The younger generation and the future cost of housing?

FTBFun

An average family terrace is £600k plus? What a load of rubbish. Where are you looking - Hampstead?

Percy1983

Thrugelmir wrote: »

That's the point at issue. Its only £6.80p.

A generation back. That's not how people treated their money.

A different attitude.

Well one thing I will say is we like the generations before us still need to entertain ourselves.

So yes I may spend £6.80 a month on a phone to keep myself in the entertainment loop as such, but I bet I drink 4 pints less a month than the average generation before me while keeping myself entertained.

In short we all 'waste' money on entertainment, its how much we waste which is the question, £6.80 on a mobile is fine £40 a month on an iphone would be a problem.

Now we talk about basics, is it possible to get by in modern society without a mobile phone? are you at a disadvantage without internet access?

ukcarper

I would agree that there is more to spend on now and not having a mobile and internet access would put you at a disadvantage. But when I was saving to buy a house in the 70s our idea of a night out was a quiet night in the local and when we did buy the house we had no TV and very little furniture.

I would say in general young people spend a lot more on entertainment and gadgets etc than we did. That is not to say that all young people do that or that all older people were responsible hard savers or that if we were young now that we wouldn’t be spending more.

I would not criticise people for spending money and enjoying themselves but is no good complain you can’t afford to buy a house.

MrRee_2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How are they gonna do that?

A number of options are open:-

1. Gift them the house.

2. Rent it to them for the loss of interest on the equity.

3. Transfer the mortgage to them.

4. Charge them the cost of the mortgage.

5. Let them live in it free and leave it to them in your will.

There may well be other options.

olly300

ukcarper wrote: »

I would agree that there is more to spend on now and not having a mobile and internet access would put you at a disadvantage. But when I was saving to buy a house in the 70s our idea of a night out was a quiet night in the local and when we did buy the house we had no TV and very little furniture.

DVDs are very cheap particularly if you borrow them from mates. In fact I've got lots of free DVDs thanks to the national papers.

Watching things on the internet or iplayer isn't expensive.

Once you have a games console and borrow games it's not expensive. (I don't have one btw but know how much these things cost.)

Alcohol from supermarkets is cheaper than the pub.

In regards to furniture you obviously didn't have the delights of Ikea in the 1970s and your local large supermarket/DIY store didn't sell home furnishings cheaper than department stores, markets etc putting them out of business.

ukcarper wrote: »

I would say in general young people spend a lot more on entertainment and gadgets etc than we did.

That's because they are cheaper and many things didn't exist until the 1990s.

Plus many things are getting obsolete. For example MP3 players and compact digital cameras can be had very cheaply now, however many people don't have either as they can use their mobile phone.

ukcarper wrote: »

That is not to say that all young people do that or that all older people were responsible hard savers or that if we were young now that we wouldn’t be spending more.

I would not criticise people for spending money and enjoying themselves but is no good complain you can’t afford to buy a house.

It's not really a comparison.

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.

Graham_Devon

I'm SO tired of these arguments.

TV rental outlets did good business in the 70's. People couldn't afford to buy them, so rented them. How is this any different to a phone contract, or sky? It's stupid to suggest people wanting everything today is a new thing when rumbelows (i think?!) was doing very good business putting items in your house you wanted today but couldn't afford to buy.

To be honest, I don't know anyone who has sky anymore in my peer group. We all just have freeview or freesat now. Again, times have moved on, and sky isn't needed anymore.

I think people are often quick to forget the boom in renting white goods and audio visual goods 20-30 years ago and are far to quick to condemn people today.

There was a series on the BBC recently about the 70's, showing how people were the first holidaying abroad. British holiday places were setup specifically for the brits to holiday there. People were spending a MONTHS worth or wages on a washing machine, and all on credit.

Then it's the "oh, we had cast offs of everything". That's not true in the slightest. Again, the boom of the credit card STARTED in the 70's. People were out literally buying now, paying later.

Why is this denied over and over?

To be comparing mobile phones to a time that didn't even have them shows just how weak the argument is.

By the theories banded around on here, young people are actually saving money today, by not renting a TV and Video Recorder.

ukcarper

The problem is they do both how many young people are prepared to go without. As I said while I was saving I didn’t buy any records etc and my Saturday consisted of a couple of drinks at the local.

I agree a major problem is the lack of employment opportunities but a lot of people who moan have reasonable jobs.

The people I feel sorry for are people in their teens or early 20s not the people in their 30s as I know enough people in their early 30s who have managed to buy properties.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

The problem is they do both how many young people are prepared to go without. As I said while I was saving I didn’t buy any records etc and my Saturday consisted of a couple of drinks at the local.

I agree a major problem is the lack of employment opportunities but a lot of people who moan have reasonable jobs.

The people I feel sorry for are people in their teens or early 20s not the people in their 30s as I know enough people in their early 30s who have managed to buy properties.

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?

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm SO tired of these arguments.

TV rental outlets did good business in the 70's. People couldn't afford to buy them, so rented them. How is this any different to a phone contract, or sky? It's stupid to suggest people wanting everything today is a new thing when rumbelows (i think?!) was doing very good business putting items in your house you wanted today but couldn't afford to buy.

To be honest, I don't know anyone who has sky anymore in my peer group. We all just have freeview or freesat now. Again, times have moved on, and sky isn't needed anymore.

I think people are often quick to forget the boom in renting white goods and audio visual goods 20-30 years ago and are far to quick to condemn people today.

There was a series on the BBC recently about the 70's, showing how people were the first holidaying abroad. British holiday places were setup specifically for the brits to holiday there. People were spending a MONTHS worth or wages on a washing machine, and all on credit.

Then it's the "oh, we had cast offs of everything". That's not true in the slightest. Again, the boom of the credit card STARTED in the 70's. People were out literally buying now, paying later.

Why is this denied over and over?

To be comparing mobile phones to a time that didn't even have them shows just how weak the argument is.

By the theories banded around on here, young people are actually saving money today, by not renting a TV and Video Recorder.

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.

olly300

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm SO tired of these arguments.

TV rental outlets did good business in the 70's. People couldn't afford to buy them, so rented them. How is this any different to a phone contract, or sky? It's stupid to suggest people wanting everything today is a new thing when rumbelows (i think?!) was doing very good business putting items in your house you wanted today but couldn't afford to buy.

It was Rumbelows. I remember it from the 80s.

I always thought it was weird that people rented TVs and washing machines until I had it explained to me.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

<snip>
Why is this denied over and over?

The people who state they didn't have anything in the 1970s when they were younger adults were always moneysavers like we are now.

However the thing they fall down on is making generalisations about the young people of today.

The people I know with all the gadgets etc are teenagers and university students who aren't independent as their parents pay for things. Once they have to pay for everything they quickly learn to make cost savings plus they also find they don't have the time to watch Sky.