… to think that no one wants to speak up for the younger generation?

[SnowBells]

I don't know what it is. Maybe political correctness gone mad.

Pensioners who are already wealthy get winter fuel allowance, etc. Each time this kind of stuff gets mentioned on things like Question Time or something, people shout and whistle, showing complete disregard for the subject, and no real debate can happen.

I am not talking about the pensioners who aren't well off. But a huge proportion of pensioners did profit from the higher house prices - something not likely to happen for the younger generation.

Our kids have to pay to go to uni. My generation will retire much, much later. We also have to pay for inflated house prices.

And yet, there will be people who say 'but we've paid our taxes'. Well, we pay taxes and our kids will, too, but we are likely to get A LOT less back. I just feel there's a huge generational wealth divide. And I wonder why no one wants to discuss this properly? Why do people want to stop a debate before it has even had a chance to happen?

Everyone will die. Your legacy is the next generation. So why not speak up for what essentially will be your only legacy?

Yes techno, it does look vaguely comparable, if you ignore that that very specifically cherry-picked data presents a very short-lived peak in house prices and interest rates against the post "crash" situation of 2012, during a period of insane house prices lasting over a decade. No mention of double MIRAS, either, unsurprisingly.

What I do know is that I don't need the most up to date phone or an expensive computer to get by.

DH needs a really good computer for work (lot of power - I'm not a techie myself). Luckily, they buy him one. I have photographer friends who need a Mac to stay competitive, etc. They need to buy it themselves. There is a theory that Bill Gates got to where he is because his school gave him early access to a computer compared to his contemporaries.

I also don't get why you need parental help when you earn in the top 5%.

Because we only just got there this year. Good promotions in 2013/14, etc. Also, DH had student debt. Far from our industries… but two teachers often can't afford a house on their combined salaries, when their parents consisting of one teacher and a SAHM can.

You may only be a few years older than us - but I noticed in RL how people I worked with who were only 7-10 years older had it massively easier than us. They got onto the property ladder in the late 90s. They missed the early 2000s tech bubble and its aftermath (i.e. they secured a job before then), etc.

P.S.: Those two teachers would be in the top 10% of earners.

Who is doing all this wasting money and spending on clothes and holidays..!?? Who?!
I know maybe 3 people who buy expensive clothes, and go out for dinner a lot, and go on holiday. One earns probably £400 a day as a contractor, another is a costume designer in films and makes silly money when she works.
But , generally, I don't see profligate money spending. I haven't bought myself anything to wear that wasn't from a charity shop in about 5 years, and even when I do spend £4 on a skirt for work or whatever I feel guilty. My winter boots-charity shop, same with my winter coat.
If we can afford a week in a caravan in the summer we will be lucky-and I earn well above the minimum wage!
The three girls I work with (22, 25 and 26) are all staying in most weekends playing board games in order to save up for their holidays, and all are full time, with full time working partners and no kids.
I think it's rubbish that younger people are extravagant-and I totally agree with how crap clothes are these days-you end up buying more because they fall apart!

Not to mention that this was a very short lived peak. It was a very bad time to buy a house, if you bought your first house then you were unlucky. tbh my parents only had a tiny mortgage by then anyway.

Prices got back up to the same in around 2000, which is when we bought our first house.

mrsdavidcaruso I'm not sure where you think this youngster made an unearned profit of £
100k? If he bought a flat at £250k, plus stamp duty and fees, invested a whole load of money in doing works and a new kitchen and sold it for £329, i would be surprised if his profit was £50k. And that is entrepreneurial profit from investing and improving a property, which is hardly the same thing as completely unearned increases on your primary residence despite your doing no more than essential maintenance!

So just because it was short lived does that magically mean that those who were looking to buy, or bought, at that time didn't have a comparably tough time. That's strange logic.

Lots of people suffered at that time due to the huge crash. Those that did not lose their house we caught in negative equity for about a decade. It sounds like some are belittling the suffering or are wearing rose tinted specs.

I don't argue that the youth of today aren't faced with some tough times ahead but what is the older generation supposed to do about it? We're doing our best by generating as much wealth as possible to help out our kids. Hopefully it will provide some sort of buffer but only if those of us that have made money on housing don't spunk it away on buying tat.

Those that don't think people are frittering money away must be turning a blind eye to the huge levels of personal debt that's still being amassed.

