To feel there is no future for children unless they

[Honeyyourfamilar]

unless they start a business or are super academic or excel in their careers.

I grew up in a working class neighbourhood in London (zone 6 so maybe not London London) and so many of the parents were normal working class people who owned their own homes: postman, bus drivers, dinner ladies, mechanics. There was a couple who both worked in supermarkets and they owned their own home. In a few families only the bloke worked and that was enough to sustain the family - I am maybe showing my age.

These were people in their early 30s who were financially secure. Now those houses are worth £500k plus and there is no way someone working a low paid job could afford that.

Two people making £30k a year will get £240k mortgage, where is the other amount going to come from?

I think that young people don't have a future here anyone.

The only way someone who isn't earning a decent wage can afford to buy a house is if they get an inheritance or if their parents sell their £500k house, that they purchased for £30k, and downsize, and give a deposit to their kids.

The amount of families renting and dependent on housing benefit is just a disgrace. It also means people stay in horrible relationships because they cannot afford to leave.

This country is a ***.

To say they don’t have a future is extreme to say the least. Since when did young adults expect to purchase a house directly after leaving the parental home? The normal route should be a cheap house share. There are home buying schemes available and the first home should be a studio or a 1 bed basic flat. It’s easier if bought with a friend or partner.

There is hope but expectations need to be adjusted!

I married at 22 and bought at 26 plus was always planning for one child and I don't think I should have gone below 2 bed flat..

My mother in law did that a generation ago and she was in a 1 bed with 3 kids for 7 years until parents helped her upsize during the 1990s property crash.

Well debated. You've put your point across well. 👏

I quite agree. Most people start off renting, then buy small. If they are working and sensible, they will move up the property ladder in time.

Why the housing ladder doesn't exist anymore - https://on.ft.com/4cqHfzw

'The housing ladder used to be a pathway towards family-sized home ownership. But it's not anymore. Now it is a myth that young people cling to, without any basis in reality.

Let’s imagine you have a deposit of £30,000, and you decide to buy a £300,000 two-bed flat. Your salary is £54,000, and the most you can borrow on the mortgage market is limited to five times your income. You borrow the maximum £270,000, and use it to buy the flat. You expect to own it for about five years, after which you anticipate moving to a house.

The kind of house you expect to eventually buy is going for £600,000, far out of your price range. Let’s firstly assume prices in the markets for flats and houses are closely correlated. Over five years, both rise by 10 per cent. Your flat is now worth £330,000. The house is now worth £660,000.

You now have £30,000 from your deposit, £30,000 in capital gains, and an uncertain amount from repayments. The amount depends on the term of the mortgage, and the interest rate. With a 25-year mortgage and an interest rate of 4 per cent, you will have paid down around £35,000 over 5 years.

This gives you a total of £95,000. The house costs £660,000. You can only borrow five times your income. This means, in order to transition from flat to house, you need to have an income of £113,000. Your income needs to have risen 109 per cent, or more than ten times faster than house prices, over the five year period.'

The maths is correct. I am also someone who bought a 2 bed flat when i was 26 where I plan to raise my first and only child 6 years on. I do not plan to upsize. Ironically it is cheaper for me to buy a buy to let for 300k (small flats have stagnated everywhere) instead of upsizing which I can rent out. Even if I don't cover the mortgage totally with it, it would be a place for my son to live in as an adult rather than living in his childhood bedroom

Family-sized housing has increased well above wages, flats have not though they are still a place to live in and my block is residents managed.

Don’t forget the can of red bull welded to the hand, grey track suit and bitch buns! From one who lives oop north!

Looks like the op is not coming back; perhaps she is starting the long journey up north.
Don’t fall down a mine op or get savaged by a whippet. Although the locals will actually speak to you if you get in trouble.

Family-sized housing has increased well above wages, flats have not though they are still a place to live in and my block is residents managed.

I know a few people who rather than buy a flat in z2 bought a house in z4.

Zone 4 houses are now closer to 700k. Zone 6 east London you could get a house for 400k (cost of my flat) but then you have to live in Romford.

I prioritize schools and I am near a school which is ranked no 15 in the uk. So it's worth it for me. My main worry is it may be cramped if son has to live with me aged 35 hence buying another property instead of a marginally bigger home may be sensible. He could move there.

