baby boomers ..confused

[ZackyVengeance]

how can a baby born in the early sixties be one?
baby boomer
nouninformal
plural noun: baby boomers
a person born in the years following the Second World War, when there was a temporary marked increase in the birth rate.

thanks.for the posts. i have found this thread so interesting. hope it keeps going

I wonder what's going to happen to our children's generation, mainly in terms of the environment. They're inheriting a mess. When they reach the point where they want to have children, we're likely to enter the 2 degrees warming point - which will have huge implications for them: water shortages, famine, war...

I think it will make the position we're in right now, whoever we are, seem very comfortable.

I am a baby boomer and agree in some respects life was 'easier' because it was less demanding. University was funded by a grant, although this was means tested apart from the tuition bit. Buying a house was affordable, if you were a professional straight out of university you could do it on one wage.DH and I did! The deposit was the same price as an MGB and we did almost buy the car and rent.
After 3 years we moved from WestMidlands to inner London, bought a doer upper, still on one wage! No competition from developers in those days.
Now across the country home ownership is harder, probably out of the reach of many. University saddles the young with ridiculous debt. I for one would not have been able to go if I'd been 18 now.
We have used the advantages we gained to help our DSs, I do realise that this is not the case for many.
I also fear for the situation that my DGCs will find themselves in.

I think people forget that attitudes and conditions were very different for those "baby boomers"
Jobs were plentiful because people had less aspirations, just to have a job was sufficient.
Many of those plentiful jobs have been replaced by technology now.
Everyone feels they have to go to University nowadays whether they are academic or not in the 60's and early 70's girls were not encouraged to go to university (have a read of Harriet Harmans' book)
When I set up home (in a rented property) I had to make do with everyone's cast offs when it came to furniture etc, as did most of my peers.
I was born in 1951 and did not buy my own property until 1994 something I continually point out to my DCs as they feel aggrieved that in their late 20's/early 30's they are finding it difficult to buy their own property.
You cannot compare those past times with present times, welfare benefits are far better now than then, as a tenant nowadays you have far more protection (remember Rachman anyone?) People were prepared to live far more frugally than they are nowadays, a holiday once a year was a privilege rather than the necessity it is regarded as now.
It causes resentment both ways to try and maintain that one generation had/ has it easier than the other.
People talk about "big pensions" but forget many in receipt of these started work aged 14+ so have up to10 more years of contributions than their graduate offspring.
Labels such as generation X, baby boomers etc are extremely devisive, when I think of how different the lives my Dcs are compared to the life DH and I lead at their age its mind boggling.
Each generation has different experiences and different problems based on the times they live in how about we all be supportive of one another!

It depends on what sector of society you are in as well.

Here's my impressions (as a late gen x er)
(I don't live in London where I suspect things are much harder due to cost of living - this is about the North where a (modest) house can still be bought for 3x the average salary. )

Baby boomers: Lots of the working class ones worked in a low paid job all their lives, may have managed to buy somewhere modest or have a council house, managed 1 or no car per household, had cheap holidays not necessarily every year, managed to save up for furniture etc, probably didn't have own washing machines or inside toilets. No chance of uni for most of them, education was poor.
Some got to uni and if so it was free. Most of them seem very content with a well ordered life and being secure in their place in society. Work places gave regular hours and no problems with zero hours contracts etc.

Middle class ones did well on the whole. Free uni, able to buy a house and raise kids on a single wage. People had to scrimp and save a lot more though.

Both groups were better off than their parents which gave them a boost psychologically

Nowadays - most people of my generation and below think they are worse off than parents. Many more go to uni but have huge debts. Much more choice in life leads to more doubt and insecurity. People spend all their money on crap, won't save, run up debts. People have brand new cars and furniture on HP but can't afford to buy a house. People won't, for example, accept second hand furniture or clothes. Most young people I know hold passports are go on foreign holidays 2-3 times a year. Most have their own car. People moan a lot but are averse to doing a hard days work and getting paid for it. They go on about their parents having all the luck, forgetting that the parents were probably very poor when they were young and had to work bloody hard for what they have now. Those I know who are prepared to put in the effort are doing fine and have managed to buy houses. (I myself have not bought a house but fully accept that if I had my parents' work ethic then I could have done by now- I'd rather have a car and holidays!)

This makes it sound as if it is the people's own fault - but that isn't what I mean. It's the atmosphere of society that makes people worried, insecure and lazy rather than their own personalities. But it can be overcome.