I do realise my parents' case is a particularly extreme example- by a combination of luck and judgement they bought and sold good investments at good times and benefitted from two fully paid moves, which would be unheard of now. However, even if they had stayed in their original bungalow that would also be worth £500k, they just wouldn't have had the excess £200k to invest. And their house would have been much smaller so they wouldn't have the spoiled and entitled attitude they now have, moaning that to buy the equivalent of their current massive house near me (commuter belt) would be well over a million. I think they are actually annoyed that their current house has only appreciated by £100k/25% in ten years. While we made a loss on our first flat and do not expect any increase in the value of our current house over money we spend improving it.

So just because it was short lived does that magically mean that those who were looking to buy, or bought, at that time didn't have a comparably tough time. That's strange logic.

No it is strange logic to belittle the long-term locking out of home ownership of an entire generation by cherry picking data that represented a very small window in which people who bought a house got a bad deal. Yes, some people who bought in the (at most) couple of years after 1989 got a bad deal. However after those couple of years passed, home ownership was probably the easiest and most affordable in the history of the UK - those who bought in the mid 1990s got an incredibly good deal, essentially a winning lotto ticket assuming they still own property now. Even those who rode out the 1989 crash are generally sitting pretty now.

Houses became a seriously bad deal again by about 2004 (arguably earlier) - however there has been no sunshine after the storm this time - they are still a seriously bad deal now, and were a stupendously awful deal in 2007. Neither does it look like affordable home ownership is going to become available any time soon, with the government pulling every trick in the book to keep house prices high.

I don't argue that the youth of today aren't faced with some tough times ahead but what is the older generation supposed to do about it? We're doing our best by generating as much wealth as possible to help out our kids.

I assume you are talking about helping children with their deposits? That's great n all, but what about those without wealthy parents? Generation Y and beyond don't need a feudal system of wealth and status being aquired based on who your parents are, they need affordable housing and a chance to make their own way in life - the destruction of social mobility in this country is disgusting.

Those that don't think people are frittering money away must be turning a blind eye to the huge levels of personal debt that's still being amassed.

Don't get me wrong, there are idiots who don't help themselves and rack up loads of debt (actually across all generations - often rising house prices has bailed out the older ones though), I don't have a great deal of sympathy for those that don't help themselves. But suggesting that the reason young people can't afford houses that have doubled (or quadrupled, as is often the case in the SE) in price is because they own an iPod and go to Starbucks every now and again is ridiculous.

Great post joven. Sums it up perfectly.

Joven I'm not belittling what the youth have to face now and in the future. I'm not cherry picking data either as it is an era that I had to face personally. If I was older/younger then I'd be commenting on data at that time as opposed to 1990. You're making it sound like I've randomly picked 1990 purely because it has headline figures.

Sadly social mobility is going to have to slow down. We are a tiny island with limited scope for expansion. Unless we build on every last piece of green belt then our growing population is only going to see one outcome. In the future the notion of having any 'right' to fly the nest and buy a home is going to be severely limited. I don't see many alternative outcomes.

Regarding spending I'm not suggesting that the odd coffee is going to cause problems but it's the 'lifestyle' that doesn't help. Other than seeing this type of individual on tv I also work with graduates who struggle with money yet grab a Starbucks on the way to work, eat in the canteen every day, have iPhones on £35+/m contracts and strive for the latest tech. Maybe it won't net you a deposit in a hurry but if you spend a large part of your disposable income on 'stuff' then how are you going to save anything at all? I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that £3 a day on coffee is going to get you a deposit but it's the attitude. If your saving potential is £500/m and you spend half of that on useless crap then a deposit that might take you 5 years is going to take 10. 10 years to most is a futile exercise.

Anything is possible, you just have to prioritise.

Only 6% of the UK is currently built up.

To answer the OP...
David Willetts has spoken up, and Jilted Generation is also an interesting read.

Two comments relating to earlier posts;

It's a myth that most pensioners paid taxes therefore are owed - for one, most women then did not work, unlike nowadays. Yes, their husbands did but proportionally much less than today.

Second, to the poster who said you can buy a house in the NW for £40k - where the hell exactly?!? I live in the NW and the only possible places I can think this fantasy house may exist are where no one wants to live, and for a good reason. The NW is just as expensive as anywhere else.

I don't know any students who waste their money on expensive clothes, foriegn holidays etc. Yes, they may occassionally go out or have a drink of coffee, but most of them are living on a tiny amount of money a year (£2-5000). They would love to rent a cheap shithole of a flat, but instead they pay £300 a month for a room in a supposedly nice house that is infested with mice... or whatever. Landlords know they can charge this kind of money, so no-where is available any cheaper. Further away from the city centre, where rents are cheaper, landlords will only rent to families.

The only students I know who can afford flash lifestyles are the ones funded by parents or grandparents. The rest often work long hours to try and save some money.

