No country for young men — UK generation gap widens

setmefree2

N1AK wrote: »

You can't judge a generation based on a couple of people living on your road. You can find examples at either end of the spectrum. My grandparents lifestyle would be entirely impossible to a couple trying to bring up 4 kids on an equivalent single income today. I'd be as wrong to assume that all pensioners are as well off as they are, as you'd be to assume they're all as badly off as your neighbours.

My point is - pensioners in London don't have the retirement income or savings to match the value of their house. They aren't the beneficiaries of house price inflation - the younger generation are - the ones who inherit the houses. They may be millionaires on paper but they aren't living like millionaires (far from it).

lisyloo

They aren't the beneficiaries of house price inflation

They would be if they moved (as pretty much everywhere is cheaper than London)
I do appreciate that's tricky if you have ties to an area.

I am in a similar but opposite situation myself.
It would be logical for me to move to London but I don't want to move away from family including an 87 year old disabled MIL.
I'd also have to move from a 5 bed house to a 1 bed flat because of the difference in prices.

Cyberman60

lisyloo wrote: »

They would be if they moved (as pretty much everywhere is cheaper than London)
I do appreciate that's tricky if you have ties to an area.

I am in a similar but opposite situation myself.
It would be logical for me to move to London but I don't want to move away from family including an 87 year old disabled MIL.
I'd also have to move from a 5 bed house to a 1 bed flat because of the difference in prices.

Indeed, so are you going to promote a 'bedroom tax' for private owners ? :rotfl:

Cyberman60

CLAPTON wrote: »

By the time boomers were 25 many had worked 9 years and most had worked at least 7

By the time the current generation are 25 they will probably have worked on 2 or three year

why would we expect the asset level to be similar?

why do we describe going to University as 'bleak'?

Most boomers didn't travel round the world (until maybe retirement)

whilst almost all the young people I know have been round the world at least once many stopping in Aus to work a while.

why is this bleak?

in most parts of the country excepting London and parts of the SE housing is affordable for the majority of people who have saved a deposit.

Young people have made different choices to the previous generations and don't feel their life is bleak at all.

6% of immigrants over the age of 25 have never worked according to stats released today, as opposed to 1% of indigenous. That's a major scandal and why we need UKIP to stop uncontrolled immigration of layabouts !!!!

N1AK

setmefree2 wrote: »

My point is

They aren't the beneficiaries of house price inflation - the younger generation are - the ones who inherit the houses.

Then your point is wrong. The younger generation don't benefit from inheriting a more valueable house because the higher value:
a) means there's more chance of inheritance tax
b) the houses they need to buy themselves cost more as well

As a thought experiment, would the young be better off if houses were £10 but they couldn't inherit property from parents? If you, correctly, come to the conclusion they wouldn't then hopefully you'll see the flaw in your original logic.

lisyloo

Indeed, so are you going to promote a 'bedroom tax' for private owners ?

No, I'm not sure why you think that.
I am very much against the mansion tax especially for cash poor pensioners.

The answer of "JUST MOVE" is not acceptable in my view.
I'm just saying they could be better off if they moved somewhere else (so could I), but family is incredible important to people especially when they become even a little bit dependent.

lisyloo

The younger generation don't benefit from inheriting a more valueable house

I'm 46 and there's a good chance I'll be retired and house paid off before I retire,
I'm sure there are a few young people who inherit, but statistically it is NOT the norm.

chucknorris

N1AK wrote: »

Then your point is wrong. The younger generation don't benefit from inheriting a more valueable house because the higher value:
a) means there's more chance of inheritance tax

Yeah, nobody wants to inherit £10m and be lumbered with a £4m tax bill, nobody outside of an asylum that is.

N1AK

thorsoak wrote: »

1. No pensioner bonds - no savings (paid off our mortgage)

5. Inflation beating pension - oh yes - thanks for reminding me. My pension will go up by £14 per 4 weeks in April. My tax code on my 21 hours @ nmw will reduce to 259 because my pension is going up.

I'm actually funding those who receive wtc and hb - they don't pay tax on those benefits (and before you comment, I do not begrudge them those much-needed benefits )

No your not funding anyone. If you've only just managed to pay off your mortgage then you clearly didn't have a high enough income to be one of the ~20% of people who pay as much or more in tax than they receive in state services.

Moan all you like about 'just' getting £728 pa more for doing nothing. You don't begrudge them the benefits, but you'll happily defend the policies that are slashing them and handing the money to wealthier pensioners instead... How very noble.

Cyberman60

lisyloo wrote: »

I'm 46 and there's a good chance I'll be retired and house paid off before I retire,
I'm sure there are a few young people who inherit, but statistically it is NOT the norm.

The NORM is changing, obviously, because we have far more houseowners with valuable assets than we had 40 years ago !!