So how much did it cost...

ruggedtoast

Sapphire

ukcarper wrote: »

I might be wrong but I would imagine you come from a middle class family because you seem to think most boomers swan around the world drinking champagne and eating caviar.

By the way my children have a lot more than I did at thier age but then again they didn't sit around moaning.

ukcarper: I don't think it's worth expending energy trying to discuss anything with this obsessive – he believes what he wants to believe, no matter what facts you present to him.

It is indeed possible that this person comes from an affluent family, which has skewed his view of his parents' generation. Given his views, it's probable he has issues with his parents. He is possibly a failure in life and his rants may be a way of attempting to shift his own failings onto others.

For the record, I don't know any people in my profession (publishing) who have retired with massive pensions – they all live quite modestly, and have always done so without speculating on property or on anything else. (They have, incidentally, had interesting lives, probably because they were not so focused on money and worrying about property buying as many people are now.)

For myself, I lived at home with my grand-parents (we were too squashed at my parents) until I was in my late twenties. It never even crossed my mind that I should be buying property. I was too busy enjoying myself and finding out about life in general – and I don't regret it one little bit.

ukcarper

Sapphire wrote: »

ukcarper: I don't think it's worth expending energy trying to discuss anything with this obsessive – he believes what he wants to believe, no matter what facts you present to him.

It is indeed possible that this person comes from an affluent family, which has skewed his view of his parents' generation. Given his views, it's probable he has issues with his parents. He is possibly a failure in life and his rants may be a way of attempting to shift his own failings onto others.

For the record, I don't know any people in my profession (publishing) who have retired with massive pensions – they all live quite modestly, and have always done so without speculating on property or on anything else. (They have, incidentally, had interesting lives, probably because they were not so focused on money and worrying about property buying as many people are now.)

For myself, I lived at home with my grand-parents (we were too squashed at my parents) until I was in my late twenties. It never even crossed my mind that I should be buying property. I was too busy enjoying myself and finding out about life in general – and I don't regret it one little bit.

You might well be right then again he probably is just a wind up merchant might even be a boomer himself.

ruggedtoast

thorsoak

Ah yes, David "two brains" Willetts (b.1956) - personal fortune over £1.9m Baby boomer personified!

Sadly, for the majority of us baby boomers, we don't share his fortune!

lessonlearned

Rugged Toast

You are right - the figures do speak for themselves. However whilst the purchase price was indeed 2.5 times our total income it has to be pointed out that in 1970 the second income was disallowed for mortgage purposes, hence the mortgage ceiling of £3600 i.e. 3 x principal income.

To wait approx 4 and half years to buy the house outright would have been foolish because already house prices were starting to rise. We sold the same house in 1975 for £9500.

As I said before - house prices rise, then level off, sometimes they fall back but they always keep rising in the end. At least that has been the pattern thus far.

Your point about renting whilst bringing up a family and being unable to save is valid. I would say it would be virtually impossible. However, it just goes to show that people are putting the cart before the horse.

By and large, it was common in the 70's for young couples to save hard and buy a house before having a family.

This didn't mean we were celibate. We were lucky in that we were probably the first generation to benefit from reliable and freely available contraception. We could plan our lives, plan our fertility to suit our priorities. Roof then kids. Of course we took full advantage, the sex was free, going out clubbing, drinking, meals out, holidays, cost money we couldn't afford.

Young people generally lived with their parents prior to marriage. Living together before marriage - at least in the 'burbs" was generally not the norm. So yes we paid our parents our "board" and saved as much as we could for our own houses. It was commonplace.

The thing that strikes me most RT on reading your posts is what a hopelessly embittered person you are.

You begrudge everything that the generations before you have built up for themselves - by hard work. Most of us so called boomers were not born with silver spoons in our mouths nor did we have the bank of mum and dad to fall back on, the way our children do.

Most of us will try and pass some of our assets on to our children, we will help them with deposits.