The problem with trying to save while you are renting is that every 6-12 months you have to come up with a new deposit, as your landlord evicts you in order to raise the rent and you will never get all of your deposit back, no matter how careful you are. Deposits are usually a month and a half's rent minimum- so around £450+ for a room in a shared house, and £600+ for a one bedroomed flat.

Most people I know do without a car for as long as possible, but to get a many jobs in this area, you usually need one, as public transport is not great- insurance is huge, and of course running a car is really expensive.

Posters have talked about older people doing without appliances, but it's not really possible anymore. There are no laundrettes in my city centre- so you need a washing machine (and often a tumbledryer because your landlord won't let you dry clothes in doors). There's no housewife at home to daily shopping, so a fridge/freezer is a must. You're expected to have a mobile phone by work, and access to the internet in order to claim benefits or apply for your student loan- never mind to find work and answer emails.

Also, when saving for a house seems an impossibility- because £10k or more is a daunting sum when you have litterally no savings, sometimes it is nice to have stuff. Having a cheaper contract phone- so saving maybe £20 a month will get you £240 a year, plus say £300 on coffee it will save you £600 a year- except it won't, because something will always come up needing you to spend money on it. It is very hard to think you can litterally have nothing but the bare essentials for the 10 years it will take you to save a deposit you need- even assuming you're employed for all that time.

I'm not completely miserable about my personal prospects- I'm young with no attatchments and happy to travel abroad to find work if I need to. However, it does annoy me to see my generation constantly criticised- especially when the problems aren't of our making, and we mostly voted for Nick Clegg who then proceeded to completely screw us over. Is it any wonder most young people are utterly disaffected with politics?

These problems, especially entry level jobs for young people do need to be addressed. I don't think it will be that long before we see a repeat of the London riots. It is in everyone's interests for young people to feel they have a stake in society.

Sorry Stevie not the women who are coming up to pension age now my own Mum will have worked and paid full NI (and its NI contributions that are used for Pensions not tax payments) for 51 years when she gets her pension and as I have already said upthread she has had her future pension statement and has enough NI contributions for her pension but she will get an extra pension which will give her an extra £1.75 per week for every year SHE pays full NI (not you, not I not some poor hard done by youngster on min wage) as she pays over a grand a year NI on her wages it certainly does look like she will be paying in to her second pension a hell of a lot more than she will be getting out

But MrsDavidCaruso you do know that NI isn't saved up somewhere like an insurance scheme? It is paid out immediately to current pensioners. So there is no way anyone can claim they "paid enough in" to cover their future pension, because there is no way of knowing for certain what the country's exact pension liabilities will be in 40-60 years' time, what future rates of NI will be, what proportion of the population and how many people will be paying it.....

What your mum paid in has never been equal to the amount she will take out, and it was never intended to work like that. It's essentially a sort of semi-hypothecated bit of income tax. And what your mum will eventually get out will depend on enough of today's young people having enough money to pay enough tax to provide it. If they have huge debts and low pay and the cost of housing and living is high, where is the money going to come from to pay out entitlements?

bedraggledmumoftwo so you don't think his profit was unearned then
you can put in a new kitchen and bathroom for only a few grand not the 50 grand you seem to think and actually when he bought the property it was under 250k by £100 pounds so he did not actually pay that much stamp duty. Dress it up how you like but there is no difference between what he did and an older person improving their property - their primary residence and selling for a profit, Why is it entrepreneurial profit when a younger person does it and greed when an older person does it?

MrsDavidCaruso

But NI is not a pension scheme. NI is meant to be an insurance in case you lose your job and access to other services. If I viewed taxes/NI contributions as my own personal pension scheme… I'd be a wealthy pensioner indeed.

This month was a bigger pay day, and I paid nearly £5k in tax/NI contributions - it actually hurts to see that figure on my payslip. That money won't be sitting there, waiting for me to draw it out by the time I retire...

But train you also have to remember that during her ( at present) 44 years of paying NI she has paid for the pensions of the grandparents and even great grandparents of todays young people. I don't expect to have a pension in the future but I am young enough to pay into a private pension to ensure my future, you cant expect people who are coming to the end of their working lives to be able to do that. Its one thing to know BEFORE you pay in that you might not get anything at the end of it but to tell people who have paid in already for 40 plus years and have already paid for the pensions of other people that we cant afford their pensions - that is totally unfair. And its not tax that pays a pension its NI if it were tax then my dads years of paying higher rate tax would probably cover it.

