Today's discussion about the news

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

I thought that was irrelevant?
#cherrypicking

Yeah it is, that's exactly what I'm saying. Can you imagine when you were in your 20s, so presumably what, the 70s, with people banging on about the war all the time?

It's not unreasonable for young people to have shorter time frames. And even beyond the perception, the reality is real.

under 35s spend 3x what their grandparents did on housing. The realities of commutes etc are real, because that's what the combination of the labour market and the housing market offer.

These are problems that need to be solved. If they're not addressed, they will become more radicalised.

But the under 35s grandparents are our parents generation and we are telling you that despite what they spent on housing, people had far less disposable income.

You may live in a shoebox but I would be amazed if your family does not eat out more often than any of us did.

If we count breakfast then there is a chance your daughter eats out more in a year than all of did put together

ddraver

Hilarious discussion...

rick_chasey

I can assure you we do not. You wouldn’t need all your fingers on one hand to count how often I have been out to a restaurant with a family member since covid. I guess if you include holidays that’s different, but then, I am deep into the top 5% of earners so I am not representative.

I do a lot of restauranting, a lot, but none of that is on my own dime.

rick_chasey

Anyway I look forward to the “you don’t know how good you have it” political campaign which is sure fire to work.

That’ll save Western Europe from the clutches of far right politics.

“Why are the young voting in radical politicians?”

“They’re too pampered” yes ok.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

I thought that was irrelevant?
#cherrypicking

Yeah it is, that's exactly what I'm saying. Can you imagine when you were in your 20s, so presumably what, the 70s, with people banging on about the war all the time?

It's not unreasonable for young people to have shorter time frames. And even beyond the perception, the reality is real.

under 35s spend 3x what their grandparents did on housing. The realities of commutes etc are real, because that's what the combination of the labour market and the housing market offer.

These are problems that need to be solved. If they're not addressed, they will become more radicalised.

1. They did. That's how I know what it was like during the war.
2. My point was that the growth of the 90s and early noughties was not normal.
3. It is what it is, and it's not going to change. See below.
4. Bring on the revolution.

I had a look to satisfy my own curiosity and came up with this. Hard to get one source of data though.
Average weekly wage 1982 = £154.30
Average weekly wage 2022 = £673.00
x4.26
Average house cost 1982 = £21,811
Average house cost 2022 = £294,559
x13.51

Inflation from 1982 to 2022 = x3.14.

Based on inflation should be weekly wage of £484.50 and average house cost £68,487. So wages have comfortably outstripped inflation but housing is extortionate.

House price should be £92,915 if linked to wages. Anyone fancy 68% negative equity?
Average weekly wage would be £2084.59 if linked to house prices. Chances of a 210% raise?

rick_chasey

Finally, you're getting somewhere.

I think you'd all do better to remember people feel poor/rich relative to their surroundings - and if you literally have the older generation in your life living more prosperously than you, that will make you feel poor.

You lot can argue till you're blue in the face that the youth of Western Europe are wrong and you are right, but that does not solve the political problem that a majority of 18-35s vote for far-right candidates now, does it?

pangolin

Pb your argument is that yes it's a problem but it's such a big problem there is nothing to be done?

pblakeney

pangolin said:

Pb your argument is that yes it's a problem but it's such a big problem there is nothing to be done?

Pretty much. We are past the point of no return.
Revolutions aside.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

Finally, you're getting somewhere.

I think you'd all do better to remember people feel poor/rich relative to their surroundings - and if you literally have the older generation in your life living more prosperously than you, that will make you feel poor.

This is the issue of perception.
Buying an affordable house that becomes expensive does not make you prosperous.

Dorset_Boy

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

I thought that was irrelevant?
#cherrypicking

Yeah it is, that's exactly what I'm saying. Can you imagine when you were in your 20s, so presumably what, the 70s, with people banging on about the war all the time?

It's not unreasonable for young people to have shorter time frames. And even beyond the perception, the reality is real.

under 35s spend 3x what their grandparents did on housing. The realities of commutes etc are real, because that's what the combination of the labour market and the housing market offer.

These are problems that need to be solved. If they're not addressed, they will become more radicalised.

1. They did. That's how I know what it was like during the war.
2. My point was that the growth of the 90s and early noughties was not normal.
3. It is what it is, and it's not going to change. See below.
4. Bring on the revolution.

