A Millennial Speaks out

chucknorris

triathlon wrote: »

You can never know for sure on these websites, but your over emphasising of home ownership and how successful you are over the poor people you claim to care about all the same makes me think just yet again another HPC infiltrator trying to make his point through the back door in that usual devious way

Really? You think I've posted over 14,000 posts since 2008, just to set up an artificial profile to try and fool you the likes of you, who has only been here since last year, and with only 66 posts. I must have used a tardius otherwise how would I have known so many years prior to do that. I'd be less welcome on HPC than a prolonged fart in a lift.

steampowered

ukcarper wrote: »

The only part of this statement that is true is that the job market, when I left school job prospects were better especially if you didn’t have a degree.

Millenials work longer hours than the older generation did. There is plenty of evidence for this if you search. See for example https://www.statista.com/chart/4906/where-do-millennials-work-the-longest-hour/ which indicates that 3/4 of millenials work more than 40 hours. In my demanding profession I regularly work 70-80 hour weeks, the older guys used to work more like 40.

Millenials have to save up for a much larger deposit than the older generation did. Again, see for example https://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/sep/17/homebuyer-housing-deposit-mortgage - showing that average deposits have increased more than 10x since 1990 yet earnings have only increased 3x.

It is still perfectly possible for millenials to buy property. They just have to work harder, save more, earn more and make more sacrifices than the comparatively lazy older generation did. Except of course for the lucky few who get given a large sum of money by their parents.

And won't get the benefit of the subsidy of the unearned, non-worked wealth that the older generations have got from house price rises and BTL. Many people have made more money from their house increasing in value than they've earned from working.

chucknorris

steampowered wrote: »

Millenials work longer hours than the older generation did. There is plenty of evidence for this if you search. See for example https://www.statista.com/chart/4906/where-do-millennials-work-the-longest-hour/ which indicates that 3/4 of millenials work more than 40 hours. In my demanding profession I regularly work 70-80 hours week, the older guys used to work more like 40.

Millenials have to save up for a much larger deposit than the older generation did. Again, see for example https://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/sep/17/homebuyer-housing-deposit-mortgage - showing that average deposits have increased more than 10x since 1990 yet earnings have only increased 3x.

It is still perfectly possible for millenials to buy property. They just have to work harder, save more, earn more and make more sacrifices than the comparatively lazy older generation did. Except of course for the lucky few who get given a large sum of money by their parents.

And won't get the benefit of the subsidy of the unearned, non-worked wealth that the older generations have got from house price rises and BTL. Many people have made more money from their house increasing in value than they've earned from working.

I didn't just work 70-80 hours regularly, I worked that every week for over 10 years after graduating, but not just in my chosen career (quantity surveyor), I also built up and ran my two part time businesses. I burned the candle at both ends, and I still had a social life, I've always believed 'all or nothing', I either do things full on, or not at all. BTL was just what was profitable back then, I spotted it early, it is up to you to spot the next big thing, I don't have to, I did it when I needed to do it. I don't lack sympathy for your situation, but don't try and tell me that I didn't work hard, because I did.

ukcarper

steampowered wrote: »

Millenials work longer hours than the older generation did. There is plenty of evidence for this if you search. See for example https://www.statista.com/chart/4906/where-do-millennials-work-the-longest-hour/ which indicates that 3/4 of millenials work more than 40 hours. In my demanding profession I regularly work 70-80 hour weeks, the older guys used to work more like 40.

Millenials have to save up for a much larger deposit than the older generation did. Again, see for example https://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/sep/17/homebuyer-housing-deposit-mortgage - showing that average deposits have increased more than 10x since 1990 yet earnings have only increased 3x.

It is still perfectly possible for millenials to buy property. They just have to work harder, save more, earn more and make more sacrifices than the comparatively lazy older generation did. Except of course for the lucky few who get given a large sum of money by their parents.

And won't get the benefit of the subsidy of the unearned, non-worked wealth that the older generations have got from house price rises and BTL. Many people have made more money from their house increasing in value than they've earned from working.

I worked 7 day a week 12 hour a day many time in 70s and 80s on many occasions, standard working well was 40 hours in 70s and 80s without any extra hours.

You can’t look at one moment in time prices in relation to earning have fluctuated greatly over the years and deposits have been the same apart from a few years

The overall tax in U.K. as percentage of GDP varied between 32.5% and 37.5% it’s 36% now. Direct tax is lower now VAT higher.

I agree in large parts of country it is extremely difficult to buy more difficult that in the past but as I’ve said if you earn enough to get a big enough mortgage saving a deposit should not be a problem.

How much your house has increased in real terms does not depend on how long ago you bought it but exactly when you bought it and that increase is not much use to most of us because it’s our home. It’s not always been easy to buy and we didn’t all have it as easy as you seem to think.

You are just as bad as triathlon only the opposite end of the spectrum.

ukcarper

chucknorris wrote: »

I didn't just work 70-80 hours regularly, I worked that every week for over 10 years after graduating, but not just in my chosen career (quantity surveyor), I also built up and ran my two part time businesses. I burned the candle at both ends, and I still had a social life, I've always believed 'all or nothing', I either do things full on, or not at all. BTL was just what was profitable back then, I spotted it early, it is up to you to spot the next big thing, I don't have to, I did it when I needed to do it. I don't lack sympathy for your situation, but don't try and tell me that I didn't work hard, because I did.

