Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
monks

How Young Need 'twice The Salary To Match Parents' Lifestyle'

Recommended Posts

Daily Mail article

Young workers would need to earn twice as much to have the lifestyle their parents enjoyed at the same age, research reveals today.

The dramatic salary increase would make it easier for them to marry, buy a home and have children – choices within easier reach of earlier generations.

The report said the average twenty-something earns about £21,000 – but would require £40,000 to match their parents.

The massive financial deficit is forcing young people to delay key life stages, according to First Direct, the bank which commissioned the report.

‘Three in ten of their parents were married and on the property ladder by the age of 25,’ it said. ‘But money worries mean the average young Briton today does not expect to pass these milestones until their mid-30s.’

Three in four of the 3,000 polled for the study agreed with the contention that today’s young people ‘are the most financially pressured in history’.

One in five has postponed, or feels they should postpone, marriage plans. One in four is delaying having children.

Nearly a third are even considering not having children at all ‘because they cannot afford to do so’, according to First Direct which calls them ‘Generation Gap’.

By contrast the report suggested that most of their own parents had delayed no major life stages.

One of the biggest problems for twenty-somethings is the enormous cost of buying a property.

A couple who married in 1985 could have picked up a home for just £35,000 – the average price at the time and four times the average salary.

A child born to the couple two years later would now be 24 and need to find £163,000 for a similar house – eight times the average salary.

A shocking situation and one that has been highlighted on HPC for years now.

So a third of youngsters are not even considering having kids.

Those that do, will have smaller families (I certainly can't see us "affording" a third).

Just where are the new recruits to the Ponzi Pyramid going to come from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daily Mail article

A shocking situation and one that has been highlighted on HPC for years now.

So a third of youngsters are not even considering having kids.

Those that do, will have smaller families (I certainly can't see us "affording" a third).

Just where are the new recruits to the Ponzi Pyramid going to come from?

The classic way to continue a Ponzi is by re-investment.

It needs to get the people at the top to put their winnings back in.

Hey presto - Bank of Mum and Dad and Property-is-my-pension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A shocking situation and one that has been highlighted on HPC for years now.

So a third of youngsters are not even considering having kids.

Those that do, will have smaller families (I certainly can't see us "affording" a third).

Just where are the new recruits to the Ponzi Pyramid going to come from?

Housing is a big differentiator. We earn considerably more than both sets of parents, yet couldn't afford to buy the houses they purchased at the same age. Properties they could afford easily then are worth >£300k now. Getting a workable deposit for a house of that value in your mid-20s isn't plausible.

Otherwise we live very well compared to how they did at the time. The 2x figure is probably about right, and housing costs will account for the majority of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More articles like this please, Daily Hate.

The worry is that, because this piece of research was commissioned by the bank, any solutions that will be proposed will involved easier access to cheap debt, rather than the crucial acknowledgement that prices need to fall.

THat said, HSBC/First Direct never went in for the mad multiple/high LTV approach that ruined their competitors, but a bank's a bank all the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the biggest problems for twenty-somethings is the enormous cost of buying a property.

Some would say it's THE problem not one of the problems.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a good journalistic article, and bringing home the reality of the problems now faced by the young.

Anyone who is young and honest and moralistic, has a problem. They cannot get anywhere off of their own back. If they look for the best job, they end up in the public sector, delivering little of value. If they work in the private sector, their wages are low, and they have a lot of tax to pay for people like crooked bankers, public sector workers, benefit claimants and pensioners.

And because of the way things work, these hard working young people, who are the most deserving, end up at the back of the queue for everything. There was a minister on Channel 4 news last night, and when it was put to him that single mothers would need child care to get back into work, he back pedalled and said it would be there, instead of standing up and saying that everyone needs to take responsibility for their own choices. Older people on pensions always have a strong political voice, and the bankers can always extract more from someone else, and the public sector seems to show no restraint.

The only cavalry that might come over the hill to save the day from all of this madness, are the bond vigilantes. Rumours are that they are fighting a hard fight against the ECB in Portugal. There are whispers that they might finally show in Japan, before rampaging through the rest of Europe and then turning their wrath on the United States.

