Bishop Bashes Boomers

IveSeenTheLight

Percy1983 wrote: »

Out of interest I don't think 1983 is the worse year to be born but it was the turning point. I say this as by the time I was 18 it was the year 2001, house prices had already started ramping and where out of reach and all I could do for many years to follow was watch them get further out of reach.

Not quite true though is it.
In 2001, house prices were on a par with circa 1989 when adjusted for inflation and below the 36 year trend.

Generali

roddydogs wrote: »

Road were "Traffic Free" in the 70s/8os, could have fooled me!

I have memories of being stuck on the South Circular for hours before the M25 was built. No luxuries like air con or cloth seats either!

The simple fact is that people are hugely richer in income terms today than in the 1970s. The troubles really are:

1. There is more to spend your money on. My parents were doing pretty well by the end of the 70s but even then, consumer electronics were a TV, a hi-Fi and a couple of radios. I didn't leave the UK until I was 13 in the mid-80s and that was quite normal, even in the pretty well off area where I grew up.
2. The Govenment spends a vastly higher proportion of GDP than in the past. Income can either go to households, businesses (profits) or the Government. Profits are up a bit but Government spending is through the roof.

House prices have risen in line with wages, broadly speaking. Expectations of spending/normal nice stuff have risen ahead of wages.

Graham_Devon

Percy, you'll find it easier to simply accept boomers had it much harder than you.

Life is so much easier!

markharding557

Stop blaming the boomer generation for the state of the housing market!
Politicians are the ones responsible, government after government did nothing to manage housing stock and even enacted policies which made things worse.

Three things could help resolve the problem.
1/ A major house building program
2/As population increases look at building up more than out
3/Focus on young unemployment because unemployed people can't buy houses.

wotsthat

Percy1983 wrote: »

I will say if I was born 20-30 years earlier I would be much better off in my profession, yes I wouldn't have a blu-ray player and 3D TV, but I could have a colour TV and a VCR, the best at the time in other words which would in relative terms cost me more than my current setup.

You're only seeing the small picture.

Percy1983 wrote: »

Out of interest I don't think 1983 is the worse year to be born but it was the turning point. I say this as by the time I was 18 it was the year 2001, house prices had already started ramping and where out of reach and all I could do for many years to follow was watch them get further out of reach.

This is why you can't see the big picture - there's more to life than house prices and ownership...

1918 - 23% owner occupiers
1971 - 50% owner occupiers
2001 - 69% owner occupiers
2011 - 64% owner occupiers

1971 looks like a peak time for boomers to be buying - why did only 50% buy if they were so cheap?

If your big problem is that you didn't buy between 1983 and 1993 you really need to get a hold of yourself.

IveSeenTheLight

wotsthat wrote: »

If your big problem is that you didn't buy between 1983 and 1993

Let's be fair, he was 10 in 1993.

Also fair to say there are many under 30 who have been able to buy.

wotsthat wrote: »

you really need to get a hold of yourself.

Ok, the thread title includes Bishops and Bashing, but lets refrain from going there

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Percy, you'll find it easier to simply accept boomers had it much harder than you.

Life is so much easier!

I'm a boomer I don't think we had it much harder than you but then unlike you and Percy seem to think it wasn't a bed of roses with houses being given away.

The main thrust of your complaint is House prices while there were times in the past when house prices have been as high as they are now.

I would say things have been pretty bad for people leaving full time education after the mid 2000s but looking at people I know in that age group house prices are the last of their problems.

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Percy, you'll find it easier to simply accept boomers had it much harder than you.

Life is so much easier!

It's not so much a case of easier/harder but that there are more ways to spend your increased income, many of which are expected of you.

Try organizing your social life or getting a job with no email, Facebook or mobile phone. People used to laugh at me in 2006 for having a little radio I listened to rather than an iPod and for having an old CRT TV. Doesn't bother me but it bothers a lot of people.

House prices have risen by more than inflation which means, by definition, other stuff has risen by less than inflation.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

House prices have risen by more than inflation which means, by definition, other stuff has risen by less than inflation.

Query, how has wages risen in comparison with inflation?

I think it is valid to consider the cost of a property against wages.
I think it's also worth considering disposable household income and how that has changed over the years.

wotsthat

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Let's be fair, he was 10 in 1993.

Also fair to say there are many under 30 who have been able to buy.

There's a train of thought that people hop into a time machine and hop out in 1971 (or whenever) and, because they're so special, will have arrived with same opportunities they had in 2013.

Looks to me like that our intrepid time traveller would need to be even more awesome to buy in 1971 compared to now.