We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The younger generation and the future cost of housing?
Comments
-
TV rentals might have done well but I couldn’t afford one and it was a year after I moved in that I was able to rent a small black and white TV.
The main difference was that people stayed with their parents while they saved if the had moved out and rented they would not have been able to save. Also food etc were more expensive in the 70s.
People are staying with their parents now.
This is backed up by real figures. It was in the news only the other day that parents are finding more and more of their children won't or can't fly the nest.
It's increased 20% in the last 15 years.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-2151550/ONS-says-20-young-adults-living-home.html
Nice to note that you rented something as you couldn't afford to buy it though. From cast offs to renting something that wasn't needed to live. This is why I can't stand these arguments. They go round and round in some type of holier than thou circle.
Surely, simply working on the basis you are working on, young people are actually saving today by not renting TVs? or would you be happy to look at how things have moved on in this case?0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »You know people who have bought in their 30's, therefore, thats your argument? No one should "moan"? (Moan meaning discuss?)
Everyone is different. Everyone has differnt incomes. Everyone lives in different places. Everyone has different needs. Everyone has different income streams and opportunities.
And in any case, someone aged 38 saw a VERY different housing landscape to someone aged 30.
If the basis of your argument is some people you know, then I can tell you that's where you are letting yourself down.
What do you actually want people to go without? A £15 a month internet subscription?
I live in a fairly expensive part of the country and the people I know who range from 30 to 36 and are not in high paid jobs have managed to buy.
The thing is it’s not just the £15 internet contract.0 -
Some young person who wanted to save money now won't save money by not having the internet at home and not having a mobile phone as it would cost them more going out as one of the major issues is not that they can't save it's that their wages aren't likely to increase that much particularly if they stay with the same employer.
I think its fair comment that access to the internet is essential so comments about how it used to be need to consider the technological changes. Even so, expectations of lifestyle have increased and now the era of overcommitment to borrowing is coming to an abrupt end it must be a culture shock for many under 40.
We are increasingly becoming a low wage economy and many people have, as you say, no prospect of getting well paid jobs. The reason for this in my view is that too many working people are too worried about losing their job to demand higher wages. I can understand this, but the low wage economy was allowed to develop 20 years ago by an increasingly compliant workforce.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
That's because you couldn't get a TV for £80 from your local larger supermarket that was guaranteed not to break down.TV rentals might have done well but I couldn’t afford one and it was a year after I moved in that I was able to rent a small black and white TV.
I have two neighbours who have their adult working daughters living with them.The main difference was that people stayed with their parents while they saved if the had moved out and rented they would not have been able to save.
They are lucky as they have the space.
Not everyone I grew up with could stay at home as they shared bedrooms with more than one younger sibling.
I was actually told by my mother that I had the worse diet of all her children in the late 80s/ early 90s as food was cheaper in the 70s when she was bringing up my brothers'.Also food etc were more expensive in the 70s.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Food WAS cheaper in the 70s, this was somethign specifically mentioned on the BBC documentaries.
However, much like now, the 70's crash saw food prices inflate for 2 years like never seen before. Hence why if you pick the right year, food was comparatively much more expensives "in the 70s". The right year being key. Hoewever, as stated on the documentary, wage inflation soon caught up, and actually overtook the increase in food prices, making food cheaper comparitavely than it started. There was definate hardship inbetween that 2 year period however.
The 70's is a decade with massive prosperity and hardship all thrown in, much like the noughties. Picking the year to back up your argument is the key on this one.
It's slamming one generation for having the internet and mobile phones on one post, claiming they had nothing but the essentials, and then stating they rented a TV that gets my goat though.0 -
We are increasingly becoming a low wage economy and many people have, as you say, no prospect of getting well paid jobs. The reason for this in my view is that too many working people are too worried about losing their job to demand higher wages. I can understand this, but the low wage economy was allowed to develop 20 years ago by an increasingly compliant workforce.
It's not because people won't go on strike or protest it's our labour laws. They mean there is no point going on strike if you are permanent employee as you are easily replaced.
Even if the employer breaches the law unless you are very canny and know how to use the law against them they will sack you.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »People are staying with their parents now.
This is backed up by real figures. It was in the news only the other day that parents are finding more and more of their children won't or can't fly the nest.
It's increased 20% in the last 15 years.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-2151550/ONS-says-20-young-adults-living-home.html
Nice to note that you rented something as you couldn't afford to buy it though. From cast offs to renting something that wasn't needed to live. This is why I can't stand these arguments. They go round and round in some type of holier than thou circle.
Surely, simply working on the basis you are working on, young people are actually saving today by not renting TVs? or would you be happy to look at how things have moved on in this case?
As usual you miss or ignore the point I rented the TV after I had saved enough to buy house.
If people are living at home and earning a reasonable wage lets say £25k they would have £1600 a month so it should be possible to save £20k in a couple of years especially if they are part of a couple.0 -
I live in a fairly expensive part of the country and the people I know who range from 30 to 36 and are not in high paid jobs have managed to buy.
The thing is it’s not just the £15 internet contract.
You are making a lot of presumptions about how young people live.
Seriously very few of the twenty-somethings I work and socialise with have:
1. Cars (as even if they can afford to run the car they can't afford the insurance)
2. Go on lots of holidays
3. Buy lots of gadgets
Yes they do go out if they can afford it.
Unfortunately for lots of them their jobs are not local to where their parents or anyone they can stay with in their family lives, so they have no choice but to rent unless they want to remain unemployed.
The people I know who have the most gadgets are over 50. Simply because they are always asking someone younger how to set this up or how to do something with it.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Your missing a few points:If people are living at home and earning a reasonable wage lets say £25k they would have £1600 a month so it should be possible to save £20k in a couple of years especially if they are part of a couple.
1. Not everyone is on a 25K wage
2. Not everyone has a partner to buy a property with
3. And most importantly not everyone has parents or a family member they can live with where their job is.
Those that do try and live with them as it's cheaper, easier and more comfortable then having to put up with a landlord and houseshare.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Food WAS cheaper in the 70s, this was somethign specifically mentioned on the BBC documentaries.
However, much like now, the 70's crash saw food prices inflate for 2 years like never seen before. Hence why if you pick the right year, food was comparatively much more expensives "in the 70s". The right year being key. Hoewever, as stated on the documentary, wage inflation soon caught up, and actually overtook the increase in food prices, making food cheaper comparitavely than it started. There was definate hardship inbetween that 2 year period however.
The 70's is a decade with massive prosperity and hardship all thrown in, much like the noughties. Picking the year to back up your argument is the key on this one.
It's slamming one generation for having the internet and mobile phones on one post, claiming they had nothing but the essentials, and then stating they rented a TV that gets my goat though.
I think you will find that food was relatively more expensive in the 70s infact wage inflation has out stripped RPI by almost 100%0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards