For babyboomers housing "has been free"

wotsthat

ringo_24601 wrote: »

So, should we stand by and watch as progressive generations get poorer and poorer?

Why not apply some more anecdotal to that? Are you better off than your parents when they were your age? Were they better off than their parents?

I've done some research into my own family tree. Nearly every generation since the early 1800's was better off than the one before. I've seen them go from agricultural labourers, to industrial labourers, to a steam engine fireman, a steam engine driver and an engineering business owner. It took a step backwards with my dad but mainly because he took George Best's motto* to new levels. I'm better off than any of them and I left school in the early '80's when exactly the same gloomy outlook was being predicted for us. My son left school about 3 years ago in much the same environment - it's been tough for them but they all seem to be doing OK and I'm confident they'll be wealthier than me.

Showing a graph of the average FTB increasing by three years during a financial crisis when FTB's were locked out of the mortgage market isn't evidence of much at all. It's certainly not evidence that we're standing by and watching generation after generation getting worse off - in fact that's nonsense - there's no evidence that generations are getting progressively poorer.

*I spent 90% of my money on women and drink. The rest I wasted.

[Deleted User]

It's hard thing to compare; I'd say my house is smaller than theirs when I was 8; but then I live in a considerably more expensive area. I just looked the price up, and whilst it's a bigger house, It's about £100k less expensive than my house. My dad was considerably better off than his council-house living parents. My mum's parents did ok for themselves really as they were shop owners and bought an east-end property when it was dirt cheap. Annoyingly, they almost bought a shop on Oxford street (i don't quite know why they didn't). I suspect i'd be minted if they did.

In terms of assets, I'm sure i'm quite a bit richer than my parents were in the late 80s/early 90s (when they were mid-30s). I have no idea on my Dad's salary at that time though.

I can't complain too much about my lot personally; i'm at the boundary of gen X/Y (Born in '80). It doesn't mean I can't see what's happening to my sibling and friends though.

NB. I couldn't find a graph going back further (i'm sure i've seen one that also overlays average age of marriage too).

Percy1983

CLAPTON wrote: »

ultimately the inheritance will be passed down to the young

As great as that is the distribution is rather uneven, to which why should your prospects be reduced or increased by the good/bad choices your parents made.

Without rampant HPI inheritance is still helpful but much less of a factor.

MrRee_2

The baby Boomers properties today are the inheritence of tomorrow - someone is going to do very well out of it, and it ain't the baby boomers!

ukcarper

ringo_24601 wrote: »

And the ones who'll get seriously rich are the owners.. who are unlikely to be the 25 year olds working for NMW (Pay in the holiday/cruise/care home industry is hardly known for being good)

Some money will reach the hands of the youngsters; but the majority will not

The one who will be seriously rich are gen x who bought in the 90s when prices to earnings were at 2.5 not people like me who bought on the 70s when they were almost 5x.

onlyroz

MrRee wrote: »

The baby Boomers properties today are the inheritence of tomorrow - someone is going to do very well out of it, and it ain't the baby boomers!

Nope it's the people who own the care homes.

wotsthat

ringo_24601 wrote: »

In terms of assets, I'm sure i'm quite a bit richer than my parents were in the late 80s/early 90s (when they were mid-30s). I have no idea on my Dad's salary at that time though.

I'd bet on it. Not because I know anything about you but because the odds are on that being the case.

Life ensures that there are plenty of examples, like my dad, who are less well of than their parents but they're exceptions rather than the rule.

Houses are only one part of wealth and as prices are cyclical they are going to ensure that it's not always a straight line to progressively increased riches.

MrRee_2

Trick is to make over all your properties well before you need a care home OR, as a neighbour has done, build an extension to the family home - an annexe - to house a care nurse.

It's a fantastic idea, you employ your own care worker - the accomodation you provide is a large portion of the wage costs! You keep the house, that increases in value, the annexe adds value too.

[Deleted User]

wotsthat wrote: »

I'd bet on it. Not because I know anything about you but because the odds are on that being the case.

Life ensures that there are plenty of examples, like my dad, who are less well of than their parents but they're exceptions rather than the rule.

Houses are only one part of wealth and as prices are cyclical they are going to ensure that it's not always a straight line to progressively increased riches.

My 'capital' is only due to house price increase in the SE, rather then my parents who live in the NW. I really hate the idea that one day someone will need to take out a £500k mortgage to buy my little house; but I imagine that'll happen in the next 5-7 years.

What i'm waiting for is some salary increase - I've only seen a 1.5% rise in 3 years. I'm only coping by being awesome at my job and getting increased bonuses. I know my dad has a huge payrise in his mid-30s.. i'd like one too!

wotsthat

onlyroz wrote: »

Nope it's the people who own the care homes.

Not that many people die in care homes though and those that do tend to have only a brief stay.