Join the Labour Party and save your country!

surrey_commuter

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

pangolin

Regions:

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

TheBigBean

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought you only got it if you have kids, so someone without kids isn't subsidised?

kingstongraham

TheBigBean said:

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought you only got it if you have kids, so someone without kids isn't subsidised?

Universal credit now replacing wtc for people without children, but the point remains, I think.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

Not sure why you can’t ask him yourself but ok

@Dorsetboy what age did you start work and how much a week did you spend (before property purchase) on poncey coffees and smashed avocado on artisan baked sourdough toast?

surrey_commuter

TheBigBean said:

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought you only got it if you have kids, so someone without kids isn't subsidised?

I believe the barrier to entry is lower for parents but is available to all

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought you only got it if you have kids, so someone without kids isn't subsidised?

Universal credit now replacing wtc for people without children, but the point remains, I think.

So what sort of top up does universal credit give you if you earn £10/hour?

Otherwise, I just see it as subsidy for kids paid to their parents.

surrey_commuter

pangolin said:

Regions:

I assumed the previous chart had an error but this shows a similar massive blip in NI around the time of the GFC. What happened?

skyblueamateur

surrey_commuter said:

pangolin said:

Regions:

I assumed the previous chart had an error but this shows a similar massive blip in NI around the time of the GFC. What happened?

Merely guessing but would NI not be more intrinsically linked to ROI and the Celtic Tiger? If you thought things were bad over here at that time it was a whole lot worse of the water.

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

Not sure why you can’t ask him yourself but ok

@Dorsetboy what age did you start work and how much a week did you spend (before property purchase) on poncey coffees and smashed avocado on artisan baked sourdough toast?

I ask because I employ a number of people in their twenties in what might be considered a hipster part of town. I've seen no evidence that such people exist.

Given that an avocado from Tesco is 70p, perhaps they're no longer the semi-luxury item you remember from your childhood.

kingstongraham

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought you only got it if you have kids, so someone without kids isn't subsidised?

Universal credit now replacing wtc for people without children, but the point remains, I think.

So what sort of top up does universal credit give you if you earn £10/hour?

Otherwise, I just see it as subsidy for kids paid to their parents.

It depends how many hours you work and what your housing situation is.

Zero to not much though.

Dorset_Boy

surrey_commuter said:

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

Not sure why you can’t ask him yourself but ok

@Dorsetboy what age did you start work and how much a week did you spend (before property purchase) on poncey coffees and smashed avocado on artisan baked sourdough toast?

Hah, graduated in 1987 and started work at the end of that summer.
Can categorically say I spent nothing on on poncey coffees and smashed avocado on artisan baked sourdough toast!
Might have spent a little on beer and toasted ham & cheese sarnies in the pub next to the office though!
And I certainly didn't own the latest mobile phone as they were all the size of 2 house bricks, weighed about 5 kg, and barely got any reception.

pangolin

Think you've both spectacularly missed rjsterry's point there, but well done for being born sooner than others I guess.

pblakeney

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

Not sure why you can’t ask him yourself but ok

@Dorsetboy what age did you start work and how much a week did you spend (before property purchase) on poncey coffees and smashed avocado on artisan baked sourdough toast?

I ask because I employ a number of people in their twenties in what might be considered a hipster part of town. I've seen no evidence that such people exist.

Bejeezus you must work in a strange location. All of the 20's and early 30's (mostly pre-children) I've worked with in the past 10 years (various offices) walk into the office every morning with their takeaway bag and cup of coffee.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Feel free to look at debt servicing costs, but given you would then also need to include inflation, which of course erodes the value of debt.

The other point is regardless of the cost of debt servicing, if the property is very expensive relative to earnings, in order to get a reasonable LTV ratio, you have to save up much more. I know some people who are in a catch 22, whereby the mortgage would be cheaper than the rent, but the bank won't offer the mortgage because they can't save enough on the rent to get the deposit to get the mortgage.

