to worry how average people in the next generation will ever afford a pension or home

[pettywitchinlondon]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3108441/Generation-Y-left-pick-6trillion-tab-Report-warns-children-born-1980-2000-face-apocalyptic-levels-debt-Government-spending.html

I'm not quite sure its apocalyptic , but certainly its worrying. Life will still function, but for the majority owning a home or ever retiring looks unlikely.

My dad was a blue collar worker in the north, working on a production line. He retired at 60, with 45k lump sum and 14k a year pension for the rest of his life. This job was enough to support a family on one income and pension only cost 20-30 a week when he was earning. I doubt anyone doing the job these days could afford a lifestyle anywhere near the same, especially as there are less of these types of jobs.

I'm ok, but only because I was born and didn't have to pay tuition fees, graduated and there were plenty of jobs and am a high earner. But even for people like me its got a lot harder in the last decade.

Living standards look like they will start to fall.

The lowest things here are a park home for the over 55s at 150k or a 1 bed apartment (80s cluster type build) for 170k

It doesn't discount those people at all. I am just making the point that not everyone does and certainly not everyone has to live in London or the Southeast. Therefore it is not true to say that everyone in the next generation will be unable to afford a house.

Which would be a reasonable statement if the OP had made such a statement in the first place. However, she didn't.

You're ignoring that it's not just London and the SE, then? I recognise it doesn't necessarily fit the narrative you're running...

Jassy - I paid 78% of my wages on my mortgage at the highest rates in the 90's - more than 10 years ago. One more rise and I would have had to hand in the keys.

The problems were very real for those of us who actually went through it.

nowadays folks seem to expect to buy a place that they will be in for years straight away.

You must know shit people.

Most folk I know are still on the 'buy a leaky cupboard, do what you can to it and stick it out until you can afford something better' camp.

But then, the shifts in affordability (and relative affordability between rungs on the ladder) are working against that approach.

I personally think that those 2 issues, pensions and homes, are linked. If you can't count on a decent pension you basically run your own investment company, i.e. investing in the property you live in. Also if a typical consumer only wants to pay peanuts for something that requires manual labour than it gets outsourced to countries where UK "peanuts" are a normal salary. Basically, I think we brought in on ourselves.

Jassy - I paid 78% of my wages on my mortgage at the highest rates in the 90's - more than 10 years ago. One more rise and I would have had to hand in the keys.

The problems were very real for those of us who actually went through it.

I'm not denying that, and it must have been shit.

However, when looked at on an overall basis, the three years around the turn of the 90s were hideous for repayments but quickly dropped back to below the 30-year average (and there have been periods since that came close) while deposit required and overall price relative to earnings were much, much lower.

I could excoriate people because I own a house now - but I recognise that my experience is not universal. That's why, when talking about trends that may or may not affect a broad swathe of people, data is probably more relevant than anecdote.

The situation as a whole has changed materially nationally over the last 30 years. You're right. We don't know what the next 30 years will bring, but we know what the last 30 have brought

It hasn't just happened in the last 30 years. People on the lowest wages weren't usually home owners 40, 50, 60 years ago either if ever.

My father supported us all and paid a mortgage on one salary.

We wore hand me down clothes, never went on foreign holidays and brought our own groceries with us when we rented holiday houses as they couldn't afford to buy takeaways or eat out, had the same carpet and wallpaper for years and years regardless of fashion, and had one television in the house.
When they bought their first house they furnished it with second hand stuff, used a crate for a dressing table etc etc. My mother walked everywhere with three small children or hauled us around on the bus.

People could manage on one salary then, but they also has practically no disposable income after the mortgage and electricity were paid for and expected very little in the way of treats and luxuries.

I personally think that those 2 issues, pensions and homes, are linked.

I don't agree that they are linked. Pensions have become unaffordable because people currently live for decades after they retire. That wasn't the case 50 years ago.

I am much more concerned about the rising number of young people who are homeless.

Another anecdote coming up... I was the first person in my family going back through all the known generations to own a house - because I was the first to have a "profession" rather than a job.

Low wages have indeed always meant no home ownership - and no pension for that matter...

There is no point contributing to these threads as the most vociferous are the most narrow minded
Never mind
We were once so poor we ate the family pet whippet and it lasted two whole weeks and for the other two we had dust dog sandwiches. People expect too much these days

www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-34853826.html Walkable to tram so commutable into Manchester and affordable for a young couple on low incomes.

This is just one example and I know plenty would rather not live there. I know it's difficult, it is undoubtedly harder than it has been. But if owning your own home is a priority it is still doable for most. It takes quite some adjustment though, because you can probably afford to rent somewhere far superior to what you can buy, when you first start out.

Owl

These threads always go the same: blame is assigned to those who cannot afford their own home and pension. It's all their fault and it's all because they want/buy takeaways, 'designer' clothes, foreign holidays and mobiles and don't live 'up north' where a bag of coal gets you a perfectly good house in a place with or immutable to plentiful employment.

Yes, Owl. 'My parents never had a microwave or flat screen TV.' That's because no fucker did, they didn't exist.

I live in an extremely naice village in the north west. We are about 20 miles from Liverpool and Manchester, about 5 miles from a couple of other smaller towns. Three bedroom semis here are about £150k, very cute terraces cottages about £110/120. In the nearby towns, terraces can be had for as low as half that. The housing crises isn't everywhere.

Depends what salary you earn as to whether that is affordable.

Moving is expensive,it is only smart to limit how many times you do it when profits aren't high on houses. My dad was always going on about our generation not just buying a family home and sticmig with it...why we had to keep moving etc. Precisely because family homes (of the sort he means) aren't eAsily affordable to the young.

I agree with people saying 40-50 year ago people on the lowest wages couldn't afford to buy.... However since then we've had it rammed down our throats that home ownership is what we should aspire to and with the introduction of right to buy those people on the lowest wages could all of a sudden own their home.... fast forward 30 years and you have a situation that someone on a low wage (life long care worker) is sitting in a home now worth 150k she only paid 25k for through right to buy and someone such as myself with a professional career earning the UK average hasn't a cat in hell chance of owning without working above and beyond to save for it. It unfair but it is what it is.

I too live in the north and yes compared with the south it's cheap but I looked into buying one of these little 110k cottages... bit of a fixer upper. With a 10% deposit (that I can't save for due to rent) I would still struggle to get a big enough mortgage on my own for it. I was advised that I would be able to borrow around 60k...enough for a very run down semi in a very rough area.

The fact that lifestyles have changed is a perfectly valid reason as to why people were more likely to be able to afford a house on one salary 40-50 years ago than they are now. No one has said that it is the only reason, but the OP outlined how her father could support a family on one salary and some posters are explaining why it's not a valid comparison to how people live nowadays.

Why can some people not make a point without being antagonistic and rude? And why do some people do this repeatedly on threads?

Yes, Owl. 'My parents never had a microwave or flat screen TV.' That's because no fucker did, they didn't exist!"

Haha! The issue is these days middle earners are having problems affording a home and look unlikely to have a decent pension.

I never said low earners in my op I said average ffs.

I am much more concerned about the rising number of young people who are homeless.

I agree. People on low wages were rarely owned their own in previous generations. They did have access to affordable rented accommodation i.e. council houses.

I am much more concerned about the rising number of young people who are homeless.

I agree. People on low wages were rarely property owners in previous generations. They did have access to affordable rented accommodation i.e. council houses.

pettywitchinlondon I mentioned that low earners were not able to afford a house in previous generations in response to a poster who complained that she couldn't buy a house in the Midlands because she and her DH are on NMW.