How can people be so greedy?

neverdespairgirl

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

In 1972, my mother remarried. They both sold their houses in very desiable areas in the SE (one for £11,700 and the other for £13,000) and bought a house for £26,000 in the sort of area that lottery winners would aim to live in now and a well known chef lives in that road now. 26k was a lot of money to spend on a house in 1972.

In 2006, £26,000.00 from 1972 was worth:
£237,085.09 using the retail price index £239,167.45 using the GDP deflator £402,484.08 using the average earnings £486,679.76 using the per capita GDP £525,165.09 using the GDP

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Just seven and half years later, in 1980, I bought my first house as a for £26,500. on a single wage:eek: Not in the same road as my parents as they were well out of my reach. In fact, 26.5K would not even buy one of those two houses that my parents had sold to buy that exclusive house! .

£78,518.97 using the retail price index £77,854.04 using the GDP deflator £122,338.13 using the average earnings £138,859.21 using the per capita GDP £149,220.03 using the GDP

neverdespairgirl

PasturesNew wrote: »

I thought about that. Then I thought again. Then I went mentally through everybody I know... and no, I don't know anybody that owns more than one house and rents any out (except my landlord, who has 3-4).

Apart from my landlord, I don't think I know anyone who owns more than one place and rents the other out.

My parents do own 2 houses - one in London, and a holiday home in Kent (where my sisters now live full-time)

neverdespairgirl

GavP wrote: »

Wow, so as long as we're not literally starving on the streets we should just keep quiet and not try to change anyting. How do you think anything would ever get changed for the better if we all took that attitude?

" The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

George Bernard Shaw

Pez2

aztec21 wrote: »

Seems to me with your socialist views you could be better off living in North Korea.

Seems to me that you might be better off thinking of a constructive comment to make.

Addy1

aztec21 wrote: »

Ever heard of a part time job?

Ever heard of getting your facts before you pass judgement?

I work a 48hr week for free in the NHS (training) then work 9 hours on a Saturday as a nursing auxillary and then 8 hours on a Sunday in a local pub.

I also work 2 nights a week and some weekends as an adult instructor in the Army Cadets which pays TA pay.

If you can find me more hours in the week I will get more jobs, but on top of this i have studying to do.

Stop being so quick to judge and assume everyone else is throwing money away. One thing I cannot be accused of is being lazy.

aztec21

Addy1 wrote: »

Ever heard of getting your facts before you pass judgement?

I work a 48hr week for free in the NHS (training) then work 9 hours on a Saturday as a nursing auxillary and then 8 hours on a Sunday in a local pub.

I also work 2 nights a week and some weekends as an adult instructor in the Army Cadets which pays TA pay.

If you can find me more hours in the week I will get more jobs, but on top of this i have studying to do.

Stop being so quick to judge and assume everyone else is throwing money away. One thing I cannot be accused of is being lazy.

My apologies. It is just that you did not mention working part time in the post I responded to. You sounded like you expected the tax payer to fund your education entirely.

andyrules

nelly wrote: »

Im not sure I think free education up to 18 then anything after that then you pay it yourself with an interest free loan.

Ive nothing against students and further education quite the oposite in fact.

But generally speaking they are academically gifted and will get a better job than those that arnt. And the tax paid by those who are academically dissadvantaged gets used to pay for those who have the advantage.

It just seems wrong somehow

Like in formular 1......... I think the fastest cars should be at the back of the starting grid

But there is no guarantee that there will be a better job after graduation. Then they will be saddled with a huge debt and no means to pay it. Granted, they can defer payments, and I suspect that is what many will have to do. But they will forever be in the clutches of the slc, who behave like any debt collecting agency. Not what I envisaged for my kids.

Additionally - uni education is peddled shamelessly by schools and colleges who are seeking to fulfill targets - rather than focusing on the individual. Some kids will end up going because that's what they have been psyched up to do.

Addy1

i think the NHS, as the ONLY employer of junior doctors bar the military in this country, should do more to support us, and at least pay our 1k a year fees. We are just used as free labour and it is a disgrace.


We are basically being trained up to work for one company, and in every other walk of life (military, private sector) you would be "sponsored" through in such a situation.

You do not object to nurses and physios having their fees paid for them, so why us?

Are starting salaries are pretty much on a par.

ixwood

Cos you'll end up earning over 100k a year maybe? What will nurses get? Some people....

gazzak_2

My parents had to live on beans and toast for a year when they purchased their first home. My wife and me lost over £11,000 after paying a mortgage for 9 years because we bought our first place in 1988.

You have to go through the pain sooner or later. As your jobs get better, your wages rise etc etc then you'll be better off in the long run. You just have to be brave enough to make that first leap. I think people want easy street, life "aint" like that. You've got to make it happen.