Renting in your 40's and staring into the abyss

Graham_Devon

remorseless wrote: »

nope, though that's why things are like that. People want a comfy life they need to fork out money and make sacrifices...

Sorry?

You asked why the grandparents couldn't look after the children. And now you simply state "people should make sacrifices".

It's not obvious what point you are trying to make here.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

I chose those dates because that's how far nationwide figures for earnings to house prices go.

What point do you think I'm trying to make.

I assumed you were making the point that earnings have gone up faster than inflation in that time period.

Which is most likely true.

But for anyone to have benefitted from that they would have to have worked throughout that period you chose.

Certainly the person we are discussing on this thread wouldn't have done as she would have been approx 13 years old when your time period started.

The people this would have benefitted is, well, yourself.

ukcarper

No they are benefiting now as if earnings had just kept pace with inflation they would be worse off than they are.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

No they are benefiting now as if earnings had just kept pace with inflation they would be worse off than they are.

Think you are getting yourself confused.

You are looking at earnings and inflation over a 20 year period.

On the back of this, you are claiming that Fiona (who was approximately 13 in 1983 and therefore clearly not earning) is better off as earnings in that date range were above inflation.

The point is very simple. If you are going to look at a period for earnings, you HAVE to look at a period that the person was actually earning wages in.

Every period of inflation vs earnings will be different. 20 years is nearly half a working lifetime, a huge sample. Look at a 5 year sample which is far more relevant an dit will be far more accurate.

Someone starting work in 2008 for example would not have seen their earnings rise above inflation up to 2013....but you appear to be assuming that they would because it's within your favoured time range.

ukcarper

No you as usual you are missing the point entirely she has more money available to her to spend on housing than somebody did it the 30 years age (by the way 1983 to 2013 is 30 years) everybody has benefited.

Crashy_Time

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/204529-new-build-losers/page-5

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

No you as usual you are missing the point entirely she has more money available to her to spend on housing than somebody did it the 30 years age (by the way 1983 to 2013 is 30 years) everybody has benefited.

If I'm missing the point it's because you don't appear to actually have one.

Put very simply.... you can't benefit from the average cumulative wage increase between 1983 and 2013 if you were not earning a wage for the majority of those years.

Surely you understand this?

Whether your wage has kept up with inflation is solely dependant on when you started earning a wage.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Put very simply.... you can't benefit from the average cumulative wage increase between 1983 and 2013 if you were not earning a wage for the majority of those years.

If real wages were £1/ hour in 1983 and they're £5/ hour now then someone who wasn't even born in 1983 is benefiting by earning £5/ hour instead of £1/ hour.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Whether your wage has kept up with inflation is solely dependant on when you started earning a wage.

Whilst true on an individual level we don't know the details of every individual so we use averages, stats and stuff.

Crashy_Time

wotsthat wrote: »

If real wages were £1/ hour in 1983 and they're £5/ hour now then someone who wasn't even born in 1983 is benefiting by earning £5/ hour instead of £1/ hour.



Whilst true on an individual level we don't know the details of every individual so we use averages, stats and stuff.

And the rest we (you) make up :rotfl:

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If I'm missing the point it's because you don't appear to actually have one.

Put very simply.... you can't benefit from the average cumulative wage increase between 1983 and 2013 if you were not earning a wage for the majority of those years.

Surely you understand this?

Whether your wage has kept up with inflation is solely dependant on when you started earning a wage.

You can because if that hadn't happened you would be earning 3/4s of what you are earning now. Let's say she is earning £40k if earnings had just kept up with inflation she would be earning £30k so she has that £10k.