I mean I have a 32 year old SIL living in a 5 bed detached with her MIL, 35 year old DH, and child. I have a 30 year old SIL living with her fiancee, fiancee's parents and fiancee's brother in a 4 bed house. I myself have lived with my MIL until I was 26 and bought our flat with DH. Dh's cousins in Wales all living with parents. Almost everyone I know who isn't an immigrant (who rents)) either got deposit help from bank of mum and dad, often rent free living with mum and dad or their parents even bought homes outright for them. It seems almost universal that kids would be with parents until their 30s and I was lucky to move out at 26 from MIL's home (cos I had a partner). I think though no matter how big the house, adult kids want their own space. And I know of so few old people who have downsized to release equity, their kids just move back in with them..

It depends where you are in London as lots of the good schools are in the outer boroughs & z4 South London you could get a house for 550k.

For them it wasn't worth paying 2 lots of stamp duty. It makes sense to me in this climate tbh.

The …. Are there jobs in the north comment. This has made me laugh! There are the exact same jobs referenced in the op. We live in the north and have a really lovely financially stable normal life. I manage people (remotely) who live in London / Greater London and do have to scrimp and save to get by a lot more than we do despite our salaries not being dissimilar.

In a "trade" you can only earn as much as you're able to work. Unless you set up a business and employ others I suppose. But in a job with progression, potentially stock options, equity, etc the sky's the limit.

So while trades, or being a train driver, might give you a stable income it's not genuine wealth creation.

or get a trade! Plumber, electrician, builder, carpenter

They are all rolling in it

Most of the tradespeople I know are on six figures 🤷‍♀️

Problem is the rents are sky high as well, higher than paying a mortgage would be. Despite the attempts on here to trivialise the issue, housing and income together is a major problem for young people today due to the huge house price inflation over the last three or four decades combined with stagnant wages. It is all very well saying move north but you have to find a job which pays a living wage, which is aligned with your skillset and qualifications, and you have to compete against hundreds or maybe thousands of others. Good luck with that.

A "wage" of £60-£70k is perfectly do-able for a sole trader electrician, plumber, etc or a train driver. That's twice the national average wage and on a par with lots of professions (especially in the regions), so actually pretty good. Of course, if your a tradie and employ others, then the sky is the limit. Even in professions, only the "top" few percent earn mega money.

And not all jobs are available in all areas. If, say, you're an actuary, there are relatively few employers, and relatively few in the smaller regional cities, so you could easily find yourself without commutable jobs if, say, you live in Cumbria or Wales. And even if commutable, the journey could be long and expensive as public transport isn't as frequent, convenient, nor as cheap as London.

Sure. You can earn a decent salary in a trade, even 6 figures. But you'll never have the opportunity to own shares in a business that might explode, or have equity in a business making high profits or that gets sold.
It's not just the top people in these businesses that get this opportunity - plenty of people do and you don't have to be a genius to benefit.

You can set up your own business and reap all of those rewards.

To be fair, the vast, vast majority of people working in professional roles do not get to own shares that 'explode' in value

I agree. It's a tiny proportion and very random as to whether you get anything at all or not. Luck of the draw really, but the vast majority of employers don't have any form of share option scheme.

But then if you have a family, you have no support nearby or build relationships with grandkids.

House prices are getting pushed up all over the country as people left big cities and work from home more. This then creates a problem in other areas of locals being outbid on houses.

I grew up in a similar area OP.
And I agree, house prices in outskirts of London, which is now usually referred to as London, are outrageous and out of reach of young people starting out in life in ordinary jobs.
Of course you could move to a cheaper area but it's sad that you can't stay where you grew up, where your family and support network are and where you'd have to look for a new job. Of course there are jobs up north and salaries of teachers, nurses etc will go much further but there are less opportunities and poorer pay in some parts of the country depending on the type of work you do. And tbf house prices can be out of reach in many parts of the country not just London.

YANBU, my in laws were both in minimum wage jobs, and MIL in fact didn’t work at all before her 3 children were at secondary school. They bought a house when first married and moved to a large 5 bedroom house when my husband (youngest child) was 2. They paid the mortgage off in their early 50s and downsized to a bungalow in their late 50s. They still live in that bungalow, both on state pensions and have a small amount of savings (£30k ish) from the sale of their house and don’t spend any more than their pensions, but relatively often have cafe lunches out etc.

It is completely unimaginable that 2 parents on one minimum wage could have the same lifestyle now as my in laws had. Indeed, my
husband and I are both in senior professional roles (but public sector for the family friendly working) and couldn’t have afforded a 3rd child or to buy anything more than a 2 bedroomed cottage / tiny 3 bed new build if we were reliant on our wages alone. I am the child of very wealthy boomer parents and without the generosity of my folks our lives would be very different.