An entire generation locked out of property ownership

Percy1983

chucky wrote: »

of course houses aren't cheap. they never were.

but if you want to argue about everything else, just let me know

Sure, lets discuss everything, where do you want to start?

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Apart from when you said everyone in their 20s is priced out of the market. :cool:

They most probably are, even here in Oldham.

By all means there will be exceptions at a guess.

mutter

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Not everyone in their mid twenties is earning £18.5k though are they? I don't mean to be harsh but that's a pretty low salary.

A single person on that kind of salary, living in the south east, probably isn't going to be buying a place of their own without a lot of help.

I made the point in reply to dianadors' earlier post, in which she compared two 'girls' earning £18,500, one of who was a pargon of virtue who spent half her take home pay ons ervicing a 40 year mortgage, and the other who was a profligate spendthrift.
The implication (I felt) was that careful people can afoord to buy their own home, and I was challenging that.

Of course, dianadors lives in South Yorkshire, and my daughter's whole life is in Brighton And Hove - they call it London-By-Sea, but whilst it's London property prices, it's definitely not London wages.

£18,500 might be a pretty low salary, but it's more than £7,000 more than the minimum wage.
It's probably more than most of the people you come across on a normal day in Brighton - people who work in shops and pubs and restaurants, people who cut your hair or clean your windows, as well as those working in the background in admin and call centres and for councils, support workers, teaching assistants, cleaners and careworkers, ancillary workers in hospitals ..... the list goes on.

It just seems so harsh that for thousands of people like her, there's little prospect of ever owning their home unless they say goodbye everything and everyone they know and make a 200 mile trek to pastures new.

ukcarper

mutter wrote: »

I made the point in reply to dianadors' earlier post, in which she compared two 'girls' earning £18,500, one of who was a pargon of virtue who spent half her take home pay ons ervicing a 40 year mortgage, and the other who was a profligate spendthrift.
The implication (I felt) was that careful people can afoord to buy their own home, and I was challenging that.

Of course, dianadors lives in South Yorkshire, and my daughter's whole life is in Brighton And Hove - they call it London-By-Sea, but whilst it's London property prices, it's definitely not London wages.

£18,500 might be a pretty low salary, but it's more than £7,000 more than the minimum wage.
It's probably more than most of the people you come across on a normal day in Brighton - people who work in shops and pubs and restaurants, people who cut your hair or clean your windows, as well as those working in the background in admin and call centres and for councils, support workers, teaching assistants, cleaners and careworkers, ancillary workers in hospitals ..... the list goes on.

It just seems so harsh that for thousands of people like her, there's little prospect of ever owning their home unless they say goodbye everything and everyone they know and make a 200 mile trek to pastures new.

The trouble is that has always been the case in the South East back in 1972 when I first bought I was on salary equivalent to £25k now and my wife £12.5k. I had to move 20 miles further from London to be able to buy it would still be possible to buy on those salaries where I live.

Graham_Devon

Just referring back to my original OP:

Those aged over 50 had the majority of wealth and younger workers had been left paying higher mortgages than baby boomers born between 1947 and 1964, the report said.

For anyone who wishes to talk about iphones being the problem!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12758367

Even reports by the NIESR are stating the previous generation had it easier.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Just referring back to my original OP:

For anyone who wishes to talk about iphones being the problem!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12758367

Even reports by the NIESR are stating the previous generation had it easier.

What about the people who bought in the mid 90s, houses in relation to wages were at there cheapest then.

Cleaver

mutter wrote: »

£18,500 might be a pretty low salary, but it's more than £7,000 more than the minimum wage. It's probably more than most of the people you come across on a normal day in Brighton

According to the ONS the mean average salary for Brighton is £26,102 and the median is £21,592. So most of the people in Brighton will be on over £18,500, but that's still quite a shockingly low salary for what I always thought was quite an affluent place.

I guess it's always going to be a place where wages are out of whack with house prices though as it's a first / second home choice for people in London. I suppose the property market in the area should really be considered against the backdrop of London wages.

PasturesNew

Cleaver wrote: »

According to the ONS the mean average salary for Brighton is £26,102 and the median is £21,592. So most of the people in Brighton will be on over £18,500, but that's still quite a shockingly low salary for what I always thought was quite an affluent place.

I guess it's always going to be a place where wages are out of whack with house prices though as it's a first / second home choice for people in London. I suppose the property market in the area should really be considered against the backdrop of London wages.

It's a seaside place... the stats will be skewed. I bet people are divided into three camps:
1] Local, low paid, seasonal work in tourism - and admin jobs in local shabby firms.
2] Public sector/council workers/teachers/police etc
3] Peeple wot get on da train and earn shedloadz in LUNDUN!!

2 and 3 will skew it for 1.

mutter

ukcarper wrote: »

The trouble is that has always been the case in the South East back in 1972 when I first bought I was on salary equivalent to £25k now and my wife £12.5k. I had to move 20 miles further from London to be able to buy it would still be possible to buy on those salaries where I live.

My parents moved here from York in 1968 and bought a bog standard 3 bed semi for the princely sum of £4,250!
We've just sold it for a little under £200,000 - the bottom end of the going rate for similar houses as this one had been neglected and needed a new bathroon, kitchen, windows and boiler, as well as redecoration throughout.

At the time, he was a skilled baker and confectioner - I just googled similar jobs and the going rate seems to be around £18 - £25k.
Mum didn't work.
There was no help from parents or anything.

There's no way a couple in similar circumstances could have bought their house now, so not surprisingly, it's been bought by a builder/developer who intends to bring it up to scratch and add it to his renral portfolio.

mutter

PasturesNew wrote: »

It's a seaside place... the stats will be skewed. I bet people are divided into three camps:
1] Local, low paid, seasonal work in tourism - and admin jobs in local shabby firms.
2] Public sector/council workers/teachers/police etc
3] Peeple wot get on da train and earn shedloadz in LUNDUN!!

2 and 3 will skew it for 1.

Aint that the truth!

An hour by train to The Big Smoke, and half an hour up the motorway to Gatwick.

Cleaver

PasturesNew wrote: »

It's a seaside place... the stats will be skewed. I bet people are divided into three camps:
1] Local, low paid, seasonal work in tourism - and admin jobs in local shabby firms.
2] Public sector/council workers/teachers/police etc
3] Peeple wot get on da train and earn shedloadz in LUNDUN!!

2 and 3 will skew it for 1.

To be fair though, there will be a fourth catagory of fairly well paid professional people as you obviously find in every city. Solicitors, doctors, accountants, company directors, architects, software developers, finance managers, IT workers, marketing professionals, business owners etc. etc.

I would imagine that this group of workers will be a bigger group than the other three.