Dorset_Boy

pangolin said:

Think you've both spectacularly missed rjsterry's point there, but well done for being born sooner than others I guess.

Eh? Don't think we did.

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

Bejeezus you must work in a strange location. All of the 20's and early 30's (mostly pre-children) I've worked with in the past 10 years (various offices) walk into the office every morning with their takeaway bag and cup of coffee.

If people think a coffee out every day is holding them back from home ownership I don't think they really understand the size of deposits required.

I'll offer an example. I have a friend who's 33 and currently lives with his parents. He earns above average, but not by much.

He's currently looking to buy a 1 bed. Only, the price of the houses are literally rising as quickly as he can save, so the cost of the flats near where he works are continuously out of reach.

it is ludicrous that this point is contested. All the published data on this is crystal clear. Even the literature coming out of banks points to this. There are now special products which are fairly popular where parents can help underwrite mortgages for their grown up children to compensate for the high LTV ratio.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought you only got it if you have kids, so someone without kids isn't subsidised?

Universal credit now replacing wtc for people without children, but the point remains, I think.

So what sort of top up does universal credit give you if you earn £10/hour?

Otherwise, I just see it as subsidy for kids paid to their parents.

It depends how many hours you work and what your housing situation is.

Zero to not much though.

Then I'm not persuaded by your argument

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Bejeezus you must work in a strange location. All of the 20's and early 30's (mostly pre-children) I've worked with in the past 10 years (various offices) walk into the office every morning with their takeaway bag and cup of coffee.

If people think a coffee out every day is holding them back from home ownership I don't think they really understand the size of deposits required...

Merely pointing out that said examples do exist.
The coffee is just one example of perhaps not being as committed as they could be.

shirley_basso

I don't think £5 per day £150/month, £2,000/annum is going to buy a house

Dorset_Boy

shirley_basso said:

I don't think £5 per day £150/month, £2,000/annum is going to buy a house

On its own it might not, but you have to start somewhere.

Pross

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Bejeezus you must work in a strange location. All of the 20's and early 30's (mostly pre-children) I've worked with in the past 10 years (various offices) walk into the office every morning with their takeaway bag and cup of coffee.

If people think a coffee out every day is holding them back from home ownership I don't think they really understand the size of deposits required.

I'll offer an example. I have a friend who's 33 and currently lives with his parents. He earns above average, but not by much.

He's currently looking to buy a 1 bed. Only, the price of the houses are literally rising as quickly as he can save, so the cost of the flats near where he works are continuously out of reach.

it is ludicrous that this point is contested. All the published data on this is crystal clear. Even the literature coming out of banks points to this. There are now special products which are fairly popular where parents can help underwrite mortgages for their grown up children to compensate for the high LTV ratio.

It still depends massively on geography though. My daughter (23) bought her first house, a 3 bed semi, a few months ago for about £130k. Good sized ex-Council house with a large garden and located on the edge of a really nice park so no risk to the views over the countryside. Admittedly she was lucky enough to have inherited money to cover the deposit and got a 75% LTV mortgage but she would have saved a 10% deposit within 12 months. Her mortgage costs less than many of her friends were paying for their cars (and about the same as she is now paying for her car having got a new one after moving in and getting the house sorted).

pangolin

Dorset_Boy said:

shirley_basso said:

I don't think £5 per day £150/month, £2,000/annum is going to buy a house

On its own it might not, but you have to start somewhere.

House prices go up faster than that It's a handy strawman so you can pretend the problem doesn't exist and the young are just lazy and impatient though.

skyblueamateur

shirley_basso said:

I don't think £5 per day £150/month, £2,000/annum is going to buy a house

Do people really spend £150 on coffee a month? I feel almost prehistoric.