In my own particular case my OH and I funded our sons through university to the tune of £40,000. How is that selfish and greedy - we didn't have to do this - we did it out of love because like most parents we want our children to have an easier life than the one we have led. I did not have the benefit of a university education.
I eventually went as a mature student when I was 40.

I now let my youngest son live here whilst he saves for his own house. I am intending to downsize to a small property so that I can give some of the equity to my sons as deposits.

I am by no means unique - most parents support their children in any way we can. Does this make us selfish and greedy.

You have a very twisted view of the world. It doesn't owe you anything.

Like many of my generation (I am 61) I came from a working class background, lived on a council estate. Everything I have I have earned, no-one gave me a leg up. I worked and slogged and did it all myself.

Which brings me back to you. Why aren't you doing the same. Why do you spend so much time posting on this website when you could be working and slogging your guts out like I and many others of my generation did.

You are too lazy that's why. I can spend time here because I am semi-retired. If I was a youngster and just starting out I wouldn't have the time.

You want it all and you want it now. I've news for you - real life doesn't happen that way.

Whinging and whining will get you nowhere. You've tried that. Now maybe its time to try something else - time to get your act together.

One last final point - Private Pensions

It was Gordon Brown who destroyed the private pension industry when he plundered them with his 5 billion tax hike - which was then squandered by the then Labour Govt. The pensions industry has never recovered.

If you are going to waste all your time on here getting into futile arguments - at least get your facts straight first.

thorsoak

ukcarper wrote: »

You might well be right then again he probably is just a wind up merchant might even be a boomer himself.

Think he is a bit of a wind-up merchant who us affluent enough to spend time in HK - not the cheapest of places to take a holiday, nor is it cheap to live there ....also has affluent parents in law who have had the temerity to make/be sitting on a fortune through hard work & buying property.....maybe they just see RT as a sponger and that is why he is so bitter :beer:

But bitter he certainly is!

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

You might well be right then again he probably is just a wind up merchant might even be a boomer himself.

I think this is just a way of writing off what he states, to be honest, hence why all those thanking the "youg are lazy, they have iphones, wah wah" are now suggesting the same thing....oh, he must be winding us up.

I mean seriously, you had someone stating they had it bad as their house was 2.5x their income. Basically like saying now....oh, we had it hard, houses were 75k against our 30k income.

He's picked up on this, and quite rightly too IMO. It's alright lating off the younger generation, but purlease don't write figures like that down!

Graham_Devon

lessonlearned wrote: »

If you are going to waste all your time on here getting into futile arguments - at least get your facts straight first.

This is what amuses me.

You've created a few paragraphs of assumptions, basically insulting a poster, as they disagree with you, and then, at the end of all that, ask them to get their facts straight before even responding to you.

Their facts WERE straight. You'd given the facts.

You didn't like the response, so went off on one.

This has been evident throughout this thread. Theres been loads more abuse and assumptions about the young generation than vice versa.

You won't like this either, I know that. But tough. You can't lay into someone else using assumptions, and then top it off by asking them to get their facts straight...it's hypocritical to the extreme!

A few followers, also in the baby boomer camp have then all colluded to nog in agreement with each other as he's caught someone out!

ruggedtoast

Sapphire wrote: »

ukcarper: I don't think it's worth expending energy trying to discuss anything with this obsessive – he believes what he wants to believe, no matter what facts you present to him.

It is indeed possible that this person comes from an affluent family, which has skewed his view of his parents' generation. Given his views, it's probable he has issues with his parents. He is possibly a failure in life and his rants may be a way of attempting to shift his own failings onto others.

As Graham points out, your interpretations of the facts are at some level of variance to logic and reason. Such as people complaining it took them an entire year to save up for one quarter of a house.

I'm not actually trying to shift my failings on to others, I am pointing out to you lot that the rosy dosy view of your generation's contribution to the world that you hold isnt shared by many people outside of it.

Considering how much has now been written about this topic, a considerable amount by sober boomer commentators like David Willetts and Jeremy Paxman , I dont think this should be a terrible surprise to you.

I mean, you are all basically in complete denial aren't you?