B B C - News Reel On The Baby Boomers And House Prices

[winkie]

...sock it to 'em......agree, not as old as you but I bought a home to live in and saved very hard for the deposit, I went without many things like gap year and traveling etc to pay for it.....never in a million years did I ever expect the price to increase so madly....I feel no better off or richer because of it, would be happy for it to have stayed in pace with inflation.

...you buy at a snap shot and sell at a snap shot....what happens in between is immaterial imo......

[gf3]

This thread, like all anti-boomer whining, is full of ludicrous generalisations. This one (above) is beautifully typical

"You were in charge". WTF does that mean? Do you think that pre-New Labour politics saw generations voting en bloc? An earlier post blamed Thatcher for many of our current ills. I'd agree with this but wasn't she voted in with something like 32% of the electorate supporting her? And what proportion of those 32% were the boomer generation? The maths just don't stack up.

I resent people like you saying that "I was in charge", or the "we"were in charge, as though previous generations had any more political power than current ones. Do you not know that every arbitrary block of people will include the whole gamut of political views. Not only that but no one knows (without the healthy level of brilliant hindsight that many seem endowed with) that casting a vote for Party X will have well-defined consequences 30 years down the line. Indeed, 9 times out of 10 we have no real idea what policies a governing party is going to come up once they are in power. Look at New Labour's charging fees on university students. Do you think I voted for that ? Do you think many young people would have -- who were NuLab's biggest supporters in 97? Of course not.

You might as well blame "people with black hair", or "men" or "white people" for our current economic ills. There is no cohesive generational group-think any more than there is a black-hair group-think, yet it is convenient for you to pretend that there is, just as it is convenient for some older people to blame "the kids of today" for farting around on gap years and running up uncontrollable credit card bills for gadgets. It's just as absurd.

If you seriously believe that boomers consciously bought cheap, then demanded HPI, you're nuts. You buy and sell a property for the prevailing market value, whatever that is. I don't set that price. If I had known then what I know now, do you think I wouldn't have bought up as many properties as I could have done with dodgy mortgages back in the late 90s? (Just like you would have done. The idea that you would have been a Mother Theresa in the same situation is rank hypocrisy. But anyway, we didn't know.)

Yes, the late 90s. We are talking about barely 10 years ago that the last bubble was getting going. Do you think that only 50 year olds and above were buying houses 10 years ago? No, the big demand was actually coming from people who are now in their 30s and 40s i.e. post-boomer.

And another thing. I'm in my 50s,and in the heart of the boomer generation as it's normally defined. Yet, I am still paying nearly £1500 a month on my mortgage, and will be doing so for a few years to come. Don't make the mistake of thinking that all people in their 50s and early 60s are sitting pretty with big paid-off houses bought for 10 bob in the 70s and 80s. I know plenty of people my age who don't own property, or who are just as much victims of HPI as anyone who happens to have a later birthdate.

Stop caricaturing an entire generation of millions of people. We are not one amorphous mass who vote and behave like a single individual.

BRILL you need to post more often

[corevalue]

But that is exactly what I am doing/saying! Bad governance is at the root of all this mess. But in a democracy you can't just blame "the government". The voters put these government there. And bought tabloids, and worshipped the BBC.

On your first part, re. pensions, same as above I'm afraid - bad governance fecked most options. On individual alternatives, in this past decade, the best alternative would have been STR since around 2004. I am not familiar with the decades before 2000, but people should have done proper research, educate themselves, and invested accordingly. I am sure some did well.

Instead, these generations created a Ponzi scheme, and bought into it!!! That will not work!!!

I was listening to a program on local radio the other day, about the rise and fall of pirate radio. I know some of the detail, I was peripherally involved. What most people don't appreciate is the extraordinary efforts made by the "establishment" to prevent any independent voice to be heard. It was even illegal to listen to radio Luxembourg, you were only authorised to listen to the BBC.

The BBC itself was not allowed to send it's own broadcasts from the studio to the transmitters, all the communications links were handled by the Post Office (GPO), a government controlled organisation, who could shut off anything they disagreed with at a moment's notice.

We are very tightly controlled and monitored in this country.