I would have rattled out at least £150 most weekends on the tear in my 20's tbf but that seems better value then on coffee. Pffft.

pangolin

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Bejeezus you must work in a strange location. All of the 20's and early 30's (mostly pre-children) I've worked with in the past 10 years (various offices) walk into the office every morning with their takeaway bag and cup of coffee.

If people think a coffee out every day is holding them back from home ownership I don't think they really understand the size of deposits required.

I'll offer an example. I have a friend who's 33 and currently lives with his parents. He earns above average, but not by much.

He's currently looking to buy a 1 bed. Only, the price of the houses are literally rising as quickly as he can save, so the cost of the flats near where he works are continuously out of reach.

it is ludicrous that this point is contested. All the published data on this is crystal clear. Even the literature coming out of banks points to this. There are now special products which are fairly popular where parents can help underwrite mortgages for their grown up children to compensate for the high LTV ratio.

It still depends massively on geography though. My daughter (23) bought her first house, a 3 bed semi, a few months ago for about £130k. Good sized ex-Council house with a large garden and located on the edge of a really nice park so no risk to the views over the countryside. Admittedly she was lucky enough to have inherited money to cover the deposit and got a 75% LTV mortgage but she would have saved a 10% deposit within 12 months. Her mortgage costs less than many of her friends were paying for their cars (and about the same as she is now paying for her car having got a new one after moving in and getting the house sorted).

Brilliant

skyblueamateur

£150 on coffee or 4 of these a month - https://www.beergonzo.co.uk/search?q=black damnation&u=1

Choices, choices.

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

Given the situation within the Labour and Conservative parties, and that most people are fairly centrist, why are the Lib Dems such a complete and utter failure too?

Rick - in what way are the issues of the young any different to those of previous generations?
I'll grant you the fact it is harder to get on the housing ladder than at any time since before about 1980 due to the high amount needed for a deposit, though interest rates are historically incredibly low as a balance once you manage to get on the ladder. There's also a lot of inherited wealth heading their way over the next 30 years.

So yes, the two things you highlighted are material. I don't think the "history boys" could be written now and be accurate, in the sense that if you were just smart and worked hard you could be on the path to a very comfortable living. If you look at all the stats now, social mobility is a lot lower and younger generations are increasingly reliant on inheritance for success. That causes a lot of political tension.

That, combined with the cost of homeownership makes growing up just very different. A good proportion of people, especially ironically those who want good paying careers, can't expect to own homes without help from their parents until deep into their 30s.

I think an under reported cost too is the cost of childcare. If housing is so expensive, and the cost of childcare is as it is, what, 2nd highest in the world and requiring an above-average wage to afford it, then the whole dynamics around what your life is about change substantially. That is impacting most people, especially those who cannot ask mum and dad for money.

The inherited wealth that's heading the way over the next 30 years isn't going to people in their 20s and 30s, but in their 50s, 60s and 70s. That is, to use a Dutch phrase, mustard after the meal time.

Every generation has their own apocalypse concern - I suspect your generation it was nuclear annihilation. This generation it is sustainability and global warming and I think that will infiltrate all walks of life. I don't think there is a single sector or behaviour that isn't and won't be somehow impacted by a drive towards sustainability. That has a profound affect on how you think about the world.

I also think the way of working is fundamentally different. Older people may remember a time of working before the internet, smart phones, corporate surveillance, zero hours, all that stuff. That's a big change in the working pattern. If you grow up with that, you see the world differently.

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living. There are a far wider variety of ways in which they can make that living now than there ever were. It doesn't have to be done in the SE.

It wasn't easy to get on the housing ladder as a graduate in the late 80s - starting salary of £8k pa, £80K+ for a 2 bed flat in SE London, mortgage interest at 18-19% pa. But buying with a friend, making other sacrifices and borrowing from family meant not paying rent. Didn't see any capital growth on the flat though in the next 6 years.

The way of work has changed massively, those in their late 40s upwards have lived through those changes and had to adapt, and learn new skills to cope, rather than growing up with what are now essential basic skills.

