£194,400 minimum wage

economic

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Sensible is what it makes you.
Or perhaps a masochist (only teasing).

Some people just will not accept that times change.
The average age of a woman having her first child is indeed increasing, just as the average age of first-time house buyers is also increasing.
It is not by accident that we see such increases as house prices also increase out of the reach of prospective younger would-be buyers.
www.homesandproperty.co.uk/property-news/buying/first-time-buyers/average-age-of-firsttime-buyers-rises-to-30-in-the-uk-and-32-in-london-a102966.html

i wonder how much of that increase in first time buyer age is due to young people not being sensible with money?

economic

Cakeguts wrote: »

How many of the people living with parents are paying for more than expenses to help their parents out?

If you live with your parents you should be able to save everything that you earn apart from anything you give your parents. So living at home should give you the opportunity to make huge savings. Someone on the minimum wage should be able to save at least 1/2 of their salary every year if they aren't paying market rent or any property taxes. That is probably close to £600 per month. £7k a year depending on how much their parents ask them for. So if you start at work at age 18 by the age of 25 you would have close to 50k in savings. In some parts of the country that would mean that you could buy a house for cash or even a better house than the typical 1st time buyers house for the area.

It isn't about how much someone earns. It is about how much someone doesn't spend. If you use public transport and do your own cooking you can easily save. A 20 year old who can get to work on public transport does not need to buy a car. How many people in their 20s do not have a car?

completely agree. i never owned a car as i dont need to. living next to a tube station gets me to where i want to go without the stress of driving. if i really wanted to go by car for whatever reason there is always uber!

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Cakeguts wrote: »

How many of the people living with parents are paying for more than expenses to help their parents out?

If you live with your parents you should be able to save everything that you earn apart from anything you give your parents. So living at home should give you the opportunity to make huge savings. Someone on the minimum wage should be able to save at least 1/2 of their salary every year if they aren't paying market rent or any property taxes. That is probably close to £600 per month. £7k a year depending on how much their parents ask them for. So if you start at work at age 18 by the age of 25 you would have close to 50k in savings. In some parts of the country that would mean that you could buy a house for cash or even a better house than the typical 1st time buyers house for the area.

It isn't about how much someone earns. It is about how much someone doesn't spend. If you use public transport and do your own cooking you can easily save. A 20 year old who can get to work on public transport does not need to buy a car. How many people in their 20s do not have a car?

You're not taking anything else into account?
Like ........... how you get to work; what clothes you wear (since nothing lasts forever); will you ask for no presents from anyone saying you will not give (at Christmas, birthdays etc.).

Oh and public transport still costs; how much depends upon where you live as well as how far away your work is.
Not everywhere has excellent public transport like London and our major cities you know.
And the areas where you can buy housing at the prices you suggest are not likely to be served well with either public transport or higher-paid career prospects.

Although I agree with your sentiment, you're being over-simplistic in your expectations.
Unless you seriously expect younger generations to live like nuns or hermits en masse to save as much money as possible?
There should be balance, I'm sure you will agree.
IMHO this balance does not include indulgences like the latest Apple phone or the newest car.
But there should be some allowance for R&R.

Cakeguts

economic wrote: »

completely agree. i never owned a car as i dont need to. living next to a tube station gets me to where i want to go without the stress of driving. if i really wanted to go by car for whatever reason there is always uber!

Anyone who lives somewhere where there is good public transport does not need a car. If they buy a car then they are not serious about saving to buy a house. If they are a couple and they have a car each then they clearly prefer owning a car to owning a house. There is nothing wrong with preferring to own a car rather than a house but it will mean that you either have to rent privately or live with your parents. It doesn't matter if you earn minimum wage or 100k a year you can still buy a new car that takes up all your savings. It is just in the case of the salary or 100k the car would probably be a Porsche or something else equally expensive. If you really are serious about spending every penny you earn you can do it at any salary level.

Buying a house is not going to happen for people who want to spend every penny they earn or even people who feel that they are entitled to spend every penny that they earn. However that is their choice and why should they be given a nice house and be able to spend every penny that they earn when everyone else has to go without something? People are entitled to their choices about how they spend their money. However they are not entitled to expect other people to pay for those choices.