The worst problem the current generation face is the ruining of the environment. (Our own fault - not blaming previous generations - the current youth seem worse than anyone for driving everywhere and being lazy about re-using stuff! - being interested in saving the planet has definitely gone out of fashion since the 80s)

People spend all their money on crap, won't save, run up debts. People have brand new cars and furniture on HP but can't afford to buy a house. People won't, for example, accept second hand furniture or clothes. Most young people I know hold passports are go on foreign holidays 2-3 times a year. Most have their own car. People moan a lot but are averse to doing a hard days work and getting paid for it. They go on about their parents having all the luck, forgetting that the parents were probably very poor when they were young and had to work bloody hard for what they have now.

Some massive and very unfair generalisations there. "Young people" I know are very different than that, don't tar them all with the "profligate entitled millennials" brush. And the spend-not-save phenomenon has been explained many times - property prices are so high that forgoing a holiday or a weekly brunch is NOT going to make a difference in your ability to save a deposit.

Just a point re being able to afford to buy a house on one wage. People didn't have a choice. At the time we bought a house building societies would largely only take the man's wage into account. In the early seventies they might consider the wife's wage as a small addition as 'obviously' she was going to give up work when babies came along! I use the word 'wife' advisedly as a partner's income would not have been considered. I think this did put a brake on house price increases.

I was born in 1946. My husband was a war baby. When my PiL bought a house just before WW2 their friends thought they were mad. Renting was the way to go.

property prices are so high that forgoing a holiday or a weekly brunch is NOT going to make a difference in your ability to save a deposit.

Of course it does and this type of attitude is what's going wrong. If a brunch costs £40 and a couple does it twice a month then that's not too far off £2k a year. A holiday costs thousands of pounds. Add those up for 5 years and you've a great deposit!

I understand what you're saying, but people did have a choice though, silvergran. They could buy, or continue renting. Today, this choice doesn't exist for many, even if you do have a partner and you're both earning.

wettum £10k isn't really a deposit for a lot of people. They'd be skipping brunch for like 15-25 years.

Here's a nice analysis on how many brunches you'd need to forgo to buy a home. It's Australia-centric, but still comparable.

Brunch vs property

My feeling is that we are reverting to "the Victorian/Edwardian norm" after a fifty year-ish anomaly created by the destruction of wealth, property and inherited privilege caused by the two world wars.

Werkz what an interesting post. I've thought the same about the regression of society at the moment but never really analysed why it might be.

IMO a lot of the political issues we are seeing are because inequality and, in particular, inherited privilege are reverting to Victorian levels but unlike in the Victorian era, those who lose out will not simply tug their forelock and accept it as their fate.

I don't think it is that hard to buy now. Although I have to say people are doing it on their own a lot more now. Getting together when 18 is much less common now than it was.

I don't think it is that hard to buy now.

Why do you say that? Recent data tells a totally different story.

chicky perfect illustration. We buy the small luxuries because the big ones are out of reach.

I bet batteries lives in one of this places where houses or £100k or less

Because looking around me I do see lots of people (friends and ex colleagues, I'm mid 30s) who could afford to buy but make expensive short term choices. I have very few friends who budget. Who even understand budgeting. That's my experience.

Missed that by a year .. Not a baby boomer .

I live in a city. Just looked on Rightmove. Within half a mile of me there's a couple of houses on for over £1million.
Half a mile in the other direction there's houses on for £250k.
Pretty standard for a city I think.

Batteries that's a small sample of people. The overall trend - the studies that look at larger demographics - is that home ownership is out of reach for a good many people.

If you Google you can see it's a widespread UK phenomenon - not just in London. For example, here.

In fairness chicky your brunch vs property link was comparing to an million pound highly desirable urban centre flat. That is such a ridiculous exaggeration of the expense of property it makes the whole article sound totally entitled and unaware.

Yes, you're right - I'm guessing it was meant to be hyperbolic! It's written in a slightly tongue-in-cheek way, as a response to the original article saying that hipsters could buy property if only they stopped eating $22 avo on toast.

Here is a more "serious" article on the overall phenomenon if you like, batteries

www.ft.com/content/94e97eee-ce9a-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377

"The income of the average 22- to 30-year-old remains stubbornly 8 per cent lower than it was in 2008"

Whereas living costs have soared.

I think that young people now would rather enjoy life's pleasures than scrimp for 21 years plus for a deposit. Cant blame them tbh with housevprices so high. We only have one life and we cant take money when we go.

Besides a house is only yours once you gave paid off the mortgage.. until then it is a lian.. by the time its paid off nany are knackered after z lifetime of hard graft..
I couldnt work hard all my life without treats like lattes snd holidays.
Most of my furniture is a hand ne down (

Why do people assume the young buy new stuff all the time?