I do agree that there will always be topics that feature high on the concerns of different generations. The Nuclear war issue was fading away by then, AIDS was probably the issue along with African famine, hence things like Live Aid.

It has always been difficult starting out in the world as a young adult, but there is a perception that some of the current younger generation are very impatient and expect things much earlier in life than the older generations.

Probably the biggest change is the impact of social media and how intrusive that is. We could get away with doing some really, really stupid things and have no record other than dodgy memories. Now there'll be photos and videos and those can have a much longer term impact.

So the statistics say it was materially easier in the 80s than it was now. You can say otherwise if you want, I'm sure it was very tough for you, but as the charts point out otherwise, it is a different level.

The chat about "patience" misses the actual facts behind what is going on. The young do have to wait longer for things than previous generations have had to wait. Things like, earning enough money after costs of living to bring up children, buying houses etc.

There are charts that show all of this. Average age of first home ownership has been growing since the 80s. Average cost of home versus wages has spiralled higher and higher - they cost proportionally substantially more. The cost of childcare is proportionally much more than it used to be.

You can discount it because you feel you hard hardships, but that is the reality.

You discount the social mobility challenges

Plenty of younger people working hard and being smart can and do build up to leading a comfortable living.

but the evidence is that it is materially more difficult than it used to be, and the wealth of your parents is much more important than it used to be.

You can see why that is frustrating for people. Being smart and hard working is often not enough any more.

We can do a four yorkshireman bit if you want, but the actual facts, rather than what you feel, suggest that things *are different* now than they used to be for young people.

Asking for a friend - why are debt servicing costs not a factor for individuals buying houses.

When John was 24 he had probably been working and accumulating assets for 3 years whereas his modern day counterpart will have been swanning around accumulating debts so that would account for 6 years difference in buying houses.

Do we need to ask him how many phones he rented and how much avocado on artisan sourdough toast he washed down with skinny mocha oatmilk chai latte?

I think you need to substantiate this figment of your imagination.

Not sure why you can’t ask him yourself but ok

@Dorsetboy what age did you start work and how much a week did you spend (before property purchase) on poncey coffees and smashed avocado on artisan baked sourdough toast?

I ask because I employ a number of people in their twenties in what might be considered a hipster part of town. I've seen no evidence that such people exist.

Bejeezus you must work in a strange location. All of the 20's and early 30's (mostly pre-children) I've worked with in the past 10 years (various offices) walk into the office every morning with their takeaway bag and cup of coffee.

Spitalfields. We provide tea and decent coffee in the office, so maybe that's it. There are occasional takeaway coffees. Phones are mostly beaten up 3-4 year old iPhones. The £8-9 falafel wraps are mostly consumed by the well-paid City workers.

kingstongraham

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

If inflation goes the way some think, £15 per hour in 2024 won't be ridiculous though.

It's difficult to argue that a profitable business should pay someone so little they need additional government support. That's the state giving handouts to businesses.

the great socialist idea of WTC has acted as a subsidy for the likes of Tesco so they don't have to pay a living wage

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought you only got it if you have kids, so someone without kids isn't subsidised?

Universal credit now replacing wtc for people without children, but the point remains, I think.

So what sort of top up does universal credit give you if you earn £10/hour?

Otherwise, I just see it as subsidy for kids paid to their parents.

It depends how many hours you work and what your housing situation is.

Zero to not much though.

Then I'm not persuaded by your argument

Actually, at £10 an hour for a 40 hour week, a single person renting a room in a house could get £70 a week depending on how much rent they pay. The housing situation makes a big difference.

But £10 is already 15% above the minimum wage, so for 40 hours at minimum wage, you would be getting more.

Take a look here https://www.entitledto.co.uk/

pblakeney

shirley_basso said:

I don't think £5 per day £150/month, £2,000/annum is going to buy a house

As I said it is one example.
Everyone I know over 25 living outside of the SE owns a house. Another example.