To think these baby boomers are missing the point?

[Hundredacrewoods]

I grew up in an area where house prices have quadrupled since 2000. I consider this an intergenerational equity issue. Whenever the topic of house prices and 'millennials' comes up with my parents' generation, all I hear is how hard they worked and how much they sacrificed to get on the property ladder. AIBU to think that they're missing the point? No one is denying that they worked hard and sacrificed. The point is that if they worked just as hard today, and made the same sacrifices, it wouldn't be anywhere near enough.

Fees aren't £9k a term, they're £9k per year.

Agree with laurie

It was NOT common and was largely the children of well off parents that went

Proles can't be educated?

@RedForFilth I'm 22 and about to move in to my first house in a month... I had no problem living with parents whilst me and my partner saved. It's nowhere near as easy as it used to be BUT we worked damn hard to save and be able to afford a house, and we have friends that own their own house by themselves on average wages. I don't think it's impossible but it's certainly not easy

Fees aren't £9k a term, they're £9k per year.

Well it depends if you are talking about Eton or a little unknown indie prep outside London really......

Sorry, 9 k a year! I should know that really. Still lots though.

But you made a choice - university and a child. Many of us with houses did not go to university or have children.

Did you miss the bit where pre children and uni I still had a £30k gap between my earnings multiplier and price of a house, and it would have taken us 8 years to save the difference? The child and going to university to increase my salary by £10k+ a year is not the issue here...

I don't even see how university is much of a choice these days. So many employers consider it a prerequisite for an entry level. Degree's have certainly become devalued but they are more required so its a vicious cycle.

I think I might get in trouble for saying this but I do think most baby boomers are sympathetic - I know my parents and in laws are, they just don’t know what to do about it.
I do think as an older generation they could all help massively by forgoing the notion of staying in the family home, selling up and moving into the many smaller homes (which currently a lot of young families are having to raise the next generation in). Free up all the 3/4/5 bedroom houses - we live on an island and these homes are needed by families with children, so many have just one or two older individuals.
I say this as a Mum in my 30s who is lucky enough to have a four bedroom house so I’m speaking more for the country as a whole. Our mortgage is huge / if family homes weren’t at such a premium (because they were more readily available) then surely the cost would eventually settle down.
In our old village a lovely older lady I knew used to tell me how she worried about her sons family being unable to move up the property ladder...she lived in a detached 4 bed house alone. They just don’t seem to understand the part they play in all this.

Yes and there doesn't seem to be many schemes building 4/5 bed houses so the price of family homes rise even higher.

My mum like many of her neighbours lives in a big 5 bed and its too much but she doesn't want to downsize and pay stamp duty even though her house has gone from 60k in the 80s to 1.8m+

Don't just blame boomers. My next door neighbours are a couple with one 11 year old child. About move from a two bed to a five bed where said child gets their own "suite".

When I was young,most working class people started full time work at 15 years old. It was a different world.

makeourfuture Why are you being so snippy? Look at the stats. Very few working class people of my age went to university. Even the school in my sixth form was tiny. Most kids left school as soon as they legally could and got a job.

It was a different world, times are constantly changing - however the wage to House ratio was simply more affordable then. It’s just maths.
If there was a

I'd love to blame Tony Blair for pushing so many people to be graduates - but to be fair its a global theme

Isn't the adage if everyone is running in one direction you run in the other.

No one is forcing people to run up debts in order to get a degree and given not everyone will ever earn enough to repay the loan wouldn't it e better to actually sit down with your dc and decide what exactly they want to do as a career.
Introduce the idea that you don't have to get a degree to get a good job. Learning a trade, starting in a company and working your way up. Or taking a hobby and making it a business. There are so many alternatives yet ask around and there seems to be this mantra that you cant get a job without a degree.
I work in a trade oriented business and for the last few years I have noticed that one particular trade I employ seems to be filled with ex public school pupils.
Some had gone down the degree route but a lot seemed to have left at 18 to start to learn their trade.

Oops posted too soon!
If there was a more cyclical approach to home ownership it could help across the board - buy the family home when you need it, sell it when you don’t and have a larger pension pot to help with the rising care bill. This is no criticism of anyone - it just makes sense to change our perspective on staying in large family homes.

I think I might get in trouble for saying this but I do think most baby boomers are sympathetic - I know my parents and in laws are, they just don’t know what to do about it.

I do agree with this. It's only a minority that peddle the 'if they only gave up the starbucks' nonsense. They're very bloody irritating though.

On the downsizing point, I'm not sure how fair it is to expect them to move into smaller homes. I get that it makes economic sense, but there aren't always suitable smaller homes for them to move into in their area.

For example, my friends mother lives by herself in a massive house in a very desirable location. Yet no suitable house for her to downsize in that area has been on the market for five years. She's close to her friends, within walking distance of town and over the years has organised everything in her house to suit her.

She's 75 and I don't see why she should be expected to start again in a new home when she doesn't want to. Successive governments have caused the issues with suitable supply, it shouldn't be her problem to sort out.

I do get your point Laurie and there will obviously always be situations where people cannot downsize - I just think that if we, as a society, could see the benefits of downsizing earlier (ie not as 75+), once the kids have moved out then we could increase the flow of family homes, making them easier to acquire and therefore reduce the premium. Looking to the future, cashing in to fund retirements/care etc will probably be essential anyway.
Where we live (in a nice area of york) there is a mixture of housing and anyone could downsize without it being a huge step down in terms of standards.

I'm really sick of people saying buy a house before having kids, especially when you consider the average age of first time buyers now, perhaps you'd personally like to pay for their fertility treatment? Do you really think there are many 20 somethings that have enough for a deposit? Maybe they should move somewhere really cheap and buy a place with magic beans?

*It was NOT common and was largely the children of well off parents that went

Proles can't be educated*

No "proles" couldn't afford it.

Smart phones, Netflix, Sky and gym membership are not necessities.

FTBs didn't buy a 5 bedroom house on one wage.

A lot of people didn't earn enough on their multiples to afford the cheapest tiniest grottiest studio flat so instead of giving up and deciding to stay in their grotty rented flat forever they worked every evening and every weekend didn't go out did without till they got there.

Rented places were akin to something out of The YoungOnes so it was an added incentive to get out of rented and buy.

This will come back to bite everyone, especially the boomers as property prices are eroded or worse still collapse. Don't worry about us, we've seen it happen more than once. We survived.

Yes house prices have collapsed before. But I don't see my home as an investment, just a place to live. I would be quite happy if prices collapsed

A smartphone really is a necessity in my profession and many others. To deny that shows a lack of understanding Of the modern world.

Exactly, that is what we did. We needed somewhere to live, we saved and bought somewhere, over the years, and I've been a home owner for 45 years, I have seen interest rates rise and fall, house prices rise and fall. I still needed somewhere to live.

It is nice if you buy at the right time, I bought in 1973 towards the end of a boom, if I could have bought in 1971 I could have had a nice 3 bed semi with a garage. If I could have bought in 1972 I could have had something a bit smaller. In 1973 I bought a very run down 2 bed terrace. In 1974 it was worth less than I paid for it. C'est la vie.

There was a good point made up thread though that milleninials are usually paying a lot less than baby boomers think for their phone packages as they buy reconditioned phones on line and have cheap sim only deals.