Welcome to the Boomerang Generation

N1AK

Generali wrote: »

You can give your kids a house if you wish to do so. If you die within 7 years then the value of the houses will be calculated as part of the estate for IHT purposes, if you don't then they won't.

It blows my mind why more, not mega-wealthy, people don't do that already. If you're playing the system right then by the time you die you should have virtually nothing in your name, and have had nothing in your name for comfortably more than 7 years.

CLAPTON

N1AK wrote: »

It blows my mind why more, not mega-wealthy, people don't do that already. If you're playing the system right then by the time you die you should have virtually nothing in your name, and have had nothing in your name for comfortably more than 7 years.

king Lear did just that

paulmapp8306

ruggedtoast wrote: »

These boomers want to have house prices at ten times the average salary, they want young people to work for minimum wage in their businesses and factories, they want generous final salary pensions and their State pension tax free, they want motor homes, caravans, foreign holidays, they want to pass the burden of university tuition fees to the young when they got theirs free, and they want £900 a month for their buy to let flat in a bad area.

But now they complain when their children live at home because they can't afford to move out.

Priceless.

I think that perfectly sums things up actually - with the exception of Uni tuition fees. OK boomers MAY have got that free - but at the time only 10% or less of students went to Uni. Now its nearer 50-60%. If it were still 10% then the country could maybe afford it to be free again.

ukcarper

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

I think that perfectly sums things up actually - with the exception of Uni tuition fees. OK boomers MAY have got that free - but at the time only 10% or less of students went to Uni. Now its nearer 50-60%. If it were still 10% then the country could maybe afford it to be free again.

You might think it sums things up I think it's complete rubbish

Blacklight

That's a hell of a lot of pent up demand sitting there ready to explode once wages start to rise again.

Mallotum_X

Blacklight wrote: »

That's a hell of a lot of pent up demand sitting there ready to explode once wages start to rise again.

And thus pent up inflation..

BobQ

A._Badger wrote: »

On the contrary. They still have to invest in job-related training. In some cases they need to teach basic language and maths skills, too.

It's grotesquely unfair to blame employers for a confidence trick perpetrated by the education industry and politicians.

I am not saying employers are to blame, as you say the politicians and commercialised universities started this, but in my view employers have taken advantage of the situation by offering less on the job training and instead demand degrees for jobs that never used to need them. Hence more of the cost of training is paid for by the student rather than employer training schemes.

ruggedtoast

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

I think that perfectly sums things up actually - with the exception of Uni tuition fees. OK boomers MAY have got that free - but at the time only 10% or less of students went to Uni. Now its nearer 50-60%. If it were still 10% then the country could maybe afford it to be free again.

The majority of universities that exist now are ex-polytechnics. These were functionally the same as universities except they couldn't award their own qualifications.

Plenty of boomers went to polytechnics for two or three years, had an experience that was indistinguishable from a university education, received a living expense grant and didnt pay a penny for tuition fees.

You would think from reading the comments on this board that there were only 7 places in higher education for the entire baby boomer generation, and the rest of them were all self educated and had no help whatsoever.

This is complete rubbish. If you had average A levels you could go away to study at 18 and not pay a penny and millions of people did. Its a shame a few more of them werent a bit more vocal when the rug was pulled from under current students rather than making facile comments about iPhones when the average student loan debt equates to hundreds of the things.

paulmapp8306

Even including polys, there were FAR fewer students entering higher education than do now. Its the normal expectation/progression for even mediocre students today - in the past it was for the more capable. I know about Poys - I went to one.

You just have to look at how many completely useless degrees are offered today - though thats another subject.

Ultimately, I have to agree that the requirement for qualifications by an employer is driven by the availability of people with those quals NOT the requirements of those quals to actual perform the job. Its a means of reducing the quality of candidates. The prefusion of quals is driven by the ammount of peopl in Uni - and the Unis are making hay on the fees.

Personally, I believe fees should go up further but with many more scolarships available for those who have the ability to succeed but who cant afford the fees. That way studnts wont go to Uni to go to Uni - they will do it only if they have the ability. That will put more people back learning trades rather than theory - which will do the country no end of good.

ukcarper

With 75% of people going to secondary modern schools and the majority of them leaving at 15 how many people had A Levels.