'Generation rent' excluded from home ownership

Percy1983

I keep seeing posts around saying when 90% mortgages come back, is it just me who can see them everywhere?

chucky

Percy1983 wrote: »

I keep seeing posts around saying when 90% mortgages come back, is it just me who can see them everywhere?

not that i've looked closely recently but i don't think there are that many that have good rates and or are easy to get.

JonnyBravo

Graham_Devon wrote: »

These "when I was younger I lived hand to mouth" threads just go round and round in circles.

Whole lifestyles have changed. Just as they had changed 40 years ago when others were doing it. It's like your Granddad telling you "well when I was a lad, I was down the mine at 11 years old chipping out coal in the pitch black....you won't do that now, you want it all".

Lifestyles have changed with generations.

As Cleaver says, good post.
Thing is, it seems as if one of the (possibly?) largest changes is going to be the move back towards fewer people being able to own the house they live in.
Again, it's a little pointless, people moaning about how their father managed to buy a house on an average wage so why can't we? etc etc.

Lifestyles have changed with generations.

GlynD

Graham_Devon wrote: »

These "when I was younger I lived hand to mouth" threads just go round and round in circles.

Whole lifestyles have changed. Just as they had changed 40 years ago when others were doing it. It's like your Granddad telling you "well when I was a lad, I was down the mine at 11 years old chipping out coal in the pitch black....you won't do that now, you want it all".

Lifestyles have changed with generations. To get to uni and get jobs you have to often leave your parents and rent. Yet now people are suggesting living with parents. To get a job, you often have to move, people tell people to move to earn more to buy a house, but the same people then turn around and say "well you should live with your parents if you want to save". Corr blimey, you can't do right for doing wrong.

They will tell you they never went on holiday. Yet I've heard all about the holidays people used to go on. Whole towns were boom towns for holidays. The difference is, the same money back then got you to Blackpool. The same money today get's you to Spain. Things have just moved on. Infact, it's cheaper often to go to spain now then it is to go to Blackpool for a week. People daming others for going on holidays seem to forget these differences.

My Dad is the same. He never went on holiday, knuckled down he did. But then insists on telling me "hey look Graham whats on TV, used to go there on holiday, how it's changed". But no, he never went on holiday!! He doesn't consider a holiday to North Wales as a "holiday". Yet the costs were the same back then as going to Spain now.

It's all very relative. Yet this whole iphone, don't go on holiday, don't go for a pee as we didn't even have pots to pee in back then and we bought is getting really tiresome.

As I said, my dad is the same, condeming the younger generation. Yet he took us on holidays (abroad). Took us out. Went to the pub. AND managed to buy the house I was born into, AND managed to pay for my mum to stay at home and look after me AND manage to have another kid.....and he just drove a lorry and did some odd jobs when he could. Worked damn hard and I won't deny that and never had any substansial savings of any type. But it's no different to the hours people do today. But even then its "oh, you just tap at a computer".

From my position it isn't a case of "hand-to-mouth". It's the similarity in being unable to purchase a house and having to rent long term. Severeal generations have been lucky enough to take advantage of the boom years and Mrs Thatcher's sale of council houses really gave some people the chance. For the moment though, many of those opportunities are gone and it's back to basics.

We never starved when I was young, we also had good holidays, albeit in the UK. It's not an issue of "when we were young me dad thrashed us to sleep with a leather belt" etc etc. :cool:

Percy1983

chucky wrote: »

not that i've looked closely recently but i don't think there are that many that have good rates and or are easy to get.

I will admit I not sure how easy to get they are but I will find out soon enough.

I will agree rates aren't the best and are better at 85% which are better at 80% which are better at 75% etc.

Personally I will be looking more at 85% as that seems not as bad for the sake of a few more months, but on the same point if we keep chasing the better deals we will end up saving a lot longer and buying outright.

JonnyBravo

Percy1983 wrote: »

.... but on the same point if we keep chasing the better deals we will end up saving a lot longer and buying outright.

Hardly. They don't get any better after c.60% LTV.

Percy1983

JonnyBravo wrote: »

Hardly. They don't get any better after c.60% LTV.

You do, buying outight and paying no interest.

As I say it easy enough to get to one mark and say 'if we save a bit more we will get a better deal' yes the final jump from 60% LTV to buying outright is certainly a big one.

To be honest the temptation my get too much at 90% LTV and we might jump in then, we will see at the time.

ruggedtoast

The point is that the generations that came before us decided that the many things wrong with their world werent acceptable and went about changing them. Partly for themselves and partly so that their children could grow up without serious privation and the constant threat of nuclear annihilation.

I dont think after having done that, and benefitted enormously from a very long, very benign economic cycle, its really on for baby boomers to turn round and say

"well we had it tough, so we could build a world where you would never have a secure place to live, where all the education we got for free costs you thousands, and you can retire when you're 75 in the country that has the highest incident of depression in the European Union. But you can have a plasma tv and a flight to Magaluf paid for on a credit card so stop moaning."

If people have a secure family life, a job where they are treated with dignity, and a place they can call their own home (whether bought or rented under a secure tenancy) then they will generally be pretty happy. For some reason Britain just cannot get this right for most people and I am baffled as to why.

The only other country I have been to where people are more systemically unhappy as a society than here is Japan.

GlynD

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The point is that the generations that came before us decided that the many things wrong with their world werent acceptable and went about changing them. Partly for themselves and partly so that their children could grow up without serious privation and the constant threat of nuclear annihilation.

I dont think after having done that, and benefitted enormously from a very long, very benign economic cycle, its really on for baby boomers to turn round and say

"well we had it tough, so we could build a world where you would never have a secure place to live, where all the education we got for free costs you thousands, and you can retire when you're 75 in the country that has the highest incident of depression in the European Union. But you can have a plasma tv and a flight to Magaluf paid for on a credit card so stop moaning."

That is not what I'm saying however. I'm saying that the world hasn't changed in the respect that there is still a high dependancy on long term rental of social housing and that buying a home is not an automatic right. You have to save for it. Several generations had additional benefits between the 70's and now but that is a very short time in our economic history. That seems to have created the impression that owning your own home is guaranteed. It isn't and never will be.

Graham_Devon

GlynD wrote: »

That is not what I'm saying however. I'm saying that the world hasn't changed in the respect that there is still a high dependancy on long term rental of social housing and that buying a home is not an automatic right. You have to save for it. Several generations had additional benefits between the 70's and now but that is a very short time in our economic history. That seems to have created the impression that owning your own home is guaranteed. It isn't and never will be.

Social housing has changed dramatically since the 70's and 80's. How can you say nothing has changed?