To think people only want the best then complain about cost and stress

[Ohhhhok]

This does not apply to people living in poverty, in unsuitable accommodation, struggling to find work and to make ends meet whatsoever.

I feel like many people will not settle for anything less than the dream lifestyle- large house in a desirable area with fancy interiors and expensive appliances, nice garden, cleaner, new cars, high-end clothing and make-up, expensive restaurants and luxury holidays, and so on.

Then they complain about the cost of their mortgage, the stressful job where they work 60 hours a week with all the responsibility and the 2k a month childcare bill.

It seems like nobody is willing to settle for less, it's like you've got to have the above to have 'made it' in life- they wouldn't be seen dead with an older car, a terraced house or shock horror, a flat. Second hand clothing, living a simpler life.

Thank you. I was sure I wasn't misremembering!

I completely agree op. I lived in a rental with a pt job managing the block when my dc were tiny so had no childcare costs and we had one old banger. Once dc were school aged we bought a house and i got a job 20 hours a week, we managed but again no ai holidays abroad, old car bought outright by saving up, no debts other than the mortgage. We appeared to have less but I made my last mortgage payment at 48 years old because I didn’t have debts, overpaying it etc. I’m retiring at 54, 16 more months… I still don’t have debts, we own our two cars and save £250 a month for the next one, and will reduce to one car when I retire. We take lovely holidays now, but I can afford to pay for them … you can’t have it all basically, and it’s not about women taking a backseat, it could be the dad. No subsidies when mine were younger

Btw when I bought my first flat the interest rate was 5.99% and I borrowed 3.5 x my salary, things haven’t changed that much

3.5 x your salary & things haven’t changed for today’s FTBs 😆

@bababamamawhy didn’t you get family allowance or child benefit?

I’d love it if it was universal again and if they bought back MIRAS!

Lots of space downstairs, but pokey upstairs.

I bought at the top of my (then) budget for a 3 person family who work from home…my husband and I have to share an office, and my adult son can’t fit a full double in his room, it isn’t too big for me 🤣🙄, and we have 1 toilet in the entire house… I could now move to a much bigger 5 bedroom home with spare rooms galore but I won’t. I’m staying at what fits my family, not what gives me status.

Youve completely missed the point of this thread. It isn’t about people who can’t afford the homes they need, it’s about people who earn decent wages but make poor spending choices to get larger better homes and then complain about having no money. It’s about people living to excess and then saying how hard life is, when I am here as living proof that if you don’t go and buy a new home and new cars just because you now have money, then you’ll still have enough money to afford your bills and not have to complain about having nothing.

I also wouldn’t sneer at you for having more people in your 3 bed because you are doing the exact thing I am advocating for. Not going bigger when you don’t need to…I think you are reading me wrong.

I was born in the late 60’s and my parents often painted rooms, had new furniture, my DM made cushions, my DDad made art for the walls. We lived in a council house and rooms were done up, I remember a few different dinner tables etc.

I'm not reading you wrong. Youre just misinterpreting your personal circumstances because it suits you. You "need" a detached house no more than someone else might need a 5 bedroom house. We all do it. We all think we need what we want or have.

Retiring at 54 after working 20 hours a week will not be the experience of many millennials or Gen Z’s. I’ve worked 40 hours a week most of my life and will be lucky if I get to retire at 67.

@Boreded you could interpret it that way, or you might say it shows people bought bigger than they needed in the past but now are less likely to. They could be elderly people whose children have left home now too.

I dont need a detached house, I didn’t say I did. I need a 3 bed…I have a very small 3 bed. I can afford a 5 bed, I didn’t get a 5 bed so I have spare money.

I’m not sure why you’ve taken exception to the fact that I own an appropriately sized home for my small family. I have the exact number of rooms I need, an office which we share, a bedroom for me and my husband, and one for my son. There are no spare rooms. No extra bathrooms, nothing that isn’t needed. I have 1 car, not one each, because we don’t need multiple cars.

I bought this home when it was all I could afford on my low salary, when I bought this home my household income was around 28-30k with 2 adults working full time. We now have an income of 120k and we still live in the same home.

The people that OP (and the person I was originally replying to) are talking about are people who despite having income like mine say that they can’t afford to get by and that things are so expensive…well of course they are when you size up your home and have 2 extra bedrooms and 2 extra bathrooms, plus a second brand new luxury car…of course you can’t afford to do much more than the basics for life in general.

There are people living in 3 beds with 5 people in them, those are appropriately sized homes. But you can not tell me that my living in a 3 bed is excessive, or that by virtue of it being detached it is somehow more than I need. It is exactly the right size, and my mortgage is very low.

If everyone who got promotions and ended up in my situation decided to stay in the homes that were affordable on their lower wages, they would have a lot of spare money and wouldn’t complain about things being too expensive. That is fact…it doesn’t change that for some families things are absolutely still expensive, nobody is debating that at all, of course it is difficult for those who live within their means and still find it difficult to get by…but those aren’t the people we are talking about here. The people being talked about here are the ones who are always looking for more, better, bigger, they take on more than they should and then wonder why they can’t afford to live.

