In my 30s and in London - what do I do?

Retireby40

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

There are people with too much food in the fridge while many rely on food banks.

There are many with 2 cars while others have to use a push bike.

There are people with 2 jobs yet others with none.

What should we do there? Fine and punish people for spending their money how they see fit?

I inherited a property while owning another. What should I do? Sell the property, put the money in the bank and watch the value of my money drop? I live abroad and may move back. What should I do sell risk house prices rising further and when I want to buy having to settle for a 2 bed terraced instead of a 3 bed semi?

None of your examples are the same, because there is not a shortage of food, of cars, of jobs. But there is a shortage of houses.

We already punish people for spending their money how they see fit. Taxes and fees on second properties are higher than on your first one. Precisely to discourage this kind of thing.

You correctly identified the problem here. All other investments are worse than property. Nothing else increases in value so fast, while also providing an income through the rent. At the expense of the people forced to rent because they can't buy anything.

Of course it should be stopped. There should be other options for people like you who want to see a decent return on investment.

The OP could have a house but.

However the OP wants to earn 32k a year which is a very low salary for London. And wants to buy a house in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

OP could move to Manchester which is a huge city with lots going on, find a job there probably on less salary say 22-24k a year and get a property.

In fact with their savings they could almost buy a house outright depending on area and needs. 

Retireby40

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

tooldle said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

Things could be worse. There could be a very small group of people with more than one property and a even bigger shortage of housing, as was the case for many parts of the UK between 1939 and the early 1970's. Bombs falling on the housing stock disrupt supply for a considerable period of time. 
It is all cyclical, we've been here before and we can't always have what we think we want. 

And we can't always have what we think we deserve and have a divine right to have while our actions (not everyone's but a significant numbers) don't fit with our objectives.

The problem with not being able to own a house is that you are going to end up renting into retirement. Only inflation can save you by making the rent affordable compared to your pension, but even then you can't move because that would involve a massive hike in rent.

The divide between those who can afford a house and those who can't is going to keep growing. As an example, we are ending sales of fossil fuelled cars and moving to electric. It's vastly cheaper to charge at home if you can. So people who can only afford to rent a flat with no charging capability are going to be paying several times as much to keep their vehicle moving.

Some people like to accuse others of feeling entitled, but the reality is that they have shaped this country into one where you need to own property to not see your wealth lost to rent, higher bills and inflation.

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

tooldle said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

Things could be worse. There could be a very small group of people with more than one property and a even bigger shortage of housing, as was the case for many parts of the UK between 1939 and the early 1970's. Bombs falling on the housing stock disrupt supply for a considerable period of time. 
It is all cyclical, we've been here before and we can't always have what we think we want. 

And we can't always have what we think we deserve and have a divine right to have while our actions (not everyone's but a significant numbers) don't fit with our objectives.

The problem with not being able to own a house is that you are going to end up renting into retirement. Only inflation can save you by making the rent affordable compared to your pension, but even then you can't move because that would involve a massive hike in rent.

The divide between those who can afford a house and those who can't is going to keep growing. As an example, we are ending sales of fossil fuelled cars and moving to electric. It's vastly cheaper to charge at home if you can. So people who can only afford to rent a flat with no charging capability are going to be paying several times as much to keep their vehicle moving.

Some people like to accuse others of feeling entitled, but the reality is that they have shaped this country into one where you need to own property to not see your wealth lost to rent, higher bills and inflation.

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

tooldle said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

Things could be worse. There could be a very small group of people with more than one property and a even bigger shortage of housing, as was the case for many parts of the UK between 1939 and the early 1970's. Bombs falling on the housing stock disrupt supply for a considerable period of time. 
It is all cyclical, we've been here before and we can't always have what we think we want. 

And we can't always have what we think we deserve and have a divine right to have while our actions (not everyone's but a significant numbers) don't fit with our objectives.

The problem with not being able to own a house is that you are going to end up renting into retirement. Only inflation can save you by making the rent affordable compared to your pension, but even then you can't move because that would involve a massive hike in rent.

The divide between those who can afford a house and those who can't is going to keep growing. As an example, we are ending sales of fossil fuelled cars and moving to electric. It's vastly cheaper to charge at home if you can. So people who can only afford to rent a flat with no charging capability are going to be paying several times as much to keep their vehicle moving.

Some people like to accuse others of feeling entitled, but the reality is that they have shaped this country into one where you need to own property to not see your wealth lost to rent, higher bills and inflation.

Some people need to rent houses due to circumstances.

Students moving to a new area a short period of time. A recently separated parent who's allowed the wife and children to remain in the mortgaged property who can't now afford to buy another property. People who move between jobs and uncertain what they want to do. People who want to experience living alone or with a partner with no tied commitment.

We live in a society who can't just buy a house because our circumstances don't allow us or we don't want to.

If there were no landlords or no rental properties what would we do with the above people?.where would they live?

[Deleted User]

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

There are people with too much food in the fridge while many rely on food banks.

There are many with 2 cars while others have to use a push bike.

There are people with 2 jobs yet others with none.

What should we do there? Fine and punish people for spending their money how they see fit?

I inherited a property while owning another. What should I do? Sell the property, put the money in the bank and watch the value of my money drop? I live abroad and may move back. What should I do sell risk house prices rising further and when I want to buy having to settle for a 2 bed terraced instead of a 3 bed semi?

None of your examples are the same, because there is not a shortage of food, of cars, of jobs. But there is a shortage of houses.

We already punish people for spending their money how they see fit. Taxes and fees on second properties are higher than on your first one. Precisely to discourage this kind of thing.

You correctly identified the problem here. All other investments are worse than property. Nothing else increases in value so fast, while also providing an income through the rent. At the expense of the people forced to rent because they can't buy anything.

Of course it should be stopped. There should be other options for people like you who want to see a decent return on investment.

The OP could have a house but.

However the OP wants to earn 32k a year which is a very low salary for London. And wants to buy a house in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

OP could move to Manchester which is a huge city with lots going on, find a job there probably on less salary say 22-24k a year and get a property.

In fact with their savings they could almost buy a house outright depending on area and needs. 

I somehow doubt they 'want' to earn that much. Pay has been going down in many sectors for years.

More than that, London needs people to do those jobs too. How much do you think the admin staff and the baristas should get paid?

Retireby40

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

There are people with too much food in the fridge while many rely on food banks.

There are many with 2 cars while others have to use a push bike.

There are people with 2 jobs yet others with none.

What should we do there? Fine and punish people for spending their money how they see fit?

I inherited a property while owning another. What should I do? Sell the property, put the money in the bank and watch the value of my money drop? I live abroad and may move back. What should I do sell risk house prices rising further and when I want to buy having to settle for a 2 bed terraced instead of a 3 bed semi?

None of your examples are the same, because there is not a shortage of food, of cars, of jobs. But there is a shortage of houses.

We already punish people for spending their money how they see fit. Taxes and fees on second properties are higher than on your first one. Precisely to discourage this kind of thing.

You correctly identified the problem here. All other investments are worse than property. Nothing else increases in value so fast, while also providing an income through the rent. At the expense of the people forced to rent because they can't buy anything.

Of course it should be stopped. There should be other options for people like you who want to see a decent return on investment.

The OP could have a house but.

However the OP wants to earn 32k a year which is a very low salary for London. And wants to buy a house in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

OP could move to Manchester which is a huge city with lots going on, find a job there probably on less salary say 22-24k a year and get a property.

In fact with their savings they could almost buy a house outright depending on area and needs. 

I somehow doubt they 'want' to earn that much. Pay has been going down in many sectors for years.

More than that, London needs people to do those jobs too. How much do you think the admin staff and the baristas should get paid?

Yeah I should have rephrased it. OP earning potential is 30-32k.  

London may need people to do those jobs. But those people don't need to live in London to do them. They can live outside of London and commute. 

What do you think OP should do? Spend his energy complaining that the world is unfair because he can't get a mortgage on 22k after tax or accept that its out of his reach and either upskill or move outside of London. You have to be mature about it. 

Places like Chelmsford have apartments and flats for £160-170k. The OP could afford that and it's about 1h 10 mins from London. Has their own house and close to work and friends. 

p00hsticks

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

There are people with too much food in the fridge while many rely on food banks.

There are many with 2 cars while others have to use a push bike.

There are people with 2 jobs yet others with none.

What should we do there? Fine and punish people for spending their money how they see fit?

I inherited a property while owning another. What should I do? Sell the property, put the money in the bank and watch the value of my money drop? I live abroad and may move back. What should I do sell risk house prices rising further and when I want to buy having to settle for a 2 bed terraced instead of a 3 bed semi?

None of your examples are the same, because there is not a shortage of food, of cars, of jobs. But there is a shortage of houses.

We already punish people for spending their money how they see fit. Taxes and fees on second properties are higher than on your first one. Precisely to discourage this kind of thing.

You correctly identified the problem here. All other investments are worse than property. Nothing else increases in value so fast, while also providing an income through the rent. At the expense of the people forced to rent because they can't buy anything.

Of course it should be stopped. There should be other options for people like you who want to see a decent return on investment.

The OP could have a house but.

However the OP wants to earn 32k a year which is a very low salary for London. And wants to buy a house in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

OP could move to Manchester which is a huge city with lots going on, find a job there probably on less salary say 22-24k a year and get a property.

In fact with their savings they could almost buy a house outright depending on area and needs. 

I somehow doubt they 'want' to earn that much. Pay has been going down in many sectors for years.

More than that, London needs people to do those jobs too. How much do you think the admin staff and the baristas should get paid?

London may need people to do those jobs. But those people don't need to live in London to do them. They can live outside of London and commute. 

It doesn't really make sense for people on low salaries such as the ones you mention (baristas, admin staff, to which I'd add cleaners)  to pay extortionate rail / bus / petrol and parking fares to commute into London to do a job that they could probably find in the place that they actually live for similar wages and shorter hours once you factor in travel time.

LateStarter

Well I don't know OP, you seem have built yourself quite an odd narrative

• blaming the boomers for "voting for their own interest" (whose interest should they vote for?)

• believing that "there's very little work outside of London"? Are you mad - the UK unemployment rate is less than 4% - we're struggling to get staff from cleaners to accountants in my town in the Midlands.

• anger at the UK for the lack of governance and the dwindling opportunities - we're the 5th biggest economy in the world and yes there may be better places for you individually, but don't drag the country down to make yourself feel better

Yes the cost of housing in London in too expensive; but it's the same with New York or Paris, or Hong Kong and Tokyo, for that matter. 

Your problem is you're working for a below-average salary, based on education and career choices you made. Can you educate yourself into a higher paying job? Charity does not pay well at the lower levels. I have offspring working in that field, in London (which is why I'm responding), earning less than 30k, sharing a house in Zone 6 with 1 other person. And no, they'll never be able to buy a house.

My partner lived most of her life in London, and left because the equity in the house - that she couldn't afford the mortgage on - was most of the cost of a house further north. She was staying in London "for family", until her parents decided to leave for warmer climes. What will you do if something similar happens to you, and your friends/family move on?

You're in your 30s, and I'm not unsympathetic, but there's a point where your life is about you - not family or friends. I actually think moving abroad for a few years may be a great thing  as it'll break the narrative, and missing your social group will be an actual thing based on distance, rather than the half-life you're struggling with in Norfolk.

Retireby40

p00hsticks said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Retireby40 said:

p00hsticks said:

[Deleted User] said:

AFF8879 said:

wildbilljones said:

zagubov said:

In my last workplace (in inner London) the staff were mainly recruited from all over England and beyond. They came to start work in their mid-20s and invariably left for promoted posts in the midlands and points north when they were getting married and starting families.
It didn't cross their minds at all to stay here and raise a family. It was always obvious to them that London's not set up for that.
Just about every other big city's got all you need. Even some small cities have it.
Can I please ask, what is it that's stopping you from exploring other more affordable and liveable cities?

I live in Norwich. I moved there because I couldn't afford to live in London or anywhere near London. I'm miserable in Norwich because all of my friends and family are in or near London. I don't know why I go to work for 5 days a week to sit in a flat in a city I don't want to be in, hundreds of miles away from my friends and family. 

I understand the situation. A generation has been hung out to dry by the one above it. 

I’m in your generation, and this is quite frankly a stupid take on the situation (although I understand it, given you’re stressed and anxious about the future)

People of any generation buying houses are not cackling whilst rubbing their fingers wanting to pull up the drawbridge. People took advantage of the opportunities at the time. There’s lots of things you can blame for the current housing situation but entire generations is not one of them.

One of the biggest problems is buy to let. Having screwed up the economy and climate, boomers are now looking to owning other people's homes as a way to supplement their adjust generous pensions (which are closed to younger generations).

