So how much did it cost...

lessonlearned

Thank you for the explanation Percy.

Of course younger people can still get on the housing ladder - you are living proof. All it takes is a little forethought, planning and working out what your priorities are. Well done and before anyone jumps down my throat - I am not being patronising. Percy has worked hard and deserves credit where it is due.

Graham is not going to give you a straight answer - he can't and he knows it - so all you'll get is obstructive waffle.

And of course don't expect any apologies for the crass remark about older generations taking no place in society.

The poster fails to realise that quite of lot of unpaid voluntary work is undertaken by retirees. Most of us are only too happy "to put something back", not just for our own children but also to the wider communities in which we live.

ruggedtoast

ukcarper wrote: »

Thats why I said teens and early 20s have it hard but if you are in your 30s and can't earn less than the national full time male median earnings in the south east you have done something wrong.
House prices in relation to earning same now as mid 70s

What don’t you understand about saving before you have kids.

The median salary in the SE of England is nothing like the £30k per annum you seem to have decided it is.

The average salary for London, is about £30k.

The mean salary in the UK is about £26,000, I would generally not assume that people don't understand what an average is, but on the basis of the comments in this thread nothing would surprise me. The £26,000 includes the highest paid people in the country, including those who have worked all their lives.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8909797/Average-salary-falls-3pc-in-face-of-high-inflation.html

The median household income in the UK is less than £22,000 per year and falling in real terms. That means most households have less than £22,000 per year coming in.

http://www.ifs.org.uk/comms/comm124.pdf

Furthermore, from the same report:

There are good reasons to be pessimistic about the prospects for living standards beyond 2010–11.

In 2011–12, employment fell slightly and average earnings fell in real terms. The Office for Budget Responsibility expects real year-on-year growth in average earnings to remain negative or negligible
up to and including 2012–13. ... Considering all these factors, recent forecasts by IFS researchers have suggested that
median household income will continue to fall in real terms until 2013–14, and still be lower in 2015–16 than it was in 2002–03. If realised, this would represent the worst period for changes in
median income since at least the early 1960s, and probably much earlier.

A house costs £160,000 to £250,000 depending on where you live.

There is no realistic prospect of today's generation acquiring the same assets as the baby boomers did regardless of how hard they work.

I understand that most of you seem to believe in eugenics, and that the 'poor' should volunteer not to procreate. Fortunately this sad belief is not shared by many real people in the UK so incomes will have to continue to be part funded by the state, for a resentful and growing underclass of younger working poor.

On the other hand we could just build more houses, redistribute some of the wealth back down the pyramid and means test benefits for retiring boomers.

shop-to-drop

Lots of people had no phone in the house. We had a party line to reduce the cost, where we shared a line with our next door neighbours. If they were on the phone we had to wait to make a call.

A._Badger

ruggedtoast wrote: »

You haven't debated a single thing. All you seem able to do is post short ad hominem attacks.

A real keyboard warrior.

You are a laugh, Toastie. Some of the remarks you have made about your fantasy hate objects - 'boomers' - are the most objectionable things I've seen on this forum. Indeed, had they been directed at an ethnic group they would probably have been actionable.

So I suggest you knock-off the whining about ad hominem attacks. It makes you look even more of a fool.

lessonlearned

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Based on the average age of a first time buyer without parental assistance now being late 30s, yes they are anomalies.

What were they doing with their money in their late teens and twenties.

Yes students now rack up considerable debt. I find that very unfortunate, however a student loan does not preclude anyone from getting a mortgage.

I know a number of ex-graduates in their mid twenties who are still paying off their loans but now have properties and babies.

They made house buying a priority and worked and planned accordingly. They are just ordinary people, not in especially well paid jobs, mainly recently qualified teachers and nurses. No parental help either.

If they cannot afford to buy until their late 30's it is likely to be because of life and/or career choices made when they were younger.

If they had made buying a house a top priority then they would probably have achieved their goals earlier.

A._Badger

Graham_Devon wrote: »

People have kids. Always have done and always will.

That's something you will have to accept. It's hardly unique to the younger generation to have children.

The difference, however, is that the usual procedure among the people you seem to feel little but contempt for, was to have children within marriage and after buying their first property.

The say the current situation is often the reverse of that would be a gross understatement.

Graham_Devon

lessonlearned wrote: »

Graham is not going to give you a straight answer - he can't and he knows it - so all you'll get is obstructive waffle.

And of course don't expect any apologies for the crass remark about older generations taking no place in society.

The poster fails to realise that quite of lot of unpaid voluntary work is undertaken by retirees. Most of us are only too happy "to put something back", not just for our own children but also to the wider communities in which we live.

The poster fails to realise nothing. But the contempt you showed, is what you got back.

I'm not sure why you expect respect shown towards you by the very people you have gone out of your way to insult and put down?

As I said, this is half the problem with the society gap. One demands respect, but also demands to be holier than thou towards the group they expect respect from. They can't see it, and that's plainly obvious. But to be putting down the young and expect respect and manners in response is stupid.

Graham_Devon

The difference, however, is that the usual procedure among the people you seem to feel little but contempt for, was to have children within marriage and after buying their first property.

The say the current situation is often the reverse of that would be a gross understatement.

We've already covered this. How long do you expect people to wait?

RenovationMan

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Based on the average age of a first time buyer without parental assistance now being late 30s, yes they are anomalies.

Thats the problem with using "my mate, my friend's son, bloke down the pub told me" anecdotes.

They are almost completely meaningless when presented on their own.

Averages are meaningless as well because they get skewed rather badly by the extremes, as we have seen with the housing market skewed by London.

Take each case on their own merits. Yes it's hard but its not the impossibility that Graham always makes out, both for strangers and for his own finances.

RenovationMan

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As I said, this is half the problem with the society gap. One demands respect, but also demands to be holier than thou towards the group they expect respect from. They can't see it, and that's plainly obvious. But to be putting down the young and expect respect and manners in response is stupid.

This works the other way but you can only ever see things from your own viewpoint Graham. You always have and you always will.

Can you even see that you put a case forward in the first sentance and then you've done exactly what you just moaned out in the second sentence?