Getting on the ladder: It's not impossible

MacMickster

StevieJ wrote: »

I was under the impression that he/she already had a property, just not as sumptuous as his/her parents (I think they may be boomers:)) I may be wrong though?

Boomers?

Don't get you know who started about boomers. They (and I) are the spawn of the devil don't you know - and their own children get lightly singed on the fire and brimstone of hell.

kabayiri

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I would love to know where all these cut price DIY bargains in up and coming areas are to be found, because in a year or so of house hunting I never found one.
...

I know a woman who during the early noughties bought a "bargain" semi in Salford for £27K. It even had a modernised bathroom.

Track forward a couple of years when most other properties had appreciated in value. The value of hers? Officially : £17K ! Ouch.

There's usually a reason why cheap properties are cheap.

[Deleted User]

wotsthat wrote: »

People don't just wake up from dreams and find they're earning a decent income.

There's very little I can do about house prices but improving income is pretty much under my own control.

Yes, i know that. I didn't do my Masters for the fun of it (It was quite fun though) - although I purchased my first house when i was earning 'average' (graduate) salary, then moved to a 'family' home when i had 2 kids, a wife, and a far bigger salary.

BUT - I know most of the population isn't capable of earning £50k, and most probably dream of £30k

wotsthat

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Yes, i know that. I didn't do my Masters for the fun of it (It was quite fun though) - although I purchased my first house when i was earning 'average' (graduate) salary, then moved to a 'family' home when i had 2 kids, a wife, and a far bigger salary.

BUT - I know most of the population isn't capable of earning £50k, and most probably dream of £30k

You realised the steps required to turn a dream of, say, £30k into a reality.

Why do you think the rest of the population isn't capable? What do you know that they don't?

grizzly1911

wotsthat wrote: »

You realised the steps required to turn a dream of, say, £30k into a reality.

Why do you think the rest of the population isn't capable? What do you know that they don't?

30+ years ago perhaps 5% of people gained adegree. Today that figure is closer to 10 times that amount. Are there 10 times as many jobs that match the graduate salaries, in real terms, from 30 years ago. If we ddin't have 10x as many graduating would the income spread be much different to that which we have now?

If everyone qualified at the highest level then would we all be in the 99th percentile or above?

wotsthat

grizzly1911 wrote: »

30+ years ago perhaps 5% of people gained adegree. Today that figure is closer to 10 times that amount. Are there 10 times as many jobs that match the graduate salaries, in real terms, from 30 years ago. If we ddin't have 10x as many graduating would the income spread be much different to that which we have now?

If everyone qualified at the highest level then would we all be in the 99th percentile or above?

If everyone had a 1st class degree then it would rather diminish he value of said degree. That's taking the argument to an extreme though because it'll never happen.

There's plenty of scope for most people to either improve their employability or to have done so in the past. Do you think the number of kids leaving school without 5 GCSE's at grade C is reflective of their intellectual ability or an opportunity squandered?

You must have come across people in McDonalds earning probably minimum wage who have something about them that makes you think they're headed for better things? It's attitude as much as intelligence or qualifications.

grizzly1911

wotsthat wrote: »

If everyone had a 1st class degree then it would rather diminish he value of said degree. That's taking the argument to an extreme though because it'll never happen.

There's plenty of scope for most people to either improve their employability or to have done so in the past. Do you think the number of kids leaving school without 5 GCSE's at grade C is reflective of their intellectual ability or an opportunity squandered?

You must have come across people in McDonalds earning probably minimum wage who have something about them that makes you think they're headed for better things? It's attitude as much as intelligence or qualifications.

I don't dispute that there is always scope for improvement for most. How far that improvement can take everybody is questionable.

Inequality seems to be widening rather than closing.

It does make you wonder hoiw the country prospered and survived without all these qualifications. As you say attitude, aptitude and common sense should be equally, if not more relevant than qualifications alone. I am not so sure intelligence is always a factor in qualifications.

[Deleted User]

wotsthat wrote: »

You realised the steps required to turn a dream of, say, £30k into a reality.

Why do you think the rest of the population isn't capable? What do you know that they don't?

I've got the capability to earn up to £150k a year at the moment (since that's what I've been offered as a contractor rate recently).. don't peg me at £30k.

It's a tautological argument. The majority of the population don't have the capability to earn £30k-50k because they don't currently do so. If they did, then it would distort the job market so that £30-50k was the average.

If you look at this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/07/exam_results/gcse_fc/html/all_subjects.stm

You'll figure out that 61% of children gain C or below in their GCSE subjects. That's pretty mediocre. I could also be mean and say that 50% of people have an IQ of less than 100 (but that's by definition... and i don't see it as a great means of measuring aptitude).

So we can't all be Quant analysts in the city, footballers, solicitors, doctors or X-factor winners. The majority will earn less than the minority above them.

I'll throw this in also:


Apparently it's only the top 25% of people that earn £31k or more - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8151355.stm

wotsthat

ringo_24601 wrote: »

It's a tautological argument. The majority of the population don't have the capability to earn £30k-50k because they don't currently do so. If they did, then it would distort the job market so that £30-50k was the average.

Not earning £30k isn't evidence of the lack of capability to do so. Can't see to much of an issue with increasing average wages either - rather than a distortion it's a sign of increasing prosperity. Other countries have higher average wages and it's generally seen as a positive thing.

Take my kid at McDonalds who sees the light, goes to night school and gets better GCSE results and goes into, say, nursing eventually earning £28k. I see no downside for them or the economy.

The GCSE results are interesting. I don't know if you seen any GCSE papers lately but to think that 61% of people aren't intelligent enough to get a C would be terribly depressing.

I'd bet there's a link between IQ and earnings but I'd bet the link between qualifications and earnings is much stronger. It's because qualifications are a better indicator of attitude than IQ.

Calfuray

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

A lot of them don't have your salary. But having said that, the main reason (in my opinion) is today's fixation with buying a first house that's 'almost perfect'. My own generation knew the secret - that you must get on the ladder asap and buy as reasonable a sh!tehole as possible. Then trade up when the mortgage repayments are 'pocket money'.

Can I just ask though, having bought that sh*tehole, how do you trade up? Who would want it if it wasn't that good a house?