Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Youngters getting a poor deal

245678

Comments

  • CWSmith
    CWSmith Posts: 451 Forumite
    Carl31 wrote: »
    CWSmith wrote: »
    It's the future for the young that worries me.

    So what is going to happen in 30, 40 years down the line? All these people with no homes of their own

    as someone mentioned on here the other day, perhaps the owbership of houses seen over the past 30/40 years will just go down as a blip in history where people did that, and housing will return to just renting as it was previously
    If so, so what? The economy changes, lifestyle changes, it happens
    We used to pay 8% VAT in this country, we now pay 20%, theres no beggars lining the streets as a result, society just adapts. its not scary, just different to what happened before

    The point is, most of these people will not be able to afford private rents in their old age. Who (if anyone) is going to bail them out. When I was young - which was years ago - virtually everyone who rented - which was most people - had council houses.
  • wotsthat
    wotsthat Posts: 11,325 Forumite
    Roota wrote: »
    They would be better off just working in Mcdonalds now without the huge student debt and wasted 4 years.

    Interesting POV - can you show your calculations to support it?
  • ukcarper
    ukcarper Posts: 17,337 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Carl31 wrote: »
    its a fair joint income, but wont supply you with a luxurious lifestyle
    Probably an average, family, household income round this way, I would say




    Median full time pay 2011 southeast £29,330 ONS ASHE
  • GeorgeHowell
    GeorgeHowell Posts: 2,739 Forumite
    edited 24 January 2013 at 12:51PM
    Pobby wrote: »
    I really feel sorry for many young folk. Off to uni, debt to the eyeballs and then the battle to get a job. Of course not every kid goes to uni. In fact, in my family, my niece and her partner earn jointy about 50k a year. Decent income but have to rent in an area in the South East where, for me, it was a piece of cake to buy when I was younger than the pair of them.

    Pensions, who knows if the state will be able to give them much. Private pensions, you sure have to pay in a lot. On top of that there are many here who are critical of youths, yoofs I think they call them.

    Well said yoofs knocked on my door, marketing consultants they introduced themselves as. Not convinced but at least they had a dreadful job selling me something I had no interest in. Having a go in this country which has horribly changed over the years.

    So they smoke dope, drink. Not overly surprised. Most likely feel like no hopers which is saddening. I find it very hard to see where this is going to lead us. Kids need a better deal.

    A lot of that is true.

    There is ageism on this forum, but whereas I have seen a number of threads put up along the lines "Selfish, greedy boomers are screwing the young and should be euthansed asap !", I haven't seen any that say, "Yoof are all useless smackheads who should be put in concentration camps". A lot of the youth-criticising is just defence against idiotic trolls who should be put on Ignore by every other poster.

    Part of the real problem is a world where burgeoining population is chasing stretched resources and the developed world is losing out to the developing world. As a nation we have to embrace the 'global race' concept and lose the idea that we can have it easy, with lavish welfare, profligate public spending, and ever earlier retirement. We can't, those days are over and things will only get worse for the younger generations if that reality is not faced up to.

    The other part of the problem lies in education and upbringing. Bringing in immigrants whilst so many of our own youth are unemployed is madness, but it happens because they are better prepared for the employment world. Parents and schools must prepare children for the real world of work and endeavour, not keep them in a sort of protective, indulgent bubble, screened from the realities of life until it suddenly hits them like huge smack in the face when they finally have to fly out of the nest and are faced with competitors, predators, and adversities.

    University is not the be all and end all. Labour's abjectly failed social engineering, ant-elitism expriment of putting up to 40% through it has made those who do go not feel like failures. They are not, and there are many other ways of preparing for earning a living which will suit many people better. The fees business might at least have the effect of returning sanity to higher education.
    No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.

    The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

    Margaret Thatcher
  • Generali
    Generali Posts: 36,411 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    ukcarper wrote: »
    I agree things are tough for young people but the main reason is the lack of decent jobs

    I don't think this is as big a problem as is claimed.

    Was working in a factory or in a mine that great a job? From what I've read the work was hard, low paid, dangerous and dirty with little chance of betterment.

    Ok, there were a small number who became foreman or even a manager but for the vast majority they did much the same job for the rest of their days that they did aged 15 or 16 when their apprenticeship ended.

    I suspect that a big part of the problem is taxation: a man working in a factory or a mine in the 1950s or 60s would have paid negligible amounts of tax whereas these days the state spends almost half of GDP and many think that it should spend even more!

    We can hardly expect young people to stand on their own 2 feet having taken huge amounts of their money from them before they start!
  • Turnbull2000
    Turnbull2000 Posts: 1,807 Forumite
    edited 24 January 2013 at 3:57PM
    I agree with the others, 50K joint income is actually quite poor for the SE. I wouldn't even consider it that great in my own North East.

    (EDITED TO 50K!)
    Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    PaulF81 wrote: »
    Its why 10% of our best uni grads are heading abroad. I will be doing the same in the very near future.

    Sinking ship and all that :( The boomers did it.

    You will be sorely missed :T
    'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher
  • ukcarper
    ukcarper Posts: 17,337 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Generali wrote: »
    I don't think this is as big a problem as is claimed.

    Was working in a factory or in a mine that great a job? From what I've read the work was hard, low paid, dangerous and dirty with little chance of betterment.

    Ok, there were a small number who became foreman or even a manager but for the vast majority they did much the same job for the rest of their days that they did aged 15 or 16 when their apprenticeship ended.

    I suspect that a big part of the problem is taxation: a man working in a factory or a mine in the 1950s or 60s would have paid negligible amounts of tax whereas these days the state spends almost half of GDP and many think that it should spend even more!

    We can hardly expect young people to stand on their own 2 feet having taken huge amounts of their money from them before they start!

    Is that right tax as % of GDP was very similar to now and basic rate income tax was 35%.

     

     

     
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    ukcarper wrote: »

    Is that right tax as % of GDP was very similar to now and basic rate income tax was 35%.

     

     

     

    Higher sales tax (VAT) disproportionately hits the poor.
    'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher
  • GeorgeHowell
    GeorgeHowell Posts: 2,739 Forumite
    StevieJ wrote: »
    Higher sales tax (VAT) disproportionately hits the poor.

    But most necessities are exempt and utilities at a lower level.

    By the way who are "the poor" ?
    No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.

    The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

    Margaret Thatcher
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 346.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 251.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 451.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 238.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 613.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 174.5K Life & Family
  • 251.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.