Indy: Economic circumstance is forcing grown adults to live like juveniles

Gracchus_Babeuf

Mr._Pricklepants wrote: »

Not so much drumming in ideologies, but yes, the boomer generation has failed miserably, raising a generation of spineless whiners.

It seems to me that you are the one whining here.......

Gracchus_Babeuf

ukcarper wrote: »

Not every body is like you and bought a 3 bed semi first time and if you end up in negative equity (remember prices are already down from peak) you will not be able to move or take and even if you still have a small amount of equity you will not be able to take advantage of lower interest rates.

I bought a house in 2005 with a 44% deposit, so I wouldn't be in negative equity. Mind you, I was 38 at the time!

DervProf

Percy1983 wrote: »

Its quie simple, can you afford the same house as your parents if you do the same (or very similar) jobs than they did at your age?

Good point, and I think I have suggested this before.

My mother worked part time in a shop and did a bit of house cleaning. My father repaired mowers for the local council. Hardly high flying careers, even they will admit. They still live in the same property they bought as FTBers. As far as I understand it today, people in similarly paid/skilled jobs (postmen, sales assistants, motor mechanics, refuse collectors, nurses etc - what I call "proper" jobs) don't often spend ~£250k on their first home in their early to mid twenties.

Even if they didn't buy an iPhone and spend £80 on a Friday night out every week, I doubt they could afford anywhere near that amount.

Gracchus_Babeuf

robmatic wrote: »

I think the meaning has changed over the years, and people seem to consider themselves a 'professional' if they have a job. In the same way that absolutely everybody is now middle class, apparently.

The old definition of 'professional' is someone who has been through a course of academic study, earning him/her self a qualification that officially authorises them to dispense expert advice and consultation in exchange for a given fee.

This old definition is now totally out of date. Nowadays, a 'professional' is simply anyone in a white collar occupation who performs a middle management role or higher, or alternatively uses expert knowledge to perform a specialised role (eg. a software developer). This reflects the general expansion of white collar jobs since the 1970s.

DervProf

ukcarper wrote: »

And talking rubbish the posters problem is not the price of houses but the fact that they are having difficulty getting a mortgage even though they can afford it.

So, is it "problem solved" if the banks lend more ?

I say it's a short term fix that will lead to bigger problems further down the line.

ILW

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

The old definition of 'professional' is someone who has been through a course of academic study, earning him/her self a qualification that officially authorises them to dispense expert advice and consultation in exchange for a given fee.

This old definition is now totally out of date. Nowadays, a 'professional' is simply anyone in a white collar occupation who performs a middle management role or higher, or alternatively uses expert knowledge to perform a specialised role (eg. a software developer). This reflects the general expansion of white collar jobs since the 1970s.

In that case, current "professionals" should not be comparing their lot to the professionals of 40 years ago, and complaining about how unfair it all is.

I would suspect that a partner in a city law firm can buy a similar house to what a partner in a city law firm could have bought in the 70s or 80s.

I would compare software developer to something like a mason or a technician.

Gracchus_Babeuf

ukcarper wrote: »

Lots of commuters where I live less that 1 hour to London season ticket just over £3.3k. Nice 3 bed semi £250k , 2 bed terraced £200k. Not unaffordable for a couple of professionals I would have thought.

Really? Where? I live in Reading and my small 95 square metre mid-terraced house is worth £260k (OK, it's in a fairly upmarket area but even so). And a one year season ticket with tube fare is £4,516 and rising 3% higher than inflation for the foreseeable future.

Gracchus_Babeuf

ILW wrote: »

In that case, current "professionals" should not be comparing their lot to the professionals of 40 years ago, and complaining about how unfair it all is.

I would suspect that a partner in a city law firm can buy a similar house to what a partner in a city law firm could have bought in the 70s or 80s.

I would compare software developer to something like a mason or a technician.

The world has changed -you don't seem to have understood that. In the 1970s only 7% of 18 year olds went up to university, now it's around 30% - maybe more. The middle class has expanded hugely. So, the comparison is still perfectly valid.

And your comparing a software developer to a technician or mason is plainly risible, given that freelance IT experts (practically all graduates these days) can earn anything up to £650 per day - depending on skill and seniority of course. And now there are recognised professional certifications for IT staff from the BCS and other bodies.
As for law/accountancy/medical partners the truth is that only a proportion of professionals in these fields will ever rise to these dizzy heights. Many never will.

You are comparing the rich of 1972 with the rich of 2012 - I am referring to the middle middle-class.

ukcarper

DervProf wrote: »

So, is it "problem solved" if the banks lend more ?

I say it's a short term fix that will lead to bigger problems further down the line.

You have totally missed the point.

Gracchus_Babeuf

ruggedtoast wrote: »

And where do all the library assistants live?

In 1 bed flats. :rotfl:What the hell do you expect?