Something needs to be done. We need to put our productive people first. The way we treat young people has to change, they need to be first not last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The facts in the article are nicely lined up but they come to a completely wrong conclusion.

The problem as I see it is not that wages in the UK are not too low. House prices are too high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one, (partly due to my own making) am starting my 'Life' late.

i am 30 now, my G/F will be 30 in a couple of months, and we will be living to gether soon.

neither of us think we are or will be in the next few years, financially stable enough to be able to have children. we couldnt afford for one of us to to have a considerable length of time un/underpaid, let alone having to feed another mouth at the same time, and all the other expenses that comes with having a child.

the only way would be for one of us to have their wage doubled and for commodity prices to fall.

i am not bothered about bringing a child up in rented accomodation, my only requirement would be a decent garden for 'us' to play in etc.

we have made a concious decission, and we have not taken it lightly either.

its a sad state of affairs to be in,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The facts in the article are nicely lined up but they come to a completely wrong conclusion.

The problem as I see it is not that wages in the UK are not too low. House prices are too high.

You are in effect saying that people want houses too much, as someone pointed out above the price of goods is determined by how much people want them.

How would you make people want houses less? A significant property tax I suppose would do it but are there other ways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are in effect saying that people want houses too much, as someone pointed out above the price of goods is determined by how much people want them.

How would you make people want houses less? A significant property tax I suppose would do it but are there other ways?

The key factor affecting price is not how much people want houses. There are loads of factors that go into setting housing prices. Demand for a dwelling is fairly constant, but the supply of credit is the main differentiating factor.

Between 1998 and 2007 the amount of available credit exploded. If you regulate credit supply, you regulate prices. Everything else has only pretty minor effects.

Edited by WageslaveX14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are in effect saying that people want houses too much, as someone pointed out above the price of goods is determined by how much people want them.

How would you make people want houses less? A significant property tax I suppose would do it but are there other ways?

A property tax or a land value tax is the magic bullet. It needs to be progressive, so that if you have say a £100,000 house, you pay maybe a third of what someone pays in a £200,000 house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are in effect saying that people want houses too much, as someone pointed out above the price of goods is determined by how much people want them.

How would you make people want houses less? A significant property tax I suppose would do it but are there other ways?

Lots of people want ferrari's but that doesn't push the price up. Economic demand means someone being willing and able to pay for a good or service. It's easy credit that has increased the economic demand for houses and pushed up the price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its tough for todays youth. but what about tomorrow's youth?

1). 16 year old taking GCSEs - due to grade inflation, needs 10A*s minimum to stand out. But then, that didn't help a certain dude on the Apprentice.

2). After GCSEs - go onto A-Levels and Uni route - total cost for 3 year degree + living expenses, £30,000+, no guarantee of good job

3). After GCSEs - want to go straight into employment? Sorry, you need a degree to get a career. Unfortunately, apprenticeships are few and far between

4). So you've got a job and now you're being frugle and saving up for a deposit to buy a house. Good luck, with interest rates being so low, how about a 2% ISA? Best savings rate around!

5). All this before you realise that house prices are still too friggin high!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lets face it the baby boomer generation have done well.

But and and a big BUT before the 1960's it was very uncommon to buy a house even rarer to go to university and food was rubbish.

I still don't think we really have it all that bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And in other news, young non-workers are breeding like rabbits on the benefit system. Yawnnnnn

Is this 'other' news- or is it the same news viewed from a different perspective? People work to gain their independence and in the hope of getting a better life- this article makes it clear that neither of these are on offer to the young now- so some of them are looking at the situation and saying what's the point.

As one of them said recently on the radio- who wants to work just to enrich the bankers?

Let those that built the debt mountain be the ones to shovel shite to move it.

Edited by wonderpup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The facts in the article are nicely lined up but they come to a completely wrong conclusion.

The problem as I see it is not that wages in the UK are not too low. House prices are too high.

