Over Privileged Boomers are not 'Sacred Cows': Wilby

macaque_2

ukcarper wrote: »

I agree things seem to be in a mess but I'm not sure it would have made much difference how hard boomers worked perhaps you could explain how it would have.

The baby boomers have run country as a cash cow for short term gains. Industries were systematically scrapped or sold to foreign buyers, hugh debts were run up and non jobs have proliferated.

ash28

Wookster wrote: »

I'd say the baby boomers did work hard generally (unlike today's youth) but they got much more than they paid for (by way of pension entitlements & benefit from the house price bubble). Correction of this anomaly will be borne but the under 40's today (in the main).

The only house we benefited from in terms of making any money, was the house we sold last year but we had lived in it almost 20 years. There was certainly no bubble when we bought it. The houses before that we usually just about broke even or in early 1990s we lost money.

Do you mean state pension entitlements - mine entitlemant has changed from when I was in my 40s when it was aged 60 it went to 65, to when I was in mid 50s it went to 66, and who's to say it won't change again. It most likely will.

We actually haven't received anything from the system other than child benefit (I'm talking cash benefits not health and education - everyone benefits from one or both of those) and won't until I'm at least 66, 11 years away. I expect the state pension to be means tested by then.

I'm not bothered about "granny taxes", bus passes or winter fuel allowances, they'll be a distant memory when we reach state retirement age, It's just as well we didn't rely on government to make provision for our old age.

ukcarper

macaque wrote: »

The baby boomers have run country as a cash cow for short term gains. Industries were systematically scrapped or sold to foreign buyers, hugh debts were run up and non jobs have proliferated.

As with rugged you are blaming the majority for the actions of a few who may or may not have been boomers and it has nothing to do with how Hard boomers have worked.

vivatifosi

macaque wrote: »

The baby boomers have run country as a cash cow for short term gains. Industries were systematically scrapped or sold to foreign buyers, hugh debts were run up and non jobs have proliferated.

I don't know who this is aimed at, but the people who are normally blamed for systematically scrapping industries were the Thatcher/Major governments. Margaret Thatcher was born in 1925 so was definitely not a boomer, Major was born in 1943 and also not a boomer. David Cameron, who may or may not sell off the Post Office was born in 1966 and is thus a GenXer.

ash28

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The majority of housing is owned by boomers. Most young people cant buy because boomers won't sell to them at an affordable rate.

Housing policy is determined by banks, governments, and corporations run by boomers.

We will have to work and pay tax to bankroll pensions, benefits and public services for retiring boomers we will never receive ourselves.

What do you want,a medal?

I can argu with you now - I've actually found some stats regarding age and homeownership.

Owned with or without a mortgage

under 35s 2.1 million
35 - 44 3.1 million
45 - 64 5.9 million
65 plus 4.1 million

The youngest boomers 48 and the eldest have just retired so the figures aren't 100% accurate - but boomers do not own most of the property in the UK - what ever you might like to think.

http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/housingresearch/housingstatistics/housingstatisticsby/householdcharacteristics/livetables/

Table 809 in household characteristics - it's actually about income but you can easily see the household ages for owner occupiers whether mortgaged or unmortgaged.

Boomers might be the largest single property owning group - but they don't own the majority of the houses.

macaque_2

vivatifosi wrote: »

I don't know who this is aimed at, but the people who are normally blamed for systematically scrapping industries were the Thatcher/Major governments. Margaret Thatcher was born in 1925 so was definitely not a boomer, Major was born in 1943 and also not a boomer. David Cameron, who may or may not sell off the Post Office was born in 1966 and is thus a GenXer.

Margaret Thatcher, blessings and peace be upon her, stopped subsidising lame duck industries. I believe that was the right thing to do. Much more damage was done to industry during the reign of Brown and Blair.

pqrdef

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Housing policy is determined by banks, governments, and corporations run by boomers.

So what age group would you expect to be running things?

Perhaps you want compulsory retirement at 55, to make way for the next generation? No, you'd resent the pensions. Maybe compulsory demotion at 55, or euthanasia.

Just remember you'll be that age soon enough, and there'll be another generation snapping at your heels. What are your plans?

pqrdef

Actually, of course, most boomers weren't born middle-class. Only 5% went to university - an unprecedented number, but still only a small minority. Most boomers, thanks to the Butler Act, failed their 11-plus and went to a secondary modern, and many of those were near-Dickensian institutions.

They left school at 15 with no qualifications and got jobs in the pits and factories. And they didn't start their married lives in a "starter home", they went on the council house waiting list. And then the jobs disappeared.

Your more typical boomer is now wondering what he's going to live on when his ESA stops, while IDS tells him he should have no trouble finding a job, once he's attended this class where they'll teach him that it's best not to be late for the interview.

Graham_Devon

Sapphire wrote: »

The point you are missing (presumably because it suits you, or perhaps because you are ignorant) is that the explosion in housing prices happened during the last 15 years – so was brought on by people younger than 'boomers'.

Why do you never blame what happened on events during the last 15 years – so greedy speculators, people who over-borrowed, bankers, and so on? Why target your parents' generation? Do you despise your parents, or what?

You simply don't make sense. You need to read up on your social history of the 50s, 60s and 70s – presumably you didn't study the subject at school.

And envy is not an attractive trait...

This is what I mean. Theres no acceptence, just straight into attack.

What did I actually state for you to come back with all of that?

All I stated wad that boomers need to accept they have had it very good. I included pensions in that too.

You've turned round abd suggested I despise my parents, simply because I suggested it would be good for people to accept they have had it a lot better than any living generation.

vivatifosi

macaque wrote: »

Margaret Thatcher, blessings and peace be upon her, stopped subsidising lame duck industries. I believe that was the right thing to do. Much more damage was done to industry during the reign of Brown and Blair.

That's not because they were boomers though, it's because they were pillocks. Whatever you think of the average boomer in the street, most don't think "I know, let's start an illegal war".