Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
hans kammler

Stop Whingeing. The Young Have Never Had It So Good!

Recommended Posts

Jermey warner troll article.

2nd highest rated comment blaming intergenerational inequality on... can you guess? yup ipads, holidays and internships.

Try to laugh your way through this drivel.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100026342/stop-whingeing-the-young-have-never-had-it-so-good/

"Lots of stuff in this morning's press about "intergenerational unfairness" on the back of the Tory leadership's pledge to protect pension spending but cut more from working age benefits – for example, see this piece by Janan Ganesh in this morning's Financial Times (£). Like most complaints, it contains elements of truth. It's not just that baby boomers have done particularly well from the post war surge in house and other asset prices; it's also that public spending seems increasingly to favour this "lucky generation" over younger ones. It's unfortunate in some respects, but ageing populations will naturally push democratically elected governments into prioritising spending on pensions and healthcare over investment in the future – education, infrastructure, training and so on. Having led the good life, older generations are accused of bequeathing on their descendents an inheritance of only mountainous debt.

As I say, there are elements of truth in this contention, but set against myriad other problems that confront society, it seems a strangely irrelevant one, and in many respects it's also just a load of whinging tosh. Besides, it is not at all clear what, if anything, can or should be done about it.

No political leader who proposes means testing of pensions can expect to survive in power for long."

So basically it may be true, but what are you going to do about it is jeremey's take on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Grandad. Just make sure you can borrow another trillion quid over the next five years to keep up the facade of prosperity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only one statistic in the whole article: the fact that less than 10% of Boomers went to university. The rest of it is a fact-free zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only one statistic in the whole article: the fact that less than 10% of Boomers went to university. The rest of it is a fact-free zone.

Totally misleading fact too. You didn't need a degree in those days to obtain a decent or semi-decent job. In fact given the choice anyone with half a brain would choose that over needing a degree to end up in at best the same or equivalent job.

Edited by alexw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only one