Ideally, we would have higher wages, than cheaper houses, but I doubt that will happen any time soon. The rest of the world is offering more for less, so I agree that prices have to come down to meet the wages instead. By the way the banks and government are playing it, I'd suggest that there could be a combination of the two, but over a much longer time scale than many here would like (say, a decade or more).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lets face it the baby boomer generation have done well.

But and and a big BUT before the 1960's it was very uncommon to buy a house even rarer to go to university and food was rubbish.

I still don't think we really have it all that bad

That's exactly what my good lady said last week

I told her that the reason why is that as a country we have spent money than we had, so our grandchildren will be paying for it all their lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daily Mail article

A shocking situation and one that has been highlighted on HPC for years now.

So a third of youngsters are not even considering having kids.

Those that do, will have smaller families (I certainly can't see us "affording" a third).

Just where are the new recruits to the Ponzi Pyramid going to come from?

yes but these younger gens are finxated on ipods and glossy magazines, serves them right I say

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lets face it the baby boomer generation have done well.

But and and a big BUT before the 1960's it was very uncommon to buy a house even rarer to go to university and food was rubbish.

I still don't think we really have it all that bad

Yes interesting points .

Was reading recently how the working class lived when our present queen was growned , it was pretty grim .

Maybe things have gone like a boom and bust in the housing market . There is a natural top to the housing market and a natural bottom based on earnings and ability to borrow .However in a boom the natural top is overshot and in a bust the natural bottom is overshot.

When the boomers were born things were at a bottom or below the bottom . Unions and people would not put up with the low standard of living and demanded better . They won and got a better standared of living , however as is human nature people always want more ( this is not always a bad thing ) that is how we progress.

But the more the boomers got the more it became unafordabel and the cost has been passed on to the next generation . The next generation are at the bottom again in terms of their standard of living and current prospects as they are having to pay for the boomers pensions , health care and equity in the boomers homes.

' I still don't think we have it that bad '

That depends on the individual person their age , job , housing costs, pension and prospects.

In my own family I look at the older generation My Dad uncles Aunts who are in their 70's and can understand that they did have a hard time . However they did buy their houses at reasonable prices and inflation saw their debts eroded in record speed. Their pensions have paid out and they are sitting on masses of equity.

My generation mid 40's me and many cousins , most left school at 16 and got average jobs . Yes we had the downturn at the start of the 80's and the 90's . But most have managed to buy a home and seen its value soar. We are waiting with fingers crossed to see if the pensions pay out . We also have the benefit of inheritance from the generation above something that the generation above did not have .

The younger ones in the family in the teens and 20's . I just cannot see them ever acheiving the living standards of their parents and grandparents . None of them are married or have any children , their parents and grandparents had started having kids by their earlie 20's. Just one has their own home . I have one niece with a really good job but her partner ( 25 ) has sparodic employment so she is stuck at home as her wage alone will not support a mortgage and another adult who has long periods without work.

As for food yes that has got better and cheaper , consumer stuff is cheaper we all have much more of that than any generation before us , but the essentials the roof over the head and the bills are light years away for most in their 20's.

Edited by miko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the problem all boils down to the fact that the previous government tried to give anybody not working the chance to enjoy the lifestyle of what somebody in a good job 30 years ago would have worked hard for, so we have the non working set up to have kids and big financial incentives to have bigger families while the working stiffs have to slave harder to stand still and so cannot afford a family, however most of those that have postponed will hit a brick wall at around 38 when a woman finally realizes that this is her last chance to have kids so there is a frantic rush followed by 50k of IVF treatment ( I know as I have been there ) and finally you can play at happy families ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lets face it the baby boomer generation have done well.

But and and a big BUT before the 1960's it was very uncommon to buy a house even rarer to go to university and food was rubbish.

I still don't think we really have it all that bad

Don't think it was actually all that uncommon. Both my sets of grandparents bought houses when my folks were still very small, i.e. early 1920s. Very modest ones, though, all new-builds from the rash of it in that era. None of the gps were what anybody would call well off - none of their own parents had owned their own homes.

I guess the rise of the building societies had a lot to do with it. Back in e.g. Victorian times, not that long before the 20s, it was quite common for even relatively well-off people to rent rather than buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.