

My personal view is that people's lifestyles are so different that comparisons are extremely hard to grasp - particularly for some of the younger element, who seem unable to grasp what life was like in an era before mobile phones, the interweb, extensive foreign holidays, regular new(ish) cars, eating out as a commonplace - and so very much else.

If you try to sit one of these mosquitoes down (think 'high-pitched persistent whine') and take them through life in the (very) slow lane of just 30 or 40 years ago, it rapidly turns into Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen sketch.

They're convinced they're hard done by and nothing will shake that belief - nor their mystifying sense of entitlement.

I also think it is very difficult if not impossible to compare now to 40 years ago. 40 years ago hardly anybody went to university, most people started work at 16 and by the time they were 21 had progressed up the pay scale. If they had a good job there is a very good chance a couple of years later they would be married and buying a house (very few single people bought houses back then). They would have lived with their parents until then giving them the chance to save the deposit.

People also had less because there was less to have and credit was hard to get. The only debt I had before I got married was the HP on the old banger I needed to get to work.

Talk about no mobiles my parents didn’t get a landline until after I moved out so I had to go round to the phone box to ring my girlfriend and she had no way of getting in contact with me.

The other thing it is still hard to buy a house if it is 4x the average wage and you can only borrow 3x the average wage.