I had a look to satisfy my own curiosity and came up with this. Hard to get one source of data though.
Average weekly wage 1982 = £154.30
Average weekly wage 2022 = £673.00
x4.26
Average house cost 1982 = £21,811
Average house cost 2022 = £294,559
x13.51

Inflation from 1982 to 2022 = x3.14.

Based on inflation should be weekly wage of £484.50 and average house cost £68,487. So wages have comfortably outstripped inflation but housing is extortionate.

House price should be £92,915 if linked to wages. Anyone fancy 68% negative equity?
Average weekly wage would be £2084.59 if linked to house prices. Chances of a 210% raise?

It would be interesting to strip London out of those figures, particularly the house price ones which I suspect are massively distorted by London.

Dorset_Boy

rick_chasey said:

Finally, you're getting somewhere.

I think you'd all do better to remember people feel poor/rich relative to their surroundings - and if you literally have the older generation in your life living more prosperously than you, that will make you feel poor.

You lot can argue till you're blue in the face that the youth of Western Europe are wrong and you are right, but that does not solve the political problem that a majority of 18-35s vote for far-right candidates now, does it?

The young will always be poor in comparison to the generation(s) above them - your income in your 20s and 30s should be less than in your 50s and 60s as your career progresses. Also in your 50s and 60s you won't be saddled with the costs of family and mortgages.
I suspect that you just haven't phrased what you mean as clearly as you need though.

rick_chasey

Dorset_Boy said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

I thought that was irrelevant?
#cherrypicking

Yeah it is, that's exactly what I'm saying. Can you imagine when you were in your 20s, so presumably what, the 70s, with people banging on about the war all the time?

It's not unreasonable for young people to have shorter time frames. And even beyond the perception, the reality is real.

under 35s spend 3x what their grandparents did on housing. The realities of commutes etc are real, because that's what the combination of the labour market and the housing market offer.

These are problems that need to be solved. If they're not addressed, they will become more radicalised.

1. They did. That's how I know what it was like during the war.
2. My point was that the growth of the 90s and early noughties was not normal.
3. It is what it is, and it's not going to change. See below.
4. Bring on the revolution.

I had a look to satisfy my own curiosity and came up with this. Hard to get one source of data though.
Average weekly wage 1982 = £154.30
Average weekly wage 2022 = £673.00
x4.26
Average house cost 1982 = £21,811
Average house cost 2022 = £294,559
x13.51

Inflation from 1982 to 2022 = x3.14.

Based on inflation should be weekly wage of £484.50 and average house cost £68,487. So wages have comfortably outstripped inflation but housing is extortionate.

House price should be £92,915 if linked to wages. Anyone fancy 68% negative equity?
Average weekly wage would be £2084.59 if linked to house prices. Chances of a 210% raise?

It would be interesting to strip London out of those figures, particularly the house price ones which I suspect are massively distorted by London.

Now that sounds suspiciously like cherry picking - 10million people live in London.

Might as well strip out Wales and Scotland instead because they'll be dragging down the averages.

pblakeney

Dorset_Boy said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

I thought that was irrelevant?
#cherrypicking

Yeah it is, that's exactly what I'm saying. Can you imagine when you were in your 20s, so presumably what, the 70s, with people banging on about the war all the time?

It's not unreasonable for young people to have shorter time frames. And even beyond the perception, the reality is real.

under 35s spend 3x what their grandparents did on housing. The realities of commutes etc are real, because that's what the combination of the labour market and the housing market offer.

These are problems that need to be solved. If they're not addressed, they will become more radicalised.

1. They did. That's how I know what it was like during the war.
2. My point was that the growth of the 90s and early noughties was not normal.
3. It is what it is, and it's not going to change. See below.
4. Bring on the revolution.

I had a look to satisfy my own curiosity and came up with this. Hard to get one source of data though.
Average weekly wage 1982 = £154.30
Average weekly wage 2022 = £673.00
x4.26
Average house cost 1982 = £21,811
Average house cost 2022 = £294,559
x13.51

Inflation from 1982 to 2022 = x3.14.

Based on inflation should be weekly wage of £484.50 and average house cost £68,487. So wages have comfortably outstripped inflation but housing is extortionate.

House price should be £92,915 if linked to wages. Anyone fancy 68% negative equity?
Average weekly wage would be £2084.59 if linked to house prices. Chances of a 210% raise?

It would be interesting to strip London out of those figures, particularly the house price ones which I suspect are massively distorted by London.

True, but way beyond my skillset.

pangolin

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Finally, you're getting somewhere.

