No country for young men — UK generation gap widens

N1AK

stator wrote: »

If only a political party came along promising to stop screwing over young people and to reform the baby boomer subsidies they would get my vote.

I've been seriously considering volunteering to help a less anti-poor candidate with canvassing etc. The issue I hit quickly was that I live in a constituency with:
> A huge conservative majority
> Considerable UKIP/English Democrat support
> Labour were a very distant second at the last election

All 3 major parties have promised to maintain the triple lock, which means even if Labour/Libs are willing to nibble at the edges they are effectively promising to continue the redistribution of wealth from a less wealthy demographic (working age) to a wealthier one (pensioners).

So I could volunteer, waste my time trying to stop a guaranteed Conservative victory, to get a few more votes for a party that is only slightly less biased against people of working age

I've never had a vote that mattered in an election (they've always been safe seats). Even if my vote did matter then there's party that could viably influence the next government that isn't nearly as bad, or worse! I'm really beginning to sympathise with the 'youth' who can't be arsed voting. Why bother becoming informed when all you'd learn if you became informed is that there's naff all you can do.

michaels

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The disengagement of the young when voting I find uniquely interesting.

We now have absolute evidence that the young WILL vote. We saw it in the Scottish referendum.

So the question should maybe be, "why are the young disengaged"?

I know that of my peers, many are voting UKIP purely because they are different and offer hope of "that something different" or "the shake up".

So maybe the young will engage so long as theres something different to engage in.... The Scottish Referendum saw some great grass roots stuff, specifically from the young....and I think I'm right in saying it was the young who wanted the change? I.e. the young were, by majority, voting for independence.

Heading OT but I think FPTP is a big disincentive to vote as for any specific election each vote is extremely unlikely to make a difference, especially as there is a rational expectations thing going on too where each young person assumes not enough other young people will vote to sway the result and thus don't vote themselves as their vote will not make a difference. Whereas for demographics who do vote in sufficient numbers it may also be self reinforcing, although the older people know their individual vote makes little difference the fact that they do vote in large numbers will send a signal to politicians that they need to maintain old people friendly policies or they risk losing voters who demonstrably do vote.

(Similarly parties do very little for their core supporters, Labour know they get most of the D/E voters and ethnic minorities so they will focus their efforts on the Cs who may swing hence the removal of the 10% tax rate etc)

lisyloo

Tell that to the thousands of people who commute from the main commuter towns is Surrey where the train journey to London is 15 mins less.

Tell them what? That their commute is sh**e.
They already know it. Here they are.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/64fqog1z6sqwnwo/tcp.jpg?dl=0

ukcarper

lisyloo wrote: »

Tell them what? That their commute is sh**e.
They already know it. Here they are.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/64fqog1z6sqwnwo/tcp.jpg?dl=0

Yes many peoples commute is longer than they would like mine was, but that is the sacrifice many people have to make if they want to home there own home and has been for some time.

lisyloo

but that is the sacrifice many people have to make if they want to home there own home and has been for some time.

I do agree with you for London specifically.
People have always have to commute if they want a career in London unless they are very high earners.
For other areas of the country people tend to be able to find places within a much more reasonable and pleasant commuting distance.

I believe the "lucky generation" being compared to in this thread are from the 1940's and probably mostly retired and not travelling on commuter trains on a daily basis. They probably go out at other times of the day with their free bus pass and avoid the busiest times and mostly don't live in London.

Loughton_Monkey

We've had all this generational "Devon-Whinging" before.

I remember his posting of a report [which as usual he misread and mis-interpreted] in 'support' of today's hard-done-by young wretches, except that it told another story.

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/7007

One particularly important issue is why younger cohorts spent all, and saved none, of their additional income they had in young adulthood relative to their predecessors.

To claim that any generation has it "worse" than the generation before them is nonsense. Every generation gets more wealthy than the previous one. Fact. For individuals within that generation, they will thrive and enjoy that wealth (or not) depending largely upon their own choices.

As most of the so-called boomer generation will validate, our economic life will go through a myriad of economic cycles. Good bad and indifferent. As everybody will admit, the previous 7 years or so has been economically dire with one of the biggest crashes on record. One day, I hope that young people recognise this and realise that they will enjoy wealth us boomers would be jealous of if we were still alive.

It's like 4 people being told to climb up and down Snowdon, but each from different starting points (bottom, halfway up, at the top, and halfway down). The poor sod starting from the bottom has a somewhat hard task to get halfway up, then a worse task to get to the top. Then there are two very easy legs on the way down.

Each one of the four will legitimately say "it's very hard" at some stage in the journey, but at the end of the day, they have all had the same experience.

The reason that my generation (starting work early 70's) will get particularly intolerant with today's whinging 'yoof' is that we had it just as bad (arguably worse) when we ourselves were 'yoof' with house prices going up 20% a year or more, 27% inflation, high unemployment, strikes, shortages, and having to live in accommodation of a standard that would just be unacceptable these days.

ukcarper

lisyloo wrote: »

I do agree with you for London specifically.
People have always have to commute if they want a career in London unless they are very high earners.
For other areas of the country people tend to be able to find places within a much more reasonable and pleasant commuting distance.

I believe the "lucky generation" being compared to in this thread are from the 1940's and probably mostly retired and not travelling on commuter trains on a daily basis. They probably go out at other times of the day with their free bus pass and avoid the busiest times and mostly don't live in London.

I'd agree with that, also in many parts of the country I'm not sure high house prices are that big a problem.

Graham_Devon

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

The reason that my generation (starting work early 70's) will get particularly intolerant with today's whinging 'yoof' is that we had it just as bad (arguably worse) when we ourselves were 'yoof' with house prices going up 20% a year or more, 27% inflation, high unemployment, strikes, shortages, and having to live in accommodation of a standard that would just be unacceptable these days.

You always fail to mention wage inflation when this tale comes along.

thequant

Today yoof are the luckiest generation in history, the boomers have had to work for all that wealth, which will one day will be passed onto the yoof without them lifting a finger.

Before someone mentions, what if your parents arn't a wealthy boomer ? well blame your parents, not society. They had the same chances as everyone else, not our fault they failed to take them.

N1AK

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You always fail to mention wage inflation when this tale comes along.

The sheer quantity of things he fails to mention, or ignores, in his desperate attempts to make nonsense look credible is astounding.

It always amazes me how so many of a generation, whose parents gave so much for the country, have done so little of note and yet feel entitled to so much in return.