I’m sorry if you are offended by me having the same size home as you, but that’s not the issue here. The issue being discussed here is people who always want bigger homes. And like I say, if they stayed within their means and utilised their new wages from promotions better they would not struggle.

It's not been the experience of single people ever either. Different with a partner, which this pp has.

This.

Yeah and I definitely think that as an aging population we should be downsizing to open up the housing stock for families, and maybe that is what is happening. Where I live the 4 and 5 beds are snapped up in seconds so there is always a good market for it, but I live in a relatively low cost area in the north east so actually we are possibly not indicative of the rest of the housing market.

There is definitely still a large number of people who are buying bigger and the number of brand new cars I see every March/april is staggering. You only have to look on the boards here every time there is an increase in the interest rates and you see two types of people, 1) those living within their means and struggling, and 2) those who have had more money so bought bigger and better, only to find that the interest rates are making it unaffordable to them.

There is definitely both camps of people. But those who are living sensibly but still struggling aren’t the issue here. They are trying their absolute best to get by on what they have, unlike the people who flash the cash for the status and then struggle, which is what OP is talking about.

Hopefully your house will sell soon, keeping it crossed for you.

I thought people got 30hrs/week childcare paid for nowadays & I realise that it doesn’t cover the full cost. But 19 years ago we got nothing & we had to find over £600/month for a couple of days a week with a local childminder. That was most of my part time teacher salary. So I can’t see why people are making a fuss about having to pay childcare when a large portion of it is subsidised.

I agree with you OP. We didn’t (& still don’t) have a lot of the things that people are expecting as the norm nowadays.

I struggle to sympathise with the current younger generation as they seem to have more than my parents & us ever had. There seems to be the expectation that it’s normal to have meals out regularly, holidays abroad every year, new cars, children in several extra curricular clubs.

You just need to read the thread on what used to be considered a treat back in the 70s & 80s to see how much expectations have changed. A bag of sweets once a week, vienetta were considered a real treat. I don’t think younger people or children would accept that these are treats.

My full time nursery bill was nearly £1000 with the 30 hours. So thats why people still make a fuss.

I think YABU. People are allowed to complain. Life isn’t supposed to be just about affording the bare minimum. Yes it’s a choice, but so what? People can still vent to friends and family how stressed they are. I think you make choices hoping for the best but you don’t really know how it feels until you are in it. And childcare costs are just insane!!

We had a lot more than people do now. I'd trade 30 hours "free" childcare (i.e. not) for no student loan, no tuition fees, a grant, an Erasmus grant, universal child benefit, an affordable home and smaller mortgage. And working part-time!

Yeah, I'm sure people could have a nice small mortgage if they just bought fewer Viennettas.

@DeftGoldHedgehog

I think it’s hard to understand if you didn’t grow up in the 70s & 80s. People spend so much money nowadays on things which we never dreamed of having. I remember many people having no landline phone, black & white TV, no central heating. I honestly don’t think people realise that Gen X & Boomers had a lot less than the current younger generations. You have missed the point, a dessert you eat at home wouldn’t be considered the highlight of the week nowadays.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5581707-what-did-youyour-family-consider-a-treat-growing-up-that-really-wasnt?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

I DID grow up in the 1970s and 1980s, that's my point. I feel extremely lucky compared to Gen Ys and Gen Zs, no tuition fees, had a grant and tiny student loan I paid off in a few years, was able to study for a year in France with an Erasmus grant. Bought a house in London age 26 before the prices went mental. Had universal child benefit until 2013. Experienced a time of relative political stability.

You are extremely fucking missing the point and totally out of touch if you think that people can't afford a home because they buy one off purchases of things that are actually relatively a lot cheaper while everything else -all the key things for life that you can't avoid and affect absolutely everything else like housing costs and energy are so ridiculously and exponentially more expensive than they were 20 or 30 years ago and totally out of proportion to average salary increases.

Absolutely! As gen X, there wasn't the tech, glamour and pressure of having certain gear, labels, gadgets etc. Even the richest kids wore hand me downs and our hair was never groomed to perfection more than a hairdryer could do.

There has indeed become an entitlement and expectation to have more than you can afford to aspire to SM self conceived pressures.

It's very sad and I've observed it a lot. A family who takes pics of huge piles of presents for every occasion, including matching and personalised outfits, latest i phone, then ask to borrow money to pay towards maxed out credit cards.

I also think of the immeasurable amount of rubbish created, but that's another issue...

The 70s and 80s were indeed different times in terms of expectations. People tended not to live in bigger houses than they didn’t need, mini-breaks were practically unheard of, takeaway food and drinks were rare, and us kids were allowed to be bored and even - shock horror - play with each other.

Average living space per person peaked in the 1970s and have fallen ever since...

You mean other taxpayers should pay for your childcare?