£194,400 minimum wage

davomcdave

economic wrote: »

IF they save £120 a month?? where did you get this from? do you make this up to suit your theory?

in my 20s i lived at home despite earning 100k for most of my 20s. i dont have any regrets. my saving rate was over 80% every single year. i made sacrifices. why cant others do the same? and i even managed 1 or 2 holidays a year.

Normal people want to get laid not live with Mummy.

economic

davomcdave wrote: »

Normal people want to get laid not live with Mummy.

i assume you are being insulting towards me? if so that just shows immaturity on your part. you have no idea about me.

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

Nope from the part where it says it allows someone £29 or so social expenses per week. 4 x that is your £120.

As for the rest of it. You earned £100k a year and made some sacrifices whilst going on 1 or 2 holidays a year. Did you also cut back by drinking bollinger rather than Dom Perignon? You're hilarious.

but you said save not spend on social expenses.

the point is its not about income. its all about savings rate. i can earn 20k a year. if my savings rate is high enough i could save for a deposit sooner then someone who earns 100k who has a very low savings rate. in fact i knew people on 100k with very low savings rates that they have nothing to show for it after 8 years of work. its all about the person and sacrifices.

davomcdave

economic wrote: »

i assume you are being insulting towards me? if so that just shows immaturity on your part. you have no idea about me.

No. I was suggesting that normal people want to move out from their parents' house and start a sexual relationship in their 20s. You must be extraordinary to earn what is a lot of money by almost any standard yet choose to live with your Mummy and/or Daddy or have something else going on in your life.

economic

davomcdave wrote: »

No. I was suggesting that normal people want to move out from their parents' house and start a sexual relationship in their 20s. You must be extraordinary to earn what is a lot of money by almost any standard yet choose to live with your Mummy and/or Daddy or have something else going on in your life.

i had a girlfriend for 5 years and she used to rent so i was at hers sometimes. i just chose not to rent as i wanted to get my savings high as possible. i did enjoy myself but wasnt exactly extravegent with my spending - i dont need to to enjoy life.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

economic wrote: »

i had a girlfriend for 5 years and she used to rent so i was at hers sometimes. i just chose not to rent as i wanted to get my savings high as possible. i did enjoy myself but wasnt exactly extravegent with my spending - i dont need to to enjoy life.

Be wary.
The poster you quote professes much but appears to seek only argument and discord, hence the "mummy and daddy" snide remarks.
You have no need to explain your reasons to that poster (or anyone else).

Your maturity in attempting to better yourself is praiseworthy; one day the sacrifice will all have been worthwhile.

There are now 3.3million 20-34 year olds still living with parents, a 618,000 leap since 1996, the findings from the Office for National Statistics show.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-3458315/Number-young-adults-living-parents-hits-20-year-high-says-ONS.html

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok, so to fit your argument we again have to strip out enough people to get to something where you can make sense of things. 18% of women at age 45 are childless. Why have you chosen childless couples then to present an argument saying that most people could afford a deposit? Why do you not address the 82% of people who do have children? Some will be divorced, split up etc, but still, big majority. By their 30th birthday, 47% were childless, so still less than half. But no, you want to base your argument on couples with no children as of course that gives them more disposable income and you can present your drivel.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/conceptionandfertilityrates/bulletins/childbearingforwomenbornindifferentyearsenglandandwales/2015-11-10

So yes a childless couple can afford to save a deposit. There you go. Well done. Strip enough people out of a cohort and you can prove anything you want. I bet I could prove that 35 year old women called Sarah working in finance could afford a house deposit if I drilled down low enough. It's farcical.

no. we are talking about young couples buying their first home. so couples in their 20s to early 30s. the average age a woman has first child in uk is 34.

we are also talking about those on minimum wage buying the average house. and i have proven it can be done outside of the SE. but why should a minimum wage couple be able to afford the average?

sure i am only looking at a certain population, but isnt this debate about buying a first home whilst young and as a couple? isnt first time young people the worst off in terms of home ownership? they are the ones struggling to buy supposively and me and greatape have proven it can be done. although we never said it actually happens. hence why houses are cheap in much of the uk.

economic

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Be wary.
The poster you quote professes much but appears to seek only argument and discord, hence the "mummy and daddy" snide remarks.
You have no need to explain your reasons to that poster (or anyone else).

Your maturity in attempting to better yourself is praiseworthy; one day the sacrifice will all have been worthwhile.


http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-3458315/Number-young-adults-living-parents-hits-20-year-high-says-ONS.html

thanks. i just feel i have to get people to look at things from another perspective, however i guess people are way too biased to accept anything but their own beliefs...

thanks for the link as well. i moved out of "mummys" at 30 so does that make me unusual?

A_Medium_Size_Jock

economic wrote: »

thanks. i just feel i have to get people to look at things from another perspective, however i guess people are way too biased to accept anything but their own beliefs...

thanks for the link as well. i moved out of "mummys" at 30 so does that make me unusual?

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.
https://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

Cakeguts

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Be wary.
The poster you quote professes much but appears to seek only argument and discord, hence the "mummy and daddy" snide remarks.
You have no need to explain your reasons to that poster (or anyone else).

Your maturity in attempting to better yourself is praiseworthy; one day the sacrifice will all have been worthwhile.


http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-3458315/Number-young-adults-living-parents-hits-20-year-high-says-ONS.html

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?