Just remind me just how many years do you have to pay tax and NI to qualify for Working tax credits or child tax credits bit less then 40 odd years I would imagine - many many people will take out more then they will ever pay in its not just pensioners who will do that. In fact my 85 year old grandad still works and still pays tax on his wages and pension so is still contributing

Snowbells I am not saying you draw your own contributions out I know you don't what I am saying that people like my Mum and Dad and MIL and FIL have already paid for other peoples pensions and at this time in their lives you cant tell them sorry we cant afford to pay you.

As a young person I am sick of the comments made by people my age in regards to our parents and grandparents its no wonder some of us are viewed as the entitled generation by the older generation.

Please don't forget that age 25 I am not looking at too rosy a future myself when I get old but I am not blaming the older generation for what may happen to me

mrsdavidcaruso i didn't say it would cost £50k to put in a new kitchen and bathroom although having just had both it would certainly be more than a "few" grand, especially since you said it was something your parents hadn't been able to do, which implies you were talking about more extensive work.

My first point was to question your maths- 329-250 is 79, less stamp duty £6k and solicitors fees to buy and sell of at least £1k, less cost of improvement works, if more limited than you first implied then maybe £7k, brings us to a gloss profit of 65k But then said youngster would probably have had at least an 80%mortgage of £200k at 5% costing 30 grand in interest payments alone. So our budding entrepreneur may have got away with £35k profit. Although the movement in the house price at a time of low house price inflation does suggest more investment than that- so he probably spent more time and money doing the rest of the place up.

my second point is that your example of an entrepreneurial youngster investing in a property for a small profit has nothing to do with house price inflation- your parents saw the value of said flat rise by 1000%, not due to their investment in improving it, since you said they couldn't afford to, but simply due to house price inflation. Had they sold in 2007 before the crash it would probably have fetched even more!
if an older person had also invested in their property, then their profit would probably be a combination of the two factors, but as i said, it doesn't sound like that was the case with your parents. And it certainly wasn't the case with my parents, when they made 400k profit on a house that was in need of improvement when they bought it and still was when they sold it having done nothing to it!

I am also not saying it is greed to profit from unearned house price inflation, as i said earlier. It is not a question of blaming or criticising those who benefitted from this phenomenon, just wanting them to recognise and acknowledge how lucky they were to do so and realise this is not something that is likely to be enjoyed by younger generations.

Mrs David curuso would you be so kind as to point me to where someone blames the older generation? I have asked this several times and each time have been ignored. The thread is about it being easier in the past not about having a go at people who lived at a different time.

It is very hard btw for ftbs to buy doer-uppers. People Now have to put all of their money into the deposit usually leaving nothing left. Yes it will be cheaper but the proportions mean that isn't all left in cash. So the person you refer to is pretty rare.

Sorry, meant your aunt not parents.
and the stamp duty would only have been 2500 when he purchased the flat(although if he spent the sale proceeds on a new flat that would have been another 10 grand sdlt!).

The post war generation and baby boomers benefitted from:
Decent NHS care - GPS who came on home visits and knew their patients, no huge waiting times for ops.
Free university education
Jobs for life
Retiring at 60
Final salary pension schemes
Better home/life balance
Huge profits from property

I am 41.
I have no idea if there will even be a state pension if I reach pension age, and no idea what pension age will be by then!
I can see people my age having to work until we are 70.

I do t blame older people but it does map get me when they make sweeping judgments about our generation. My mum (68) has told me several times she is glad she isn't my age now and bringing up kids now. She says it's just too hard :(

I can only speak for two Babyboomers.

Good NHS care/GPs proper ones who knew families well and did home visits.......Yes but what can be done for modern day patients eg treating cancer/CHD etc has improve so sort of cancels that out.

Free university education.....Yes for the lucky few. Most didn't get the chance. Really very few working class girls. Most worked from 15 or 16 and lots still are working.

Jobs for life.....No unemployment in the 70s, 80s LOL!

Retire at 60....For men it has been 65 for many years. Baby boomers born in the mid 50s still work.

Final salary pension scheme......Again for the lucky ones. DH will have to sort an annuity out himself. Many older women and low paid men will have only a state pension. Also women often paid a married womens stamp and I'm not sure what their state pension rights are now.

Better home life balance.....I know very few mums who stayed at home once the youngest DC was at school. DH always worked long hours and was away working to earn enough to pay the mortgage. There is nothing new in that.

Huge profit from property.....We were lucky not to lose our home. High interest rates and all that. We still live in the property so can't actually spend it. Some may remortgage we will not.

Then there's the 3 day week, the winter of discontent and the poll tax.