[Tired of Waiting]

This thread, like all anti-boomer whining, is full of ludicrous generalisations. This one (above) is beautifully typical

"You were in charge". WTF does that mean? Do you think that pre-New Labour politics saw generations voting en bloc? An earlier post blamed Thatcher for many of our current ills. I'd agree with this but wasn't she voted in with something like 32% of the electorate supporting her? And what proportion of those 32% were the boomer generation? The maths just don't stack up.

I resent people like you saying that "I was in charge", or the "we"were in charge, as though previous generations had any more political power than current ones. Do you not know that every arbitrary block of people will include the whole gamut of political views. Not only that but no one knows (without the healthy level of brilliant hindsight that many seem endowed with) that casting a vote for Party X will have well-defined consequences 30 years down the line. Indeed, 9 times out of 10 we have no real idea what policies a governing party is going to come up once they are in power. Look at New Labour's charging fees on university students. Do you think I voted for that ? Do you think many young people would have -- who were NuLab's biggest supporters in 97? Of course not.

You might as well blame "people with black hair", or "men" or "white people" for our current economic ills. There is no cohesive generational group-think any more than there is a black-hair group-think, yet it is convenient for you to pretend that there is, just as it is convenient for some older people to blame "the kids of today" for farting around on gap years and running up uncontrollable credit card bills for gadgets. It's just as absurd.

If you seriously believe that boomers consciously bought cheap, then demanded HPI, you're nuts. You buy and sell a property for the prevailing market value, whatever that is. I don't set that price. If I had known then what I know now, do you think I wouldn't have bought up as many properties as I could have done with dodgy mortgages back in the late 90s? (Just like you would have done. The idea that you would have been a Mother Theresa in the same situation is rank hypocrisy. But anyway, we didn't know.)

Yes, the late 90s. We are talking about barely 10 years ago that the last bubble was getting going. Do you think that only 50 year olds and above were buying houses 10 years ago? No, the big demand was actually coming from people who are now in their 30s and 40s i.e. post-boomer.

And another thing. I'm in my 50s,and in the heart of the boomer generation as it's normally defined. Yet, I am still paying nearly £1500 a month on my mortgage, and will be doing so for a few years to come. Don't make the mistake of thinking that all people in their 50s and early 60s are sitting pretty with big paid-off houses bought for 10 bob in the 70s and 80s. I know plenty of people my age who don't own property, or who are just as much victims of HPI as anyone who happens to have a later birthdate.

Stop caricaturing an entire generation of millions of people. We are not one amorphous mass who vote and behave like a single individual.

Firstly, as I had already written above, regarding the supply side :

My main problem here in the south is not with boomers per se, but with NIMBYs.

Problem is, most NIMBYs are boomers and most boomers and NIMBYs. And to "kick the ladder" after oneself is a very despicable thing indeed.

And secondly, as I had already written above as well, regarding the demand side, over-boosted by unregulated and too cheap credit :

The 2005 election.

In 2003 RPI was starting to go up, and the BoE was going to have to raise IRs in 2004. Chancellor Gordon Brown concluded that a raise in 2004 would seriously jeopardise Labour's chance of re-election in May 2005. Home owners would be hit, and the (bubble) economy would slow down (normalise, at least partially).

To prevent that Brown removed housing costs from the inflation index targeted by the BoE (from RPI to CPI).

Now, the question is: Was Brown right in his analysis, that a raise in IRs in 2004 would jeopardise Labour's 2005 GE?

What is your honest opinion?

In my case I am in a most unusual and most uncomfortable situation of agreeing with Brown's analyses (though not with his unethical and disastrous tampering with the inflation target, of course).

Regarding "generalisations": As we all know, the main deepest cause of this crisis was bad governance. Specifically monetary policy. This was a crisis of political economy. And in our democracy, the voters must bear the final responsibility, collectively.

But individually, if you didn't vote for labour in 2005, you bear less responsibility. Or, if you hadn't MEWed (Mortgage Equity Withdraw), you would be in a better financial position now, and less angry.

Edit: Sorry, I forgot to mention: A huge increase in the national debt is intrinsically generational politics.

Edited January 2, 2011 by Tired of Waiting

[Tired of Waiting]

I was listening to a program on local radio the other day, about the rise and fall of pirate radio. I know some of the detail, I was peripherally involved. What most people don't appreciate is the extraordinary efforts made by the "establishment" to prevent any independent voice to be heard. It was even illegal to listen to radio Luxembourg, you were only authorised to listen to the BBC.

