When my dad was my age he owned a four-bed semi - so why am I still in a rented dump?

System

"Hard" where people mean "more" I think.

The vast majority could work harder (more) if they wanted to.

It's a choice, innit. I'll stick to 35 hours thanks.

My friend is self employed, sometimes he chooses to work Sundays, presumably he thinks hard work will get him somewhere otherwise he'd be in the pub instead.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That's not what I asked though, is it.

I asked if you had to start again today....not if you had to start again on what you were on back then. That job may not be available any more. The pay for your job may now be minimum wage. That's all part of the discussion.

I'm asking if you had to start again today, with not a single penny, and work in whatever job you could get, or even the job you are in now....would you be able to afford your house within 5 years. Remember, you would need living accomodation while saving the deposit. You'd also need to pay for all the other things one needs, maybe a car and insurance for work, or travel expenses etc. Food, clothes, maybe feed your family at the same time as renting.

Remember, all you would need to do is "work hard".

Graham if you are saying it's difficult to find a decent job therefore it's hard to buy I agree with you, I have always said the lack of good job is the major problem young people face. But if you are saying people in a reasonable jobs of the type I had when I first bought can't buy now because of house prices I disagree.

GeorgeHowell

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That's ABOVE average income here. This is the problem. You suggest just working hard, but even working 80 hours a week, (hard work in my book) it's still not enough to secure her own home.

So, drilling down, is working hard simply being used as a substitute for "having a better paying job" or "having a job paying quite a way above average wage"? If so, you certainly didn't need to do that 30 years ago, as so many who have houses now have had average (and under average) paying jobs all their lives. My mum and dad being my primary example.

Plenty of people work damn hard. It doesn't mean thats the answer to home ownership.

I didn't say it was the answer to home ownership. It never has been for everyone because other factors come into play. But working hard in my experience has seldom worked to anyone's overall detriment in the longer term compared with people who don't. Saying that hard work is pointless in the context of housing, or any other context, is a very fatuous remark. One gets the impression that it may have originated from someone who would not recognise a hard day's work if it jumped up and bit him in the a**e. Make points about the housing problem by all means, but associating them with the claptrap posted by leftist, propagandising wind-up merchants does not add to their credibility/

buglawton

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

Just comes down to what is useful. A mobile phone is not always a luxury, if it helps your job it definitely isnt. Buying a house is quite sensible vs renting but not always not when prices were 50 years rents

So in the past maybe the point is people had the chance to make themselves more useful, do more work. Gain some extra income, maybe this is no longer possible. Regulation but also benefits make initiative pointless and illegal even

Im not inclined to think old people were better workers then us, the system was different though

Modern employment for those with jobs is now intensely target driven and stressful. Having a 2nd job or foregoing modern luxuries just might seem less acceptable today.

poet123

It is often a mindset though. Two of my sons want to move out, the one who earns much less is excellent at saving and budgeting, the higher earner is not, guess who has the most savings towards a house? Priorities are different for everyone. The higher earner is currently in the process of buying, a 3 bed renovated repossession for £90.000, he is a sole buyer and it will be tight to afford all the outgoings but he has seen the error of his ways re spending and is now happy to make the required sacrifices.

Sacrifices that we made when we bought 31 years ago, when we were paying interest rates of 15% on our borrowings, when we both had to work to pay the mortgage, when we had to save relentlessly for two years to get the deposit together etc, etc.

Yes, it is hard to buy a property, it always has been, Yes it is hard to stay in work, during our working lives it always has been. Qualifications, flexibility and hard work are the way to get what you want. There have never been any short cuts, there still aren't.

GeorgeHowell

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Rugged wasn't suggesting people shouldn't work hard. He was simply saying working hard doesn't mean you'll earn enough to buy a house. You twsited that, presumably to create one of your "all the youths are lazy good for nothing" arguments that many on this forum appear to hold so dear.

Either I missed that last bit or you added it afterwards.

People should not work hard is exactly what he said and you have chosen to provide an interpretation of it with which I do not concur, especially given the general tenor of his postings..

I certainly have never said that "all the youths are lazy good for nothing", not do I believe that to be the case. But I do believe that among those who constantly whinge that the world owes them a living that they not getting, that a conspiracy of the older generations holds them captive in penury, and that there's no point in getting off their a***s and trying to do anything about it because everything is geared against them, there is more than the average proportion of the types who are lazy and good for nothing.

morganedge

ILW wrote: »

Possibly "dad" in the OP was just better at his job than the son.

that could well be part of it.

When my dad was my age, he was earning around £120 per hour contracting for a big oil firm, and owned a big 6 bedroom house along with a number of respectable cars.
However, he's loads cleverer than I. I'm somewhat of an idiot.

I earn about £7 per hour and don't have my own place.

grizzly1911

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The question I favour is this one:

To anyone who thinks it's just a case of "working hard" etc....

If you lost your house today, and had to start from scratch again, could you buy your equivalent house within a five year period?

Majority of the time, for those who are honest, the answer is no. That says it all really.

No I couldn't because it has taken more than 5 years, closer to 30, to get what I have. Also my lifestyle and outgoings are totally different to when I set out.

Doing the same/similar job I started with and buying a similar house to my first one then the answer is yes. Living the life I did then and saving for 8 years, 3 of those with SWMBO.

I do appreciate that here is a paucity of good jobs and that the breadth and depth of jobs no longer exist like they did. they are much more polarised.