Defeated and trapped. Young look on in despair at The Kingdom of the Boomers

BillJones

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Another insightful post. Every person of that age I know who has bought a property (including our own son) has been helped with a deposit from parents, grandparents or other relatives.

That's interesting, everyone who I know has done it without any financial help from their family.

Like everyone I know, I saved up myself, from my wages.

GeorgeHowell

BillJones wrote: »

That's interesting, everyone who I know has done it without any financial help from their family.

Like everyone I know, I saved up myself, from my wages.

The huge extent to which families are helping young people with property deposits is routinely under-played, or ignored, by the ageists waging this "anti-Boomer" war. This may be because they themselves are not benefiting from such help, for whatever reason. Or it may be that it is an uncomfortable truth which counters their argument.

mystic_trev

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

The huge extent to which families are helping young people with property deposits is routinely under-played, or ignored, by the ageists waging this "anti-Boomer" war. This may be because they themselves are not benefiting from such help, for whatever reason. Or it may be that it is an uncomfortable truth which counters their argument.

Indeed. Apparently two thirds of FTB's get parental help.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/mortgages/10620187/First-time-buyers-in-golden-age-for-mortgage-support.html

ukcarper

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Some of the primary reasons why the current generation are disadvantaged compared with the Baby Boomer generation at the same age are as follows :-

Liberal post-war education policies which have majored on social engineering and anti-elitism rather than employability. Result is a high level of youth unemployment/unemployability funded via tax by those who work, with better educated and motivated immigrants taking the jobs.

Liberal immigration policies including the effect of EU membership which have helped to increase the population above an optimum level and increased the demand for everything, especially for land and property, causing severe price rises.

Liberal social policies which encourage and subsidise procreation and which have helped to increase the population above an optimum level and increased the demand for everything, especially for land and property, causing severe price rises.

Liberal welfare policies which indiscriminately treat anyone who is apparently disadvantaged as a victim and remove incentives for work, initative, self-improvement, and self-reliance. All has to be funded out of tax by those who do work.

None of these are the direct fault of the younger generation (ie under 30s). I do wonder however how many of that generation recognise these as the sources of many of their problems and will take the trouble to vote for parties that will try to do something about them. Alternatively how many will not vote at all , or will vote for parties who will compound and perpetuate these problems, because of the misguided notion that such liberalism is the modern, progressive, and civilised way to think.

You forgot to mention one of the main reason and that is the transfer of mass manufacturing to the far east and the loss of skilled and semi skilled jobs.

Moby

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Some of the primary reasons why the current generation are disadvantaged compared with the Baby Boomer generation at the same age are as follows :-

Liberal post-war education policies which have majored on social engineering and anti-elitism rather than employability. Result is a high level of youth unemployment/unemployability funded via tax by those who work, with better educated and motivated immigrants taking the jobs.

Liberal immigration policies including the effect of EU membership which have helped to increase the population above an optimum level and increased the demand for everything, especially for land and property, causing severe price rises.

Liberal social policies which encourage and subsidise procreation and which have helped to increase the population above an optimum level and increased the demand for everything, especially for land and property, causing severe price rises.

Liberal welfare policies which indiscriminately treat anyone who is apparently disadvantaged as a victim and remove incentives for work, initative, self-improvement, and self-reliance. All has to be funded out of tax by those who do work.

None of these are the direct fault of the younger generation (ie under 30s). I do wonder however how many of that generation recognise these as the sources of many of their problems and will take the trouble to vote for parties that will try to do something about them. Alternatively how many will not vote at all , or will vote for parties who will compound and perpetuate these problems, because of the misguided notion that such liberalism is the modern, progressive, and civilised way to think.

Social Liberalism freed us from the stifling chains of right wing bigotry and narrow thinking. The world is a better place as a result. Its just that people like you don't know how to enjoy life;)

moneyinmypocket

The young need a good kick up the back side - to many watch and live for townie and think they will end up on X factor.

GeorgeHowell

Another uncomfortable truth which is conveniently ignored or misrepresented by the militant ageists is that virtually nobody in the Baby Boomer generation saw themselves as raking it in at the expense of future generations. Nobody foresaw that youth unemployment would reach such levels, that property would become unaffordable to many, that graduates would routinely end up working in burger bars, that our manufacturing base would be decimated, or that state welfare would spiral out of control.

With the benefit of hindsight it would be easy to say that signs were there, but with the hitherto traditional optimism of youth pretty much everyone took it for granted that living standards would continue to rise and that the next generation would be better off still. People bought houses, paid into pension funds, and saved where they could because the conventional wisdom had it that it was the sensible and responsible thing to do for the benefit of the whole family, not because it was a good way to prepare the ground for screwing the next generation. A great many of the Boomer generation now provide a great deal of help and support for their children and other younger relatives.

I believe that the majority of the younger generation realises this and does not share the horrible, ageist, resentful, spiteful views that we see expressed on these boards and elsewhere, mainly from typically leftist, agitprop merchants with massive chips on their shoulders.

MrRee_2

It is the baby boomers duty to pay for the next generation - indeed, I have helped my offspring to purchase their first property. It's no bother, just a gift ... they will get it later anyway - let it work for them as it did for me.

That financial investment in them has ballooned through 2013, that deposit has tripled in value ..... and it's been kept in the family.

If I had held onto it it would have increased by around 1.5% in value - by giving it away it has increased by 300% and given someone else their own property, their own investment in the country, their own little part of Britain.

You simply cannot lose ............. thumbs up for Baby Boomers wherever you are, you have the unique ability to change the young lives. Give and then give again ......

GeorgeHowell

MrRee wrote: »

It is the baby boomers duty to pay for the next generation

In the way you describe it I would not argue, though of course not all BBs are in the fortunate position to afford that. I don't think there is a duty however to subsidise gap years, or unaffordable lifestyles, or knocking out three or four kids because of the obsession to have at least one of each sex.

By the way where is this property that appreciated by 300% during 2013 ? That's pretty good going even by the standards of today's HPI.

Cornucopia

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

By the way where is this property that appreciated by 300% during 2013 ? That's pretty good going even by the standards of today's HPI.

It was the deposit that increased by 300% - not the whole property value.