The BBC itself was not allowed to send it's own broadcasts from the studio to the transmitters, all the communications links were handled by the Post Office (GPO), a government controlled organisation, who could shut off anything they disagreed with at a moment's notice.

We are very tightly controlled and monitored in this country.

Jeeezus, I had no idea. Thanks for that corevalue.

I really thought we were much more democratic than that. I mean, had been, for longer.

Embarrassing.

[bomberbrown]

This thread, like all anti-boomer whining,

<snip>

Stop caricaturing an entire generation of millions of people. We are not one amorphous mass who vote and behave like a single individual.

Just wanted to say, as the OP, this thread wasn't intended to be a Baby Boomer Bashing thread, just an observation that the BBC were now reporting the perceived generation wealth transfer from the old to the younger. Much that has been touted on HPC for years before the MSM.

My mum's a boomer (1949) and I'm a Generation X (1968) and neither of us have coined it in (I rent, my mum has a mortgage from 1994 on a very modest semi).

The only people to blame are the New Labour government that presided over the biggest HPI and credit bubble in history. Utter kunts!!

Just my tuppence worth.

[ProdigalGnome]

The only people to blame are the New Labour government that presided over the biggest HPI and credit bubble in history. Utter kunts!!

My point is that even thinking that certain identifiable people are to "blame" is misguided, though it makes us feel better if we can vent anger and frustration on a particular person or group.

The economic meltdown is a link in a long chain of events and people. I remember as a kid a housing boom in the 1970s. Beyond that, if we want to identify the roots of HPI, surely we have to look toThatcherism, with its deregulation of the City, the selling off of council houses, the cult of the individual, the avowed aim to make everyone a homeowner, and so on. It was also in the early 80s, to coincide with the home ownership boom, that we started to see home and garden makeover programmes on TV. These planted ideas in our collective consciousness, that it was easy to add value to property and sell it on -- a theme hungrily embraced by the egregious Beenie and Allsopp in the last 10 years. It was also during Thatcher's time that we started to get overseas property shows on TV, which added to the mania. Things went dormant again in the 90s but came back with a vengeance during New Labour.

I also think we massively underestimate the influence of the Internet and connectedness since the late 90s. This, and the DotCom bubble, has had a huge effect on the way people have regarded investment in general, which includes property. The Get-Rich-Quick mentality got well and truly drilled into all of us during this period.

HPI is complicated. Its roots are deep and multifarious.

[Tired of Waiting]

My point is that even thinking that certain identifiable people are to "blame" is misguided, though it makes us feel better if we can vent anger and frustration on a particular person or group.

The economic meltdown is a link in a long chain of events and people. I remember as a kid a housing boom in the 1970s. Beyond that, if we want to identify the roots of HPI, surely we have to look toThatcherism, with its deregulation of the City, the selling off of council houses, the cult of the individual, the avowed aim to make everyone a homeowner, and so on. It was also in the early 80s, to coincide with the home ownership boom, that we started to see home and garden makeover programmes on TV. These planted ideas in our collective consciousness, that it was easy to add value to property and sell it on -- a theme hungrily embraced by the egregious Beenie and Allsopp in the last 10 years. It was also during Thatcher's time that we started to get overseas property shows on TV, which added to the mania. Things went dormant again in the 90s but came back with a vengeance during New Labour.

I also think we massively underestimate the influence of the Internet and connectedness since the late 90s. This, and the DotCom bubble, has had a huge effect on the way people have regarded investment in general, which includes property. The Get-Rich-Quick mentality got well and truly drilled into all of us during this period.

HPI is complicated. Its roots are deep and multifarious.

Dear newbie, since you are just arriving, in a site that has been discussing HPI for a few years, I suggest you phrase your posts more in a enquiring than affirmative style.

To blame Thatcher for the 2003-2007 housing peak is just crazy. By far the 2 most powerful factors were demand boosted by loose monetary policy, and supply blocked by planning.

Interest rates were kept too low for too long, particularly since 2004 (after Brown removed housing costs from the inflation index/target in Dec 2003 - RPI v CPI), and the FSA/BoE failed to regulated the credit/mortgage bubble.

