Paying the mortgage

John1993_2

DELETED USER wrote:

You assume that anyone can just "work hard" and get a post-graduate degree, then get a good job..

No, I don't. I do, though, assume that everyone could have worked hard starting in school. If you made bad decisions back then, did not put in the ffort, chose poorly, then yes, those choices will limit what you can do now. They were your choices to make, though, not anyone else's.

And although you don't have a route to my job, you are still able to make choices now that will affect your situation years down the line. Throwing up your hands and saying "it's all unfair, why can't I have a Ferrari" is always an option, but it's a bad one to take.

It's NEVER too late to work to improve your life, and it's never too early to start.

CLAPTON

DELETED USER wrote:

Rather than replying individually, to all those who claim they worked hard when they were young: I don't doubt it. I work damn hard too. Damn hard. Shattered every day, in a highly skilled job. Not my first job either.

The current problems have nothing to do with how hard people work. Life is simply unaffordable for the majority of young people because wages are too low, rents are too high and house prices are too high. By definition most people are going to be somewhere near the average, and the average young person does work hard. Sure, there are plenty of !!!!less ones that the scummy newspapers like to trot out for everyone to vent their hatred at, but most of us are trying out best and don't waste money on frivolities.

For example a lot of people have car loans now. Older people say "don't buy a car if you can't afford it", but you need some form of transport to get to work. An old car sucks up money on maintenance and isn't reliable, hardly ideal for advancing your career. Rent is already crippling so saving up isn't an option, hence people have to get a loan. I'm lucky not to have one, but I can completely understand why so many people do.

Yes, things were hard when the boomers were young, no question. It wasn't nearly as hard as it is now though. The reason we have 35 year olds trapped living with their parents or in rented accommodation is NOT a lack of hard work.

I've never claimed to have worked hard
and cars a have never been so reliable so cheap ones are a bargain


but tell us what is a good graduate salary and where they live so we can find them somewhere to buy

Loughton_Monkey

DELETED USER wrote:

...The current problems have nothing to do with how hard people work. Life is simply unaffordable for the majority of young people because wages are too low, rents are too high and house prices are too high.

A glance at "Measuring Worth" informs us here that average wages in 2010 terms (RPI) have risen fairly steadily from 1970 (low £13k) to a peak of £24.6K in 2008 with a reduction to £22.5K in 2012. RPI includes housing costs.

So should we all show pity on youngsters - 2 or 3 years into their job - earning 70%+ more than we did in what it can buy?

DELETED USER wrote:

...By definition most people are going to be somewhere near the average, and the average young person does work hard. Sure, there are plenty of !!!!less ones that the scummy newspapers like to trot out for everyone to vent their hatred at, but most of us are trying out best and don't waste money on frivolities.

It was ever thus. So what's changed? Answer: nothing.

This is a 'non point'

DELETED USER wrote:

...For example a lot of people have car loans now. Older people say "don't buy a car if you can't afford it", but you need some form of transport to get to work. An old car sucks up money on maintenance and isn't reliable, hardly ideal for advancing your career. Rent is already crippling so saving up isn't an option, hence people have to get a loan. I'm lucky not to have one, but I can completely understand why so many people do.

Why the comparison with rent and car buying cost? Why not say Utility bills are so high I can't afford holidays? Or any other pairing? You know your salary. You know how much you can afford to spend on the whole package of rent, utilities, transport, food, clothes..... so why not live within it, and leave a bit for your pension as well?

To me, you are saying simply that the house I want to live in, and the car I want to drive, are together beyond my means. Then I will pretend that taking a loan will make things 'better'. It won't. [OK I know you don't have a loan but you get the point].

DELETED USER wrote:

...Yes, things were hard when the boomers were young, no question. It wasn't nearly as hard as it is now though. The reason we have 35 year olds trapped living with their parents or in rented accommodation is NOT a lack of hard work.

It's bad enough to believe this myth, which is simply not true. But those who 'live the lie' of it by demanding and living an unsustainable lifestyle will, ironically, turn it somewhat into a self-fulfilling prophesy in their own case.

purch

bump...................................

[Deleted User]

PaulF81 wrote: »

I do all my own car maintenance, bar the cam belt, saves over 500 quid a year which gets piled straight against the mortgage. Older cars may be less reliable, but they are simpler to fix. A decent used shouldnt cost more than 4 grand, will cost next to nothing to maintain, and if you buy diesel, will cost little in fuel or road tax. Oil change every 6000 miles and the bad boy will run forever.

4 grand means a loan for a lot of people. For what it's worth I do my own car maintenance as well.