I think you'd all do better to remember people feel poor/rich relative to their surroundings - and if you literally have the older generation in your life living more prosperously than you, that will make you feel poor.

You lot can argue till you're blue in the face that the youth of Western Europe are wrong and you are right, but that does not solve the political problem that a majority of 18-35s vote for far-right candidates now, does it?

The young will always be poor in comparison to the generation(s) above them - your income in your 20s and 30s should be less than in your 50s and 60s as your career progresses. Also in your 50s and 60s you won't be saddled with the costs of family and mortgages.
I suspect that you just haven't phrased what you mean as clearly as you need though.

Plenty of people on 35 year mortgages these days as it's all they can afford

rick_chasey

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Finally, you're getting somewhere.

I think you'd all do better to remember people feel poor/rich relative to their surroundings - and if you literally have the older generation in your life living more prosperously than you, that will make you feel poor.

You lot can argue till you're blue in the face that the youth of Western Europe are wrong and you are right, but that does not solve the political problem that a majority of 18-35s vote for far-right candidates now, does it?

The young will always be poor in comparison to the generation(s) above them - your income in your 20s and 30s should be less than in your 50s and 60s as your career progresses. Also in your 50s and 60s you won't be saddled with the costs of family and mortgages.
I suspect that you just haven't phrased what you mean as clearly as you need though.

Under 35s do not expect to earn more, over their lifetime, than their parents.

Like I said, that's the first time that's happened since the war which is getting on for a century ago.

If you want to ignore the concerns that's fine, but you'll continue to get large swaths of the young voting for nutter candidates in elections, whether it's the AfD, Le Pen, the PVV or Corbyn et al.

you can put that down to youthful exuberance, but I'd say that's a dangerous political game to play, and eventually, governments across the west need to address some of their concerns with real action, else people like Wilders will capitalise on their frustration.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

You could argue that Boomers and Gen X were so successful in creating prosperity and raising living standards over a sustained period that Millenials assumed it would just carry on forever, which clearly it can't. Millenials should at least be thanking us for those achievements - and working harder to get us back on track.

I think you should lead with this on your campaign to get the 18-35 vote.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

wallace_and_gromit

Re housing costs for the youngsters vs us old fogies, we had this or a very similar discussion a few months ago. My recollection of the conclusion was that with interest rates as they were in 2021, debt service costs were the same proportion of income as they were when I was a mere stripling paying my first mortgage at 14.5%. Prices simply adjust to mop up all cash that is available for debt service. A sub-conclusion was that there is a genuine issue now for those re-mortgaging, as their debt is what was required to buy when prices were consistent with 0.5% base rates, but with mortgage rates now reflecting 5% base rates. A further sub-conclusion was that raising a deposit is harder now relatively.

There are always winners and losers. My generation had negative equity and graduating into the era of "Major' Millions" to contend with. Life is rarely consistently easy...

Dorset_Boy

I should probably have said that the mortgage costs will be ending or close to ending. And if you haven't moved for 15+ years, the loan to salary will probably be relatively low by the time you are in your mid-50s.

pangolin

Dorset_Boy said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

I thought that was irrelevant?
#cherrypicking

Yeah it is, that's exactly what I'm saying. Can you imagine when you were in your 20s, so presumably what, the 70s, with people banging on about the war all the time?

It's not unreasonable for young people to have shorter time frames. And even beyond the perception, the reality is real.

under 35s spend 3x what their grandparents did on housing. The realities of commutes etc are real, because that's what the combination of the labour market and the housing market offer.

These are problems that need to be solved. If they're not addressed, they will become more radicalised.

1. They did. That's how I know what it was like during the war.
2. My point was that the growth of the 90s and early noughties was not normal.
3. It is what it is, and it's not going to change. See below.
4. Bring on the revolution.

I had a look to satisfy my own curiosity and came up with this. Hard to get one source of data though.
Average weekly wage 1982 = £154.30
Average weekly wage 2022 = £673.00
x4.26
Average house cost 1982 = £21,811
Average house cost 2022 = £294,559
x13.51

Inflation from 1982 to 2022 = x3.14.

Based on inflation should be weekly wage of £484.50 and average house cost £68,487. So wages have comfortably outstripped inflation but housing is extortionate.

House price should be £92,915 if linked to wages. Anyone fancy 68% negative equity?
Average weekly wage would be £2084.59 if linked to house prices. Chances of a 210% raise?