And you forgot to reply to this:

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=156958&view=findpost&p=2840113

[ProdigalGnome]

Dear newbie, since you are just arriving, in a site that has been discussing HPI for a few years, I suggest you phrase your posts more in a enquiring than affirmative style.

To blame Thatcher for the 2003-2007 housing peak is just crazy. By far the 2 most powerful factors were demand boosted by loose monetary policy, and supply blocked by planning.

Interest rates were kept too low for too long, particularly since 2004 (after Brown removed housing costs from the inflation index/target in Dec 2003 - RPI v CPI), and the FSA/BoE failed to regulated the credit/mortgage bubble.

And you forgot to reply to this:

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=156958&view=findpost&p=2840113

Dear Patronising Git,

I've been a member since about 2006, but lost interest a couple of years ago, and re-registered recently.

If you think HPI is a recent phenomenon, think again. Thatcher laid the foundations, while ill-judged monetary policy since 1979, and compounded by the recent Labour regime, has hammered it home. But underpinning all those mechanisms are human factors which were (*he said affirmatively*) very much a child of Thatcherism.

[tomandlu]

Dear newbie, since you are just arriving, in a site that has been discussing HPI for a few years, I suggest you phrase your posts more in a enquiring than affirmative style.

For someone who seems to have a healthy disregard for authority, I find that a rather suspect statement. Is there a vetting committee that new posters should submit to for approval as to their tone?

To blame Thatcher for the 2003-2007 housing peak is just crazy. By far the 2 most powerful factors were demand boosted by loose monetary policy, and supply blocked by planning.

I'm not sure he was 'blaming' Thatcher - just pointing out that a sociological shift can be parked at her door... an argument I'm not entirely convinced by, but I'm not convinced by the supply argument either (see below).

Interest rates were kept too low for too long, particularly since 2004 (after Brown removed housing costs from the inflation index/target in Dec 2003 - RPI v CPI), and the FSA/BoE failed to regulated the credit/mortgage bubble.

100% agree - and you really don't need constraint in supply* to create the HPI monster if you have low interest rates and a credit bubble...

* well, you need some constraint but YKWIM

[General Melchett]

No boomer bashing from me, people are inherently selfish, it is part of the human condition, I don't blame them for it. It would be nice if they realised their role in their childrens suffering though, but too many simply don't understand and are baffled as to why they don't have any grandchildren. "That'll be all those iPods i expect, oo they want it all nowadays don't they, so many women want careers now don't they Mavis, putting off having kids for their career, oooooooo I know. Did you see the express this morning? Good news, house prices up! I might do one of those equity release things I saw on the Telly, I've always fancied a cruise.". 2+2=538

Brilliant.

POTM

[bomberbrown]

Dear Patronising Git,

I've been a member since about 2006, but lost interest a couple of years ago, and re-registered recently.

If you think HPI is a recent phenomenon, think again. Thatcher laid the foundations, while ill-judged monetary policy since 1979, and compounded by the recent Labour regime, has hammered it home. But underpinning all those mechanisms are human factors which were (*he said affirmatively*) very much a child of Thatcherism.

I very much disagree. Quite simply, while the sun was shining over the past 13 years, the last lot of incumbents should have been jolly well making hay!! :angry:

[Tired of Waiting]

For someone who seems to have a healthy disregard for authority, I find that a rather suspect statement. Is there a vetting committee that new posters should submit to for approval as to their tone?

Of course not, and I didn't say that. You are exaggerating my post tomandlu. That guy had been rude to me first, totally out of the blue, when he thought (mistakenly) that I was blaming all boomers for this crisis. He is just rude, and constantly wrong - a very annoying combination.

I'm not sure he was 'blaming' Thatcher - just pointing out that a sociological shift can be parked at her door... an argument I'm not entirely convinced by, but I'm not convinced by the supply argument either (see below).

New labour was in power for 13 years, since 1997. (When Chancellor Brown created the tripartite structure, incidentally, creating the FSA out of the BoE. The FSA's remit didn't include macro-economic considerations... But I sidetrack.) To blame Thatcher for a bubble that got worse from 2003-4 is just bonkers. Particularly considering also Brown's direct tampering with the inflation index in Dec 2003.

100% agree - and you really don't need constraint in supply* to create the HPI monster if you have low interest rates and a credit bubble...

