Will Releasing Pensions lead to a lot more BTL

Thrugelmir

CLAPTON wrote: »

In what way was the period before 2007 the least productive in UK history?

Output per head.

A puzzle that's been unsolved for some years.

Productivity is relative to standard of living.

Bantex_2

I am a boomer in my mid fifties. I would dearly love to be 35 years younger even if I had to give everything away and start again.

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

Economics is not a zero sum game: because some-one gains doesn't mean that anyone has lost.

How does that work then?

Thrugelmir

grizzly1911 wrote: »

How does that work then?

Keep expanding the money supply and the availability of credit. Then leave it to the next generation to sort out the mess. :think:

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

How does that work then?

if it were a zero sum game most of us would be working on the land in abject poverty

has clean water, electricity and gas, hospital made the vast majority poorer so that a few can be richer?

bigheadxx

CLAPTON wrote: »

I really can't understand what you are trying to say.

You seem to want immigration and not want it.
You seem to resent boomer spending and resent them not spending.


The clear reality is that we in the UK are all very rich by any historical standard and virtually any world standard.

It may or may not be true that one section is a bit better off that another but all have riches beyond anything people could dream of when the first boomers were born.

Economics is not a zero sum game: because some-one gains doesn't mean that anyone has lost.
Go travel the world and see what real poverty is like.
Then rejoice you live in such a wonderful country and have such excellent opportunities, health care, education etc and stop being envious because you have read some garbage about inter generational inequalities.
And yes, even rejoice that people are living longer and in better health even if it does throw up some minor, easy to solve issues.

We are rich because we can manipulate the system. And yes, look at the poverty in those countries and ask yourself if our gain is not their loss. Every winner creates a loser, whether it's across generations, gender or country.

Thrugelmir

bigheadxx wrote: »

We are rich because we can manipulate the system. And yes, look at the poverty in those countries and ask yourself if our gain is not their loss. Every winner creates a loser, whether it's across generations, gender or country.

The West has exploited much of the rest of the world for a very long time. Times are a changing.

CLAPTON

bigheadxx wrote: »

We are rich because we can manipulate the system. And yes, look at the poverty in those countries and ask yourself if our gain is not their loss. Every winner creates a loser, whether it's across generations, gender or country.

You must be a very evil person then as you claim to have cause so must suffering in the world.

Conrad

CLAPTON wrote: »

1997 boomers were aged 31 to 51
and in
2007 between 41 and 61

so in this period they probably made up about 25% of the whole population and probably more than 50% of the working population.


One would expect them to have been a major economic factor in this period : how could it be otherwise?

House prices can be reduced by building more houses: this is not technically difficult and other countries have managed to do that without all the agonising in the UK

Just build more houses.

Now a growing majority of of the economic active people are no longer boomers so these 'new' people can magically show how clever they are and solve all the 'problems ' you perceive we have.


Boomers have already past considerable assets to their children and as they die off their huge assets will pass to their children or grandchild: doubtless there will be a new no hope generation declaring war on them for inheriting the earth.

Build more houses and more migrants come for a piece of nirvana and you solve nothing. More houses, more people, more roads, more congestion, more intensive farming, less nature, stress on services, is this really what we want? When do we stop?

CLAPTON

Conrad wrote: »

Build more houses and more migrants come for a piece of nirvana and you solve nothing. More houses, more people, more roads, more congestion, more intensive farming, less nature, stress on services, is this really what we want? When do we stop?

There is no relationship between building more houses and more immigration.

whatever reason they came it certainly wasn't because of the excellence of our housing.


you confuse cause and effect.