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.

*"Who's going to benefit from that wealth when they die off? "

Not necessarily their children
I'm sick of this sentiment: suck it up because you MIGHT inherit SOME of it SOME TIME in the future......maybe..*

I hate that also. I suspect the people to really gain are cruise companies, luxury German car makers, Waitrose and care homes anyway!

The boomers children will probably have a much lower life expectancy anyway with increased stress, demands and all the illnesses that come with that.

My grandfather paid for my parents wedding. That was the only financial help they got. They were able to build a life without family money because of the opportunities available to them.

Because AT THAT TIME your opportunities in life weren't dependant on what bones the previous generation threw your way!!!!

Based on my family tree research some of which goes to the year 1000, group affiliation and family played a huge role in your opportunities.

Well quite, the bb gen and gen x though could succeed regardless, even though an Eton education and a barrister father was probably an advantage. In the past that want the case and in the future it is looking like it won't be. I'm not too worried about my own dc because we'll be able to help them, but it's a ridiculous society/ a missive step back where success is not on merit.

Up until the late 60s around 75% of the population left school at 15. Very few Sec Mods taught '0' levels, effectively cutting off higher education from most of the population.They had to get their qualifications through night school or institutions like Birkbeck, after a hard day's work. And this includes a lot of the early Boomers, many of whom lost their jobs when whole industries disappeared during the 80s.

That isn't true now. I wish Blair had done something about Right to Buy, but he did expand university provision. You have opportunities that previous generations did not have and most of them made their own way without any bones thrown to them from their parents.

But there will always be people without the intellectual ability to make the grades to get a university place, around 50% at present. (And some people think it should be more.) Home Ownership for all is a totally unrealistic goal. Tbh, I'm more concerned about them than graduates. Their opportunities for decent housing have been most affected by the lack of social housing and an unregulated private rental market. They have also suffered more than graduates from the lack of well-paid, secure employment.

where i live every tom dick and harry has a ba degree. we have some very well educated young people serving coffee. again those with family support continue on to get their master's or take a trade after their ba.
i worry about the lack of industrial jobs. outsourcing to countries with cheaper labor has been a huge mistake.

That is true thyme but the key was to pass the 11+. Both my dm and fil (very wc backgrounds) did and this presented massive opportunity for education that previous generations had not seen. My df got a scholarship to a very minor public school, his background was in truth more affluent but my gm always identified herself as WC.

There's no denying that social mobility was far far better for the boomers.

The trouble with degrees now is because so many people have them it's a requirement for jobs that never used to need them so people are forced to get into debt when they could have learnt on the job.

11 plus only worked for some children. My mum passed 11 plus and went to grammar school. All the girls from working class families were put into classes for the commercial route i.e. pa and secretary, all middle class girls in the academic/university route. My dad passed 11 plus but could not afford to go. His family were dirt poor. Uniform still had to be bought.

I don't disagree with that crunchy, but the same can be said for any education system, including the one we have now. I think some people probably failed the 11+ but should have passed also. But for those it did work for it gave significant opportunities is the point I am making.

The same thing happened in the 80s. Both my sons took ages to find a job on graduating and had to do agency work, one as a driver, one as a bailiff's assistant - that only lasted one day - before they found anything approaching 'a graduate job'. I couldn't get supply work as a well-qualified English teacher and was told to retrain in Domestic Science.

There's lots of research that shows that grammar schools do not improve social mobility. One of the reasons Justine Greening was sacked was because she didn't agree with May's policy on grammar schools. Greening went to a Comprehensive. You can't compare them with Secondary Moderns, but Sec Mods is what you have in a selective area for those who don't pass the 11+.

I don't think they improve social mobility in modern day Britain at all and if anything the opposite is true. But there was a group of people in the 60s that they worked incredibly well for, whatever current research says.