[Deleted User]

Cakeguts wrote: »

The problem is that it is the national minimum wage so in Heywood a couple can buy a house in the South East they could buy a garage. Makes you wonder why people stay in the South East to work on such low pay?

Because of low office rents meaning lots of jobs/vacancies in these area's so pay goes down but vacancies go up?.

We were only having a discussion recently at work that were we are in Suffolk (and also relatively close to North Essex) have some of the lowest office rents which I didn't appreciate. As soon as that got said I thought to myself I now understand why I've kind of always got work easy.

It was said where they moved our contact centre from; previous agents were on a lot more money because of that area/situation.

I'm in a market town which has seen the build of at least 4-5 brand new almost sky scraper estates (lots of housing) over the last decade but there are few jobs/enough hours/lack of more then min wage in the town direct so people are left commuting to get any serious-ish money, jobs they might want.

economic

Cakeguts wrote: »

Anyone who lives somewhere where there is good public transport does not need a car. If they buy a car then they are not serious about saving to buy a house. If they are a couple and they have a car each then they clearly prefer owning a car to owning a house. There is nothing wrong with preferring to own a car rather than a house but it will mean that you either have to rent privately or live with your parents. It doesn't matter if you earn minimum wage or 100k a year you can still buy a new car that takes up all your savings. It is just in the case of the salary or 100k the car would probably be a Porsche or something else equally expensive. If you really are serious about spending every penny you earn you can do it at any salary level.

Buying a house is not going to happen for people who want to spend every penny they earn or even people who feel that they are entitled to spend every penny that they earn. However that is their choice and why should they be given a nice house and be able to spend every penny that they earn when everyone else has to go without something? People are entitled to their choices about how they spend their money. However they are not entitled to expect other people to pay for those choices.

well put. for me its pretty simple. i spend my own time earning money. therefore time = money. why should i waste imoney and therefore my time to show off to people on expensive things? people who do that are usually (but not always) very insecure.

kabayiri

In the kind of economy/society we live in, our spending decisions do have consequences though.

If you are one of those young people whose living depends on selling iphones and other Apple paraphernalia to other people (including the young), then I guess you are hoping they will continue buying.

Cakeguts

Deleted%20User wrote: »

Because of low office rents meaning lots of jobs/vacancies in these area's so pay goes down but vacancies go up?.

We were only having a discussion recently at work that were we are in Suffolk (and also relatively close to North Essex) have some of the lowest office rents which I didn't appreciate. As soon as that got said I thought to myself I now understand why I've kind of always got work easy.

It was said where they moved our contact centre from; previous agents were on a lot more money because of that area/situation.

I'm in a market town which has seen the build of at least 4-5 brand new almost sky scraper estates (lots of housing) over the last decade but there are few jobs/enough hours/lack of more then min wage in the town direct so people are left commuting to get any serious-ish money, jobs they might want.

You might want to do a few sums. If you work on minimum wage but don't have a car and either walk or cycle, or use public transport to get to work how much more would you have to earn to pay for the cost of the commute? Some people only see the top line. If the local jobs pay £15k a year but by commuting you can earn 20k you might not actually be getting more money because all the extra is used up by the cost of the commuting.

Graham_Devon

!!!!!! is this thread?

If 2 people, as part of a couple are on a minimum wage which does not yet exist, for a company who breaks the law when it comes to annual leave, can afford to borrow just shy of 200k?

!!!!!!. Just use the halifax mortgage calculator instead of typing all of this guff and step into the real world.

https://www.halifax.co.uk/mortgages/mortgage-calculator/calculator/

2 people both on minimum wage at 37.5 hours a week, with NO fixed outgoings, NO debts and NO kids can borrow.....£137,000.

You're only 32% out though greatape, so not all is lost.

I do hate to break it to you, but you can't just approach a bank and tell THEM what they will lend you.

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

why not possible? oh right of course, they HAVE to buy take out coffee, they HAVE to go on nice holidays, they HAVE to buy expensive gadgets and they HAVE to buy designer clothes. life is unfair if you cant have all this to be able to afford to buy. why dont they just tax the rich people so they can afford luxuries?

Made a mistake there I put a spurious don't in totally reversed what I meant to say.