* well, you need some constraint but YKWIM

Construction is slower than credit, but more structural, long term. But we can leave that for another time. I have to work now.

Edited January 4, 2011 by Tired of Waiting

[winkie]

I think it all started in the early 80s.

-Selling of council houses.

-Buy-to-let mortgages and new AST laws

-Mutual building societies becoming privately owned.

-Banks started to sell mortgages.

-People being able to cash in the growth in their equity to buy anything they wanted, instead of ONLY home improvements to the house in question. ( big one).

...over the years many things caused the high rise in property, the popularity of property has been used as a security for both buyers and lenders....

All governments, banks and people have collectively contributed to the bubble......the bubble had many benefits to many people.....but it was all allowed to get out of hand IMO, had Tony or even Gordon put a damper on it like they should have done by upsetting a few with vested interests and forfeiting some artificial growth things would have been so much easier for the priced out and over indebted but unfortunately they were weak and had their own popularity interests at heart.

Edited January 4, 2011 by winkie

[Tired of Waiting]

Dear Patronising (...)

Well, not really. I was just reacting against your rudeness.

(...) Git,

Very wrong, again.

I've been a member since about 2006, but lost interest a couple of years ago, and re-registered recently.

I'm not sure that information actually helped you there.

If you think HPI is a recent phenomenon, think again.

Thatcher laid the foundations, while ill-judged monetary policy since 1979, and compounded by the recent Labour regime, has hammered it home. But underpinning all those mechanisms are human factors which were (*he said affirmatively*) very much a child of Thatcherism.

OK then, if you want/prefer/need to believe that.

[corevalue]

Dear Patronising Git,

I've been a member since about 2006, but lost interest a couple of years ago, and re-registered recently.

If you think HPI is a recent phenomenon, think again. Thatcher laid the foundations, while ill-judged monetary policy since 1979, and compounded by the recent Labour regime, has hammered it home. But underpinning all those mechanisms are human factors which were (*he said affirmatively*) very much a child of Thatcherism.

And who is promoting the idea of inter-generational wealth transfer the most? Thatcher's long-term ultra-right wing adviser, David Willetts.

I don't think her policy was ill-judged, it was entirely deliberate. As much as I detest the woman, she was certainly no fool. Now we have Willetts trying to set generations against each other, in order to deflect the blame.

The wealth transfer hasn't gone between generations, but classes; the beneficiaries being the holders of land and the lenders of money.

[eric pebble]

Demographics and changes in the rates of household formation did underpin the HP boom but easy credit LIAR LOANS /MORTGAGE FRAUD since the mid 1980s has been the main factor.

Now the cheap money LIAR LOAN SCAM has gone diminished [still there if you look] the market really depends on hope and fresh air.

Edited January 4, 2011 by eric pebble

[PopGun]

Corrected it for you.

You obviously know nothing of my peer group, you're just another shill for the blame game. One guy I talked to this year had lost 80% of his private pension to these Banksters. Not one of my peers wanted high house prices, except the aforementioned; and he was stuck between wanting his children to be able to afford to buy, and knowing he had 2/10ths of eff-all to live on in retirement, unless he could get a decent price for his house.

It was all Labour's/Thatcher's/Boomer's/Public Service/Unemployed's fault!

A lot of boomers did strike it lucky, however the bankers always knew and know what they're doing.

[eric pebble]

It was all Labour's/Thatcher's/Boomer's/Public Service/Unemployed's fault!

It really got bad from around 2001 onwards: G Brown absolutely did the WRONG thing by not tackling it - and instead taking house prices out of the inflation figures..... THAT was ABSOLUTELY CRIMINAL - worthy of a prison sentence for treason imo..... :angry:

[Tired of Waiting]

It really got bad from around 2001 onwards: G Brown absolutely did the WRONG thing by not tackling it - and instead taking house prices out of the inflation figures..... THAT was ABSOLUTELY CRIMINAL - worthy of a prison sentence for treason imo..... :angry:

Exactly.

[Wait & See]

I don't care what anyone says, this whole HP culture began in the 1960's when the young arseholes back then thought they deserved better than their parents. The only problem was, they were no richer than their parents so just though, "If I can't afford to buy a car, I'll just borrow the money to buy it".