Reason seems to go out window on these threads with some people saying there is no problem and it still just as easy to buy while others seem to think older generation had it easy and didn’t have to save and work hard to buy a house, both of which are obviously incorrect.

Cakeguts

I have a nasty feeling that the "no one has to fail" education system has something to do with this as well. You can't fail to buy a house if you have never been taught to fail anything and then work harder. Older generations knew that if you didn't do something well you didn't succeed. Millenials didn't really get this lesson because anyone can pass a GCSE or an A level or even get a 1st in a degree from a university offering degrees the educational level of 5 old O levels. Basically if you know that you have to work hard in order to get something you also know that you have to work hard at saving.

There has probably been too much coming too easily for many millenials. So they know how to work at their jobs (?) but not at anything else much. We don't even know why they are supposed to work longer hours. It could just be that it takes them twice as long as it would an older person just because they aren't well organised or have the necessary concentration spans. Modern exam systems mean that you don't have to concentrate for very long or organise your answer.

ukcarper

Cakeguts wrote: »

I have a nasty feeling that the "no one has to fail" education system has something to do with this as well. You can't fail to buy a house if you have never been taught to fail anything and then work harder. Older generations knew that if you didn't do something well you didn't succeed. Millenials didn't really get this lesson because anyone can pass a GCSE or an A level or even get a 1st in a degree from a university offering degrees the educational level of 5 old O levels. Basically if you know that you have to work hard in order to get something you also know that you have to work hard at saving.

There has probably been too much coming too easily for many millenials. So they know how to work at their jobs (?) but not at anything else much. We don't even know why they are supposed to work longer hours. It could just be that it takes them twice as long as it would an older person just because they aren't well organised or have the necessary concentration spans. Modern exam systems mean that you don't have to concentrate for very long or organise your answer.

Not sure that’s the case but I think one of the effects of more people getting degrees is that you now require degrees for jobs that you didn’t in the past. In the 70s you were in a select group if you had a degree, but it was possible to get an apprenticeship work hard get good qualifications and progress in your career.

I think globalisation has had a big impact on the type of jobs available removing many skilled and semi skilled jobs. I also think that the lack of building and increase demand on property by changes in lifestyle has had a big impact.

Although I admit expectation are higher and people expect to be able to have everything and I suspect we have some blame in that.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

Don’t rent then £33k is a 10% deposit on a £330,000 house so you would need to be earning £75k a year to buy that house, if you can’t save £33k out of that salary in a couple of years you are doing something wrong.

I have no need to save but when I bought my first house We save the equivalent of £20k in a year on joint earnings equivalent to £45k

So where does one live if they don't rent and can't yet get a mortgage?

Genuinely interested if theres another option most of the country hasn't yet tapped into!

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So where does one live if they don't rent and can't yet get a mortgage?

Genuinely interested if theres another option most of the country hasn't yet tapped into!

If they can’t stay with thier parents they will have to move into a shared property for a couple of years my stepson did exactly that. I really don’t see saving deposit is the problem, the price of property is a problem in many places but if you earn enough to get big enough mortgage you should be able to save deposit with a bit of effort.

Cakeguts

ukcarper wrote: »

If they can’t stay with thier parents they will have to move into a shared property for a couple of years my stepson did exactly that. I really don’t see saving deposit is the problem, the price of property is a problem in many places but if you earn enough to get big enough mortgage you should be able to save deposit with a bit of effort.

The other thing that I have noticed and this may be due to everyone having a degree is that years ago people didn't take jobs in areas that they couldn't afford to live in. I suspect that having a degree makes people think that they are entitled to a well paid job regardless of whether it is in an area where they can afford to live?

London is one of the examples of this. There seems to be an endless stream of people on here complaining about the fact that they can't afford to rent or buy in London having moved from a different part of the country to a "better paid job." I expect it is better paid but it isn't enough better paid. I can remember discussions about this when I was young in that there was a problem getting people to transfer to work in local government jobs in the South East because the life style although not as well paid was better anywhere than London. The particular department was offering quite big promotions to people who would go and most people wouldn't. This would have been in the 60s and 70s. There are jobs in other parts of the country that give a better lifestyle than an underpaid job in London but because it looks more on paper the "graduates" who have really easy degrees don't realise that although they have a degree it isn't one of the ones that is ever going to let them earn enough to live in the most expensive part of the country. The thing is that if you have one of these degrees you are unlikely to be going to get a graduate level job anywhere so you need to look very carefully at costs of living in anywhere you are thinking of getting a job. Unfortunately the people who have these degrees are not very bright and they don't research anything well enough. All they see is the salary. It isn't until they try to live in London that they find that they don't earn enough.

Those that do earn enough shouldn't have a problem saving for a deposit as long as they put enough effort in. The journalist lady wasn't prepared to put the effort in and so proved that buying a house was not a high priority for her.