[Deleted User]

John1993 wrote: »

No, I don't. I do, though, assume that everyone could have worked hard starting in school. If you made bad decisions back then, did not put in the ffort, chose poorly, then yes, those choices will limit what you can do now. They were your choices to make, though, not anyone else's.

How dare you. You disgust me, sitting there in judgement. You know nothing about me, but assume I didn't put in the effort at school because I'm not rich. Screw you.

For your information I tried as hard as I could at school. I happened to be seriously ill, but I tried anyway. I had many personal tragedies but struggled through it all and got my degree. In a proper science as well. I'm a software/electronics engineer, and work hard at my job.

People like you are the problem. Scum who take an "I'm all right Jack" attitude and think everyone else is lazy and deserves to be kicked to the gutter.

Disgusting, absolutely disgusting. You should be ashamed.

[Deleted User]

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

A glance at "Measuring Worth" informs us here that average wages in 2010 terms (RPI) have risen fairly steadily from 1970 (low £13k) to a peak of £24.6K in 2008 with a reduction to £22.5K in 2012. RPI includes housing costs.

So should we all show pity on youngsters - 2 or 3 years into their job - earning 70%+ more than we did in what it can buy?

Apparently your maths skills are not that good. The numbers you quote are based on RPI which is mostly based on things other than house prices. Have a look at inflation adjusted house prices, unfortunately only going back to 1975:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_house_prices_adjusted_for_inflation.png

£60k to £180k, so they tripled. In the same time average wages didn't even double. Understand now?

Why the comparison with rent and car buying cost? Why not say Utility bills are so high I can't afford holidays? Or any other pairing? You know your salary. You know how much you can afford to spend on the whole package of rent, utilities, transport, food, clothes..... so why not live within it, and leave a bit for your pension as well?

Because you have to pay rent, and even rubbish places to live are expensive. You have to pay utility bills of freeze to death. You have to have transport to get to work, especially since you can't afford the rent near where the office is.

Do you honestly think so little of young people that you assume this has never occurred to them? I can tell you now that most of them have a better understanding of price inflation than you.

[Deleted User]

mystic_trev wrote: »

In a recent post, I pointed out that me (a boomer) started work in a menial Clerical job. I worked as a Clerical Assistant for Post Office Telephones (now BT) in 1972. My salary was £600 a year, which would equate to around £6,500 in todays money. Starting salaries for such posts are now around £20,000,so three times as much. Most of us worked bloody hard to get where we are today.

The key difference is that £6,500 would net you about 75% of the average house price with a mortgage back in 1972, where as £20,000 today would get you about 35% of an average house. Things are even worse in the south.

You also have to factor in the higher cost of renting and higher utility bills we have now. They make it harder to save up a deposit.

It's becoming obvious that all you boomers claiming it was just as hard or worse when you were young have not actually done the maths, or failed to understand the real cost of living for the young today.

ukcarper

DELETED USER wrote:

The key difference is that £6,500 would net you about 75% of the average house price with a mortgage back in 1972, where as £20,000 today would get you about 35% of an average house. Things are even worse in the south.

You also have to factor in the higher cost of renting and higher utility bills we have now. They make it harder to save up a deposit.

It's becoming obvious that all you boomers claiming it was just as hard or worse when you were young have not actually done the maths, or failed to understand the real cost of living for the young today.

But £600 which is what he was earning is about 8% of £7500 which was average house price in 1972.

In 1972 average house price to earnings ratio was just under 5 now it's about 5.2x.

Loughton_Monkey

DELETED USER wrote:

The key difference is that £6,500 would net you about 75% of the average house price with a mortgage back in 1972, where as £20,000 today would get you about 35% of an average house. Things are even worse in the south.

You also have to factor in the higher cost of renting and higher utility bills we have now. They make it harder to save up a deposit.

It's becoming obvious that all you boomers claiming it was just as hard or worse when you were young have not actually done the maths, or failed to understand the real cost of living for the young today.

Yes. Simple mathematics not a strong point? [Another feature of boomers is that we did learn proper maths at school]

UK Nationwide Average House Price Q2 1972 = £7,395
UK Nationwide Average House Price Q2 1972 = £167,294

£600 salary was 8.1% then.
£20,000 is 12.0% now.

Mortgage Rates then 8.5%
Mortgage Rate now 4%

Anyway. We all have to put up with high Utility bills. And petrol etc.

Your theme about high costs for the young is getting boring. Read the media. Look at the facts. Lots and lots of young people are now stepping into the market. Rushing to buy. They can afford it. If you can't, then don't you think you ought to take some sort of financial advice.......?