The boomers ate all the avocados
Comments
-
Yeahbut the top 10% have always looked out for themselves.
Mostly because they can. I'm sure the bottom 10% would look after themselves if they could.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
The “it’s always been this way, it’s just worse” is not a very persuasive argument and anyway, I would argue that coming from wealth has become much more important than income has, which is supported by the data above.
Where is the incentive to work hard if what you earn barely matters?
0 -
Yes in that the wealthiest have always been very interested in how to maintain and transfer the family estate down the generations. No in that mass home ownership is a relatively new phenomenon anyway (maybe a century). If people with very well-paid middle management jobs in London financial services are having to rely on their parents to help them out in their late 30s, I'd suggest the trend of the 20th century is now reversing.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Yeah well, I still maintain that housing is so expensive because some muppets pay ridiculous prices.
As long as people are paying those prices then the high prices will remain. Vicious circle.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
If you think it's bad now, wait till the well off boomers with pensions drawdown start to die and hand down their unused pensions funds to their kids: it's going to skew the game even more.
================================
Cake is just weakness entering the body0 -
What, you predicted millennials fighting each other over avocados? I only read the bit about illennials wanting to fight bòomers for the avocados that the latter already own,
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
No.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Back to house size again?
1 -
-
If you want to think that people are stupid for paying the market rate for a home that's up to you. I guess all those people sleeping rough and on housing waiting lists are the clever ones. 😐
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
It's not going to change anytime soon regardless of who is in charge, so my advice is that patience is a virtue. And remember, blessed are the Millennials, for they shall inherit their parents houses. Well the lucky ones anyway: as we all know, life isn't always fair.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You missed my point. If people keep paying high prices then prices will remain high. Legislation won't happen and a mass building spree will only help long term. Short to medium term it sucks. Moan as much as anyone wants, won't help.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
You seem to be asserting that there is considerable inequality amongst millenials with regard to housing. I was assuming this was presenting itself in the form of house size, but maybe you were making an argument about location.
0 -
I am currently house hunting, if a property is on for £800k, I can offer 500 but then someone else will buy it and I won't have a house.
They are expensive because they are in demand. Unless everyone in my area gets together and agrees to pay 20% under the current market value then I don't see how your statement offers any kind of solution.
0 -
Or the lenders stop lending so much.
1 -
It sucks, as I said. It is what it is, a "Just say no!" collective would work but that's dreamland.
My solution was to locate in a nice area I could afford and travel for work, but then I turned down job offers in London as travel and accommodation was cost prohibitive, as everyone keeps saying. I just said no to London.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
You are right, I have not. Feel free to point out how this does not come back to some people having bigger houses.
0 -
Parents giving certain amounts of money early on in life, enough to buy a house on a mortgage, dramatically changes people’s living standards.
so people in the same property can have vastly different outgoings for a given house.
point being parental willingness and ability to help impacts living standards *so much* that it is creating a deeply unequal cohort - much deeper than it’s predecessors.
0 -
People with more disposable income or bigger inheritances then buy bigger houses which is the point you continually make.
I think parental gifts and inheritance should be taxed. I've been pretty clear on this. However, there is little public support for this, so the current mess will inevitably continue. I just accept this is the situation and avoid being consumed by envy. I haven't benefited from the property market nor I am likely to.
0 -
In ‘other things that are unfair’ some people get paid significantly less than others and there is little correlation between how much they earn and the wider benefit of their job to the rest of humanity. Life isn’t fair, get over it or spend your whole life being bitter.
2 -
Ffs why does everyone make out I have envy. I’m doing fine, I own a house. It’s the millions of those who don’t.
0 -
Many of your posts are not consistent with this.
0 -
I am pissed off that my decent household earnings merely allow me to own something - rather than something that’s more commensurate with my income yeah, that is true.
That is true all the way down the income ladder, however.
that isn’t envy. That’s being pissed off me with my own lot.
I recognise that the lack of house building has turned housing into a zero sum game and that creates conflict; that is the germ of this entire thread.
If they just built loads of houses that I’d like to live in and could afford on my very decent income I’d be fine. Couldn’t give a sh!t about who else was living where.
alas, it is zero sum in reality, so if I want to live somewhere, someone else is gonna have to vacate that.
0 -
In the words of Kirstie Allsopp, "location, location, location".
That is the issue here. People choose to live where houses are expensive. Fine, just don't moan about it.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I’m confused is this still because the boomers…..? Or the housing shortage where all the rich families buy the best stuff.
0 -
-
Maybe I am because I think those choosing to live in overpriced areas are stupid. One of us must be wrong?
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
what makes you think something in the free market is “overpriced”?
The price is the price, and I think you’ve got the logic of “location location location” wrong. The location is the most important, not the house. Obviously.
I can’t live near my family or my work in Dorset can I ?
0 -
I see you've got the logic of it being a choice. People shouldn't moan about their own choices.
People do work in Dorset and it's not too far away from family, purely as the example given.
Oh, and that's not really a Boomers issue.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0