They don't improve SM now as lots of middle class people get loads of tuition to get into a GS. They seemed to in the past though.

the 80's were not good. jobs were not in places where people really wanted to live.
but i'm glad i listened to my parents and learned from them and their parents.
my dh and i ended up in an industrial community/mining. the opportunity was good to us and like our parents we made suggestions to our trio to make their job options again just that little bit better (cleaner healthier less physical risk).
it's worked out okay for them and funny enough our SIL is always asking us questions about workplace standards and improvements.

Thymeout it also happened in the 90s. DS couldn't get a 'graduate' job, he did low paid agency work then went back to uni and did a masters in a different subject. He's been climbing the career ladder ever since, both DC have better qualifications and earn far more than their father or I who are BBs. We own a house that is worth about 1/5th of DS's. Our holidays were visiting relatives, theirs have been far and wide, DGC have had some fabulous travel experiences.

We moved hundreds of miles for a career opportunity that only paid off short term, but by the time it wasn't going so well DC were well settled in at school and moving back home wasn't an option. We realised by the 70s (from our own experience) that leaving school at 15 with no qualifications wasn't a great career plan. We put all our efforts into ensuring we lived in a decent area with good schools and children whose families valued education. We could have had a better house in a different area, but I make no apology for doing the best we could for our DCs future. I didn't want them to struggle like we did. I worked full time and DH & I juggled childcare and housework etc.

Decent comprehensives worked for our DC and I'm hopeful for our DGC, where secondary moderns didn't do much for people like me and DH.

Based on my family tree research some of which goes to the year 1000, group affiliation and family played a huge role in your opportunities.

Of course it's always helped
But the degrees by which NOT having connections and money inhibits you vary and fluctuate.
At these are one of those times, for people starting out, where not having family support prohibits more of your choices than it would have done in the past.

I remember old school friends going to teacher training colleges in the early 70s (I was getting married, working, having babies, buying a house) Only one actually got a teaching job. I don't know why there was a shortage of teaching jobs in the early 70s or if it was just in our area, thinking about it the one who did get a teaching job was the daughter of a Head so maybe had strings pulled.

Wow grannietomine, does that count as you admitting that there are sometimes periods of time, like NOW for instance, where outside societal influence, and not a lack of grit and hard work, can prevent a generation starting out from having what came EASIER to other generations?????

Shimmer - grammar schools did help w.c. children in the 50s and 60s. You're right. But not nearly as many of them as comprehensive system does. 75% of the population didn't pass the 11+. And that was it, for them, if they were working class. I've lost count of those from middle-class homes I met at university who failed the 11+ but their parents could afford private schools.

I reckon there's at least 10% on either side of the pass mark who'd get a different result on another day, in another month, next year. Not to mention from a different school. It's an incredibly wasteful system.

My mum failed her 11+ but still ended up being a teacher, my dad went into the merchant navy coming from a very poor background but has enjoyed a great career retiring as a captain and funding a very comfortable lifestyle abroad for many years. They owned a nice family sized home before my brother and I were ever born as did all their friends and relatives - both in wealthier areas and poor areas in the north and south.
There have always been very poor people who are unable to buy houses - the real generational gap isn’t even seen at first time buyer level, it’s further along, the jump from your first tiny starter home to getting an actual family home (especially if you want to be near good schools).
The benefits my parents generation receive are immense in comparison to what will be available in 30 odd years when my age group is facing retirement. I do not believe the bbs wealth will be passed down - my husbands grandparents home has just been used to pay ongoing nursing home fees etc, sure most bbs homes will go that way.

Yeah I agree thyme. Post-war was also a time of massive opportunity/ skills shortage that helped. Plus prior to that very few stayed at school past 14 so the potential for mobility was great. My initial point was never that gms are great for social mobility but that many bbs were very socially mobile. With better comprehensive education this may have been more so.

Things like retail and hospitality aren't "just walk in off the street" jobs any more, they are quite competitive

Actually dd's friends work in retail and hospitality which they got by just walking in off the street or just applying on line.

Gran22 - That must be v gratifying that your dcs have done so well. All credit to you and your dh.