Same with property, washing machines, TV's, holidays. Fu*k it they said. I'm a peasent but I still want all these things, so I'll just forget about adding up how much interest I pay over and above the capital and just delude myself to get that Cortina or Spanish holiday etc.

Pathetic and very insecure. Just poor people trying to look wealthy by being desperate to borrow off the wonderful banks that we all hate so much. This culture was passed on the their kids until we have what we have today. A total balls up.

Edited January 4, 2011 by Wait & See

[Tired of Waiting]

I don't care what anyone says, this whole HP culture began in the 1960's when the young arseholes back then thought they deserved better than their parents. The only problem was, they were no richer than their parents so just though, "If I can't afford to buy a car, I'll just borrow the money to buy it".

Same with property, washing machines, TV's, holidays. Fu*k it they said. I'm a peasent but I still want all these things, so I'll just forget about adding up how much interest I pay over and above the capital and just delude myself to get that Cortina or Spanish holiday etc.

Pathetic and very insecure. Just poor people trying to look wealthy by being desperate to borrow off the wonderful banks that we all hate so much. This culture was passed on the their kids until we have what we have today. A total balls up.

If it is culture, how do you explain the periods when house prices are going down?

Or, suppose the German government suddenly decided to allow 100% mortgages there, and adopt a planning system as blocked as ours, do you think prices wouldn't go up there?

Edited January 4, 2011 by Tired of Waiting

[Wait & See]

Because in the past i.e before 2001, banks tried to stop the dumb bastards from borrowing money that they couldn't pay back. That all changed about 8 years ago and look where we are.

My point is that this HP, borrowing culture begain in the 1960's with insecure boomers wanting to be trendy, but without the cash to do it with. The end result of this delusion has been the last eight years and look at the fecking state of the place.

Most boomers are and always have been very poor, just like their parents. They just chose to ignore this small fact and borrow to look cool.

Most working people in the 1940's couldn't afford to buy a car in cash.

Most working people in the 1970's couldn't afford to buy a car in cash.

Most working people in 2010 can't afford to buy a car in cash either.

No ones better off, as we're all going to now find out. Back to the 1940's again I think.

Edited January 4, 2011 by Wait & See

[Tired of Waiting]

Because in the past i.e before 2001, banks tried to stop the dumb bastards from borrowing money that they couldn't pay back. That all changed about 8 years ago and look where we are.

My point is that this HP, borrowing culture begain in the 1960's with insecure boomers wanting to be trendy, but without the cash to do it with. The end result of this delusion has been the last eight years and look at the fecking state of the place.

Most boomers are and always have been very poor, just like their parents. They just chose to ignore this small fact and borrow to look cool.

Most working people in the 1940's couldn't afford to buy a car in cash.

Most working people in the 1970's couldn't afford to buy a car in cash.

Most working people in 2010 can't afford to buy a car in cash either.

No ones better off, as we're all going to now find out. Back to the 1940's again I think.

I agree with you that a major reason behind this bubble was people borrowing beyond their means. But people have always tried to borrow beyond their means, all generations, and in all countries. if interest rates are too low, and controls too loose, people will borrow too much, always, everywhere.

And this is old knowledge in political economy as well. This is the main "cultural" reason behind monetarism. Monetary authorities have to control and limit the amount of money in circulation. Old story really. Unfortunately, contrary to popular belief, imbecile Brown (a historian) didn't know sh!t about economics, fecked the regulation system (splitting the BoE and the FSA), and then tampered with the inflation index in Dec 2003 to force the BoE to keep interest rates low - too low!

And to say that it was the "greedy bankers" fault is a similar mistake. Bankers were not greedy b@stards only between 2003 and 2007, and mainly in Britain and in the USA. Bankers have always been greedy b@stards, and in all countries! It is their job to be greedy b@stards. The problem was that macro-economic regulation failed, mainly in the USA and Britain.

Edited January 4, 2011 by Tired of Waiting

[Wait & See]

Forgetting about history, I totally agree with you about IR's and Brown with his FSA delusions. Was always a slight of hand that one. Regulators....of what exactly. Just the way Gordon wanted it.

The general public lying to the bank and the bank turning a blind eye IMO means that the lot of them should be locked up. Shocking corruption thats more at home in a banana republic than the UK ............the UK before NuLabour anyway.