At the risk of extending a thread that is veering dangerously into verboten 'discussion Time' territory....

I'm not sure it's entirely down to boomers. It may jsut be my perception but we seem to see quite  a lot of posts on these boards from (I assume) youngish people who either both own their own properties and decide to continue to hang onto both when they move in together or who are upsizing due to growing families but still want to keep the existing one...

Also many people also inherit properties while owning their own. Some don't want to sell because of sentiment. Some don't want to sell because they may in the future need that property and the most suitable thing to do is rent it.

Landlords in general get a bad name. Many people ignorantly call them greedy, however it's purely a form of investment and being smarter with their money and making the most of earnings or savings.

Yes, there are too many people with more then one property at a time when there is a massive shortage.

There are people with too much food in the fridge while many rely on food banks.

There are many with 2 cars while others have to use a push bike.

There are people with 2 jobs yet others with none.

What should we do there? Fine and punish people for spending their money how they see fit?

I inherited a property while owning another. What should I do? Sell the property, put the money in the bank and watch the value of my money drop? I live abroad and may move back. What should I do sell risk house prices rising further and when I want to buy having to settle for a 2 bed terraced instead of a 3 bed semi?

None of your examples are the same, because there is not a shortage of food, of cars, of jobs. But there is a shortage of houses.

We already punish people for spending their money how they see fit. Taxes and fees on second properties are higher than on your first one. Precisely to discourage this kind of thing.

You correctly identified the problem here. All other investments are worse than property. Nothing else increases in value so fast, while also providing an income through the rent. At the expense of the people forced to rent because they can't buy anything.

Of course it should be stopped. There should be other options for people like you who want to see a decent return on investment.

The OP could have a house but.

However the OP wants to earn 32k a year which is a very low salary for London. And wants to buy a house in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

OP could move to Manchester which is a huge city with lots going on, find a job there probably on less salary say 22-24k a year and get a property.

In fact with their savings they could almost buy a house outright depending on area and needs. 

I somehow doubt they 'want' to earn that much. Pay has been going down in many sectors for years.

More than that, London needs people to do those jobs too. How much do you think the admin staff and the baristas should get paid?

London may need people to do those jobs. But those people don't need to live in London to do them. They can live outside of London and commute. 

It doesn't really make sense for people on low salaries such as the ones you mention (baristas, admin staff, to which I'd add cleaners)  to pay extortionate rail / bus / petrol and parking fares to commute into London to do a job that they could probably find in the place that they actually live for similar wages and shorter hours once you factor in travel time.

So what should they do? Try to buy a 300-400k flat next door to their place of work on 25k a year? 

One in which they require about 3 years salary to put down as a deposit?

london21

Don't have a victim mentality.
Work towards taking action towards the solution. 

Working in London and living outside London can be very costly depending on the commute cost. 

Grizebeck

Move to county durham!

[Deleted User]

Retireby40 said:

sheramber said:

[Deleted User] said:

sheramber said:

[Deleted User] said:

sheramber said:

It is not a new situation.

20 years ago a colleagues daughter and son in law moved from London to Edinburgh when she became pregnant,  as , despite having two salaries, , they could only afford a small 1 bedroom flat.

House prices have risen over 140% in most UK cities in the last 20 years. Salaries haven't. So, respectfully, I think you're very wrong.  

How can I be wrong about a statement of fact.

This is the kind of stuff I hear from my parents. "It was hard when we first bought a house too". Their first house cost 40k in 1991. Unless they were earning about 4k a year (they weren't), it's entirely incomparable to the situation first-time buyers face now. 

But the scenario is the same.  

A young couple with two salaries- one was a teacher-  could not afford anything bigger but were able to buy a two bedroom house in Edinburgh, which is not a chap place to buy.

The bottom line is the OP has a few options. Upskill to earn more than 30-32k a year in London, take on a second job for a year or two at the weekends and sacrifice hanging out with mates for the long term good, or move out of London. 

Asia most definitely isn't the answer if Norwich is too far.

I earn 36k a year. I don't believe I ever said I earn 32k. 

32-40k is roughly an executive salary (i.e not entry level and not managerial). I'm talking about public and charity sector, publishing, arts etc. 

I find it ridiculous that it doesn't get you somewhere to live. 

The majority of adults in London won't earn over 40k.