To think that fairly soon it will be impossible to retire unless you're a homeowner?

[Echobelly]

... at least in some parts of the country.

I'm sort of amazed this isn't being talked about - we have more and more people who can never afford to buy, whose rent payments take a significant chunk of their salary, and that chunk only goes up and up. How are they supposed to save for a pension when all their money goes on rent? And there's very little social housing to go round.

Homeowners at least will mostly be able to pay off mortgages, that are likely to be less than rent and allow them to pay into pensions, and have the option of downsizing to help manage retirement.

In the next few decades it seems likely we will see increasing numbers of people who reach retirement age, or may simply no longer be well enough to work, yet their pensions will not cover rent, let alone anything else. But no one's thinking about how society is supposed to cope with this and won't until it's too late it appears.

ive been harping on about this for years. Even wrote to David Cameron about it. No one wants to touch the elephant in the room and the massive tax burden it will be when generation rent can no longer work, or have a home to sell to pay for care.

My mother is classed as a boomer. She is well off now, but when we were children every single penny had to be accounted for. Literally down to the last pence each week. Our clothes came from jumble sales and we’re altered accordingly. We had no central heating and Lino on the floors. BUT she worked hard and paid into a pension often topping it up and bought a house when she was able. What has she done so wrong to deserve the wrath of those on here?

this. Also to be honest renting from a good landlord will work out well for many elderly - housing costs covered by housing benefit (perhaps with a top up needed but not much if housing is appropriate size) and no responsibility for maintenance.

I think people in many different situations will be stuffed. We’re mortgaged until DH is 67 and that’s if we don’t need to extend it for any reason. My pension pot is minimal as I’ve not been in a position to pay extra in (will start paying extra next year one youngest dc is at school). Retirement looks pretty bloody depressing at the moment!

My aunt is 77 and has just sold her house, paid off the small amount remaining on her mortgage and is now renting. She doesn’t want the responsibility of maintaining a house alone in her old age.

If your husband's employed, and the mortgage is paid off, why doesn't he join the pension scheme, considering that the employer also contributes to it?

To be fair as a generation (obviously not necessarily each individual) boomers tend to vote Tory. They also tended to vote for brexit. Both those things have not resulted well for younger generations. Pensioners incomes have been favoured over working age people too (pensioners vote and often vote Tory) for those reasons. Also pensioners can often be NIMBYS who oppose new housing and are under occupying both private and state housing.

its not personal of course and many individuals are different. But as a generation boomers have pulled up the ladder behind them.

If you're a renter with a private pension and state pension you lose 85% of the private pension to housing benefit and council tax support. You only keep 15p in the £.

I think we forget the enormous amount of housing and money that will flow into the economy beginning in about 10 years time as the baby boom generation start to die off.

This generation entering retirement (and the youngest of them are just entering it and the oldest have not started to die in significant numbers) was always going to cause an unprecedented global economic squeeze as we lost a large productive, tax paying labour force and replaced it with an increasingly vulnerable group of elderly people who are also hoarding a great deal of money and property. As that generation die off, large numbers of properties will become free, leading to downward pressure on house prices. A great deal of money will also be released as inheritances happen and that money is spent by the younger generations on goods and services.

As that bulge generation die off there will also be a reduced pressure on the public purse. One of the main reasons for the declining NHS is the fact that when we set it up, we had a young, healthy tax paying population and fewer elderly. Now it’s the other way round and large numbers of increasingly complex elderly patients place huge pressure on services. The release of pressure on income will stabilise services and free up money to support the vulnerable. Frankly the anomaly of this large generation is one of our biggest problems and long term the future looks brighter

Same with us @TheSummerPalace. We’d love a bungalow with a decent garden, there aren’t any. As it is our house is walking distance from shops, doctor, dentist and cafes. We’re a ten minute taxi ride to the station. We’d be mad to leave this house to move to another where we’d be worse off if we can’t drive.

Tbh public housing isn’t really a cheap way to house people. Councils don’t tend to be very efficient at building, maintaining or managing property. Well managed private housing is often better but the problem in the uk is that we simply don’t have enough housing. That said, almost all the housing in the uk that no one wants to live in (and ends up getting demolished) is Council housing.

To be fair as a generation (obviously not necessarily each individual) boomers tend to vote Tory.

The thing with baby boomers is that they are a large generation and they tend to vote in a way that benefits them.

When they were younger they were more liberal and voted for things that they wanted (free education, affordable housing etc). Now they are older they are more conservative and vote to their preserve wealth.

They are the generation who get their own way because there are so many of them. It's not necessarily intentional, but this is why they are seen as the selfish generation.

How can you possibly write off an entire generation like this? Condemning everyone born between 1945 and 1964 in this way is ludicrous. Some of us are very wealthy, some of us are trying to exist on a state pension, some of us are still working. Some of us started voting Tory in our 20s, some of us never have and never will.

I feel very sorry for people trying to buy a home now which is why we’ve used our inheritance to help our kids out. And I’d be happy to pay more tax if the money was used to improve public services. We’re not all selfish bastards.

My son studied the NHS in History at school. It has never balanced the books.

I'm a boomer and happily using my money to give my millennial and Gen Z DCs and DGCs a more comfortable life than I had.
I presume the miserable comments on here are posters whose DPs have selfish, miserable DCs and probably take after them

Should say DCs with selfish miserable DOs

It was really, really tough in the 70s-90s. People went without and worked hard. It was always a big achievement.
The difference is that now in SE and many other expensive bits of UK it’s not possible without family help on normal wages. That’s not to say it was ever easy.

There is a bulge in ageing population, there will be another one when their children reach old age and on and in

This is exactly why my mum had to move in with us. She couldn’t afford her rent as a single person and had no private pension. We were her only hope. It’s definitely going to be happening more and more.

There is a bulge in ageing population, there will be another one when their children reach old age and on and in

But people are having far less children. There are already more over 65s than under 15s.

I think once you reach state retirement age then you have a right to housing benefit, if you have no other income. So state pension, plus pension credits and housing benefit.

Really a lot/most people on below average wage who know they are going to be renting in retirement are probably better off not having a pension at all because it will take them out of pension credit and housing benefit. They would end up no better off in terms of disposable income.

That in itself will increasingly become a major policy headache but as long as the savings limit is so low then it's not in their best interests to make any meaningful provision.

Regression to the mean. Retirement will go back to being something only the very wealthy and landed can do. Before the 19th century, you worked until you died. Your retirement plan was kids, if that.

There are not enough humans nor resources to offer retirement to anyone wanting to retire in the future. And especially if the West is dethroned by the emerging markets like BRICS to the point that we don't get the free ride we otherwise had by using financial trickery in exchange for physical goods and assets.

I think we forget the enormous amount of housing and money that will flow into the economy beginning in about 10 years time as the baby boom generation start to die off.

won't it make inequality worse though? some will inherit millions, others nothing.

Would you like to live like this when you are elderly?