"Confirmation Bias" among generation who did well from house prices

Thrugelmir

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The housing market, currently, is about as far as it can get from a free market.

The GLC was kind enough to offer my then girlfriend to vacate her council rented property in Thamesmead. Providing she bought a property. In summary we got all legal fees paid for, a £2,500 cash lump sum plus reimbursement of her removal expenses.

In those days we also had MIRAs along with tax relief on endowment policies.

There's always been incentives.

PasturesNew

chucknorris wrote: »

We used to dream of a half empty glass, but the lucky boomers seem to have all of those.

Some would say I'm a boomer, depending on the dates you attach to that. I don't even OWN a single glass! I drink out of kiddies' plastic beakers from Ikea. 6 for £1 or similar. Nice and cheery they are.

PasturesNew

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

If you waved a magic wand and created several million more houses tomorrow Graham, average house prices would fall.

Simples.;)

Where they had an over-supply in Ireland, rather than selling for cheaper prices whole estates are just bulldozed - brand new, not lived in, bulldozed as they didn't sell.

Cornucopia

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Interesting that you come to the conclusion that because I challenge something a poster wrote - I automatically accept what the poster wrote.

No - just basing my conclusion on what you wrote.

Well as you said yourself, they range from 51 to 69.

So you'd have an age range of 25-43 when the poll tax riots took place.

Do I think any 25-43 year old took part? Yes. Seems to be plenty of them in this photo....

You're slightly missing the point. You are talking about ALL baby-boomers, aren't you? It would be much more accurate to say that the riots involved a minority at the younger end of the group.

But at least they were about a proper political issue - I can't really see anyone taking to the streets to protest Ed Milliband's multiple kitchens, or because they doubt the sincerity of Jeremy Hunt's NHS lapel badge.

ukcarper

Cornucopia wrote: »

No - just basing my conclusion on what you wrote.



You're slightly missing the point. You are talking about ALL baby-boomers, aren't you? It would be much more accurate to say that the riots involved a minority at the younger end of the group.

But at least they were about a proper political issue - I can't really see anyone taking to the streets to protest Ed Milliband's multiple kitchens, or because they doubt the sincerity of Jeremy Hunt's NHS lapel badge.

Who benefited from the abolition of pole tax home owning boomers or the younger non home owners.

Cornucopia

ukcarper wrote: »

Who benefited from the abolition of pole tax home owning boomers or the younger non home owners.

The whole point about the Poll Tax was that it applied to every person, individually, therefore it didn't matter whether you were a home-owner or not....

.... but you knew that before you posted?

ukcarper

Cornucopia wrote: »

The whole point about the Poll Tax was that it applied to every person, individually, therefore it didn't matter whether you were a home-owner or not....

.... but you knew that before you posted?

I just wondered if Graham could work out who was better off after pole tax was replaced by council tax (reintroduction of rates by another name)

Cornucopia

ukcarper wrote: »

I just wondered if Graham could work out who was better off after pole tax was replaced by council tax (reintroduction of rates by another name)

I think Graham has in mind some grand point about there being consistency between social-media based whinging now, and riots then. I think the only consistency is that in both cases, it involves predominantly younger people.

He's not understood how vastly politics has changed in the intervening 25 years, nor that when you make sweeping comments about an entire demographic group, they need to be well-founded.

MARTYM8`

In reality if you only own one home and never move until you die or move into a care home – which in reality probably applies to most pensioners – you haven’t really seen any monetary benefit from the rise in the price of your house. Unless you downsize or equity release its all on paper – and most don’t as they quite like the home and garden they spent 25 years paying for!

Assuming the council doesn’t take your cash for your care fees your kids will of course see the benefit – but potentially they may be in their 60s before they do assuming you live until your late 80s.

The difference being compared to today that in most cases you were able to buy an average house on an average salary.

The median salary for a single person now in London with a 10% deposit would just about stretch (4 times salary mortgage) to a one bed flat in a council tower block in East Ham or Dagenham – my parents were able to buy a nice house back in the early 70s in a relatively nice suburban area for 1.5 times average salaries on a single salary. When they moved in the area was mainly lower middle class/working class types – now on one side they have a doctor and on the other two Chartered Accountants (who are priced out of more expensive areas).

CLAPTON

MARTYM8` wrote: »

The difference being compared to today that in most cases you were able to buy an average house on an average salary.

if that were indeed true then one would expect that house ownership must have been very close to 100% of the population.