Baby Boomers Were More Financially Responsible

gadgetmind

trets77 wrote: »

I'm sorry but when i stop seeing programs on the telly like Homes under the hammer , with a endless line of Baby boomers rubbing their hands at what rental income they can get off the younger generation

When I was at Uni, I rented off someone older than me. He owned a few houses but I didn't bear a grudge. Property ownership hasn't changed anything like as much as grudge ownership.

The only way it will change is to stop the next wave of promised new homes being purchased by people wanting to buy to rent and live off the poverty of others.

People are just wanting a return on their capital, a return the banks don't deliver.

Anyway, if you think it's bad now, wait until you see what REIT regulations in 2012 bring to bear.

FATBALLZ

The boomers didn't get themselves into debt, they spent on the credit card to be inherited by their successors instead.

gadgetmind

FATBALLZ wrote: »

The boomers didn't get themselves into debt

Some did, some didn't.

they spent on the credit card to be inherited by their successors instead.

That's not how credit cards work. Wish it was!

BobQ

As one of the baby boomer generation, I think it is true that people of my generation were less inclined to borrow money than those who followed us. The idea that this makes us more responsible is however unfair as with any generisation.

My perception is that the baby boomer generation were brought up with the attitude that debt was fundamentally bad. The important thing was get a good job. A good job was usually defined as one that required an education and skills: professional jobs (medicine, teaching,the law) were for the academically gifted, but skilled jobs (plumber, electrician, engineering) or responsible jobs (bank clerk, civil servant, insurance) that offered a good income and some stability or a good pension were the goal for the rest. A good job meant you could afford to take on the risk of a mortgage or the occasional loan.

Younger generations have a very different attitude to debt. They have had to take on educational debts and have needed to take on mortgages they could hardly afford for fear of prices being unaffordable. They have naturally become more relaxed about living with debts and credit and store cards were easily available. They have also had to contend with a different employment market. Stable jobs for life have declined, many have become self employed through choice but many more have done so because of the employment models of particular industries. Its easy to say that younger generations are less responsible about managing their finances but in reality they have just been conditioned to accept debt as a way of life in an uncertain world.

One difference that has not helped the younger generations is the way they have bought into the materialist model. In my experience baby boomers are more likely to accept second hand goods, more willing to wait till we could afford to buy new. Younger generations expect new carpets, furniture, whitegoods immediately. They also they expect a good or brand new car and regular holidays. But I suspect this stems from their relaxed view of debt too.

BobQ

trets77 wrote: »

I'm sorry but when i stop seeing programs on the telly like Homes under the hammer , with a endless line of Baby boomers rubbing their hands at what rental income they can get off the younger generation then i might stop thinking they are not stealing off their children and grand children to fund a cushy lifestyle that will be beyond the reach of the "NINJA" generation, no matter how long they live or how hard they save.

Yes that is very generalised, but basically near the mark IMO.

The only way it will change is to stop the next wave of promised new homes being purchased by people wanting to buy to rent and live off the poverty of others. But of course even building these is opposed by the baby boomers who don't want anything built within 2 miles of their big garden. it not enough to monopolise the current housing stock it seems , you have to oppose the building of any more much needed houses for young families ect.

Also introduce rent control , abolish free TV licenses , winter fuel payments and free bus rides for those who own more than one house. Tax rental income from the first pound.

And after homes under the hammer we of course have a endless stream of baby boomers wanting know what the stuff in their house is worth.

and you wonder why the NINJA generation feel so alienated.

You have a serious chip on your shoulder about things. The reality is we all try to do our best in the free market that most people seem to be content to operate in. Just because some people decide to invest in property and want a return on the investment, you seem willing to subject an elderly person living on a state pension to lack of heating, inability to afford to travel.

Oh and rental income is taxed from the first pound.

Derivative

I am 21 and looking at those around me I would be very very surprised if this wasn't the case.
As a student it is fairly difficult to find people who even budget their spending, never mind anything like saving for the future.

esuhl

After the war, the birth rate increased dramatically as men returned to their wives and made up for lost time. When those children grew up, the number of people in work dramatically increased - thus the productivity of the nation and tax revenue also dramatically increased.

Combine that with greater social rights (women had worked during the war and expected to work after, again increasing both the proportion and number of workers).

Also during the war, people from different social classes were thrown together and this resulted in better post-war social integration. No longer were the opportunities of the "working class" arbitrarily limited to such a great extent.

Technological advances, such as cheap air travel and computerisation increased the size of markets and efficiency.

An increased rate of immigration (in some cases without corresponding increases in social welfare costs) further increased productivity.

Finally, the availability of credit has increased (till the latest economic downturn) and there has been a decreasing stigma in accepting it, so inevitably a greater proportion of people are able to make poor decisions regarding borrowing.

And the largest item most people ever buy (a house) has cost a greater and greater proportion of people's wages.

So, I don't think that baby boomers demonstrated more skill at handling their money. A golden age of increasing prosperity, increasing social mobility, relatively low housing costs, a larger workforce as more immigrants worked in addition to the increased native population and women working, combined with a reducing stigma towards debtors has contributed to people taking more risky peronal decisions in recent years... I would say.

esuhl

trets77 wrote: »

I'm sorry but when i stop seeing programs on the telly like Homes under the hammer , with a endless line of Baby boomers rubbing their hands at what rental income they can get off the younger generation then i might stop thinking they are not stealing off their children and grand children to fund a cushy lifestyle that will be beyond the reach of the "NINJA" generation, no matter how long they live or how hard they save.

If you were to get your wish and be instrumental in the downfall of capitalism... what would you replace it with?

guitarman001

Yeah, it's ok to rip the younger generation off because nobody else is giving the older folks a better return. Too damn right I'VE got a chip on my shoulder about it. I can't afford to start a family or buy a bog-standard (decent) flat due to artificially high housing prices. I'd rather see a major downturn than continue on this path. How about that for a Christmas message? (And I'm in a good decent-paying job)

gadgetmind

guitarman001 wrote: »

Yeah, it's ok to rip the younger generation off because nobody else is giving the older folks a better return.

Whether it's "OK" is something people need to decide for themselves, but that it's a natural consequence of very low interest rates (which make mortgages cheap and casg savings pointless) is plain to see. Nothing will change until interest rates rise.