It would be interesting to strip London out of those figures, particularly the house price ones which I suspect are massively distorted by London.

Depends what site you look at but average Bristol house price is just under £400k and average salary is about £35k (which is £673 per week)

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

You could argue that Boomers and Gen X were so successful in creating prosperity and raising living standards over a sustained period that Millenials assumed it would just carry on forever, which clearly it can't. Millenials should at least be thanking us for those achievements - and working harder to get us back on track.

I think you should lead with this on your campaign to get the 18-35 vote.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Well yes, we can both agree calling brexiters thickos was accurate in aggregate but hardly a vote winner either, so perhaps a reframing of the situation is in order.

What do the under 35s across Western Europe have to look forward to? What's in it for them, politically?

ddraver

I mean I know he's rich but...seriously?

https://x.com/Flip5ide666/status/1728015910013706432?s=20

rjsterry

pangolin said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Finally, you're getting somewhere.

I think you'd all do better to remember people feel poor/rich relative to their surroundings - and if you literally have the older generation in your life living more prosperously than you, that will make you feel poor.

You lot can argue till you're blue in the face that the youth of Western Europe are wrong and you are right, but that does not solve the political problem that a majority of 18-35s vote for far-right candidates now, does it?

The young will always be poor in comparison to the generation(s) above them - your income in your 20s and 30s should be less than in your 50s and 60s as your career progresses. Also in your 50s and 60s you won't be saddled with the costs of family and mortgages.
I suspect that you just haven't phrased what you mean as clearly as you need though.

Plenty of people on 35 year mortgages these days as it's all they can afford

And we were considered young parents when we started a family in our early 30s. It's no coincidence that the underground is full of adverts for fertility clinics.

TheBigBean

Whilst everyone competes over who has been more hard done by, are there any proposed policies to the right injustices?

For example, I'm all for free higher education.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

You could argue that Boomers and Gen X were so successful in creating prosperity and raising living standards over a sustained period that Millenials assumed it would just carry on forever, which clearly it can't. Millenials should at least be thanking us for those achievements - and working harder to get us back on track.

I think you should lead with this on your campaign to get the 18-35 vote.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Well yes, we can both agree calling brexiters thickos was accurate in aggregate but hardly a vote winner either, so perhaps a reframing of the situation is in order.

What do the under 35s across Western Europe have to look forward to? What's in it for them, politically?

Pretty sure the same question was asked when I was under 35. And the answer is probably the same - get out there and make it better for yourself rather than relying on governments to do it for you. Worked for me.

TheBigBean

Also does anyone know if taking a gap year before university is on the decline? The small number of kids I know of that age don't seem interested.

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

When you're 60, 30 years won't seem like a long time at all. When I was at school, WW2 seemed like ancient history (30 years old), but now when I think that I was born just 19 years after WW2, and how quickly time has gone since I was 30, it seems crazily close.

I'll be quoting this post in about 25 years for you. Possibly.

pblakeney

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

When you're 60, 30 years won't seem like a long time at all. When I was at school, WW2 seemed like ancient history (30 years old), but now when I think that I was born just 19 years after WW2, and how quickly time has gone since I was 30, it seems crazily close.

I'll be quoting this post in about 25 years for you. Possibly.

A little bit of context for Rick, and everyone else to ponder. Rick has been posting on here for nigh on 14 years. Doesn't time fly? Nearly half way to the 30.

briantrumpet

TheBigBean said:

Also does anyone know if taking a gap year before university is on the decline? The small number of kids I know of that age don't seem interested.

Anecdata: yes (but low sample). Maybe because Br....

No, maybe I'll avoid that conclusion.

ddraver

As BT says...

Many fewer taking gap years and more and more staying close to home to avoid comical rent prices.

secretsqirrel

pblakeney said:

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

Since the 90s housing has not been normal, amongst other things. #warpedperception

That's 30 years > it's a long time.

Like the gap between the war and the 70s. It's a long long time.

In 30 years you had 2 world wars.

When you're 60, 30 years won't seem like a long time at all. When I was at school, WW2 seemed like ancient history (30 years old), but now when I think that I was born just 19 years after WW2, and how quickly time has gone since I was 30, it seems crazily close.

I'll be quoting this post in about 25 years for you. Possibly.

A little bit of context for Rick, and everyone else to ponder. Rick has been posting on here for nigh on 14 years. Doesn't time fly? Nearly half way to the 30.

And the 2nd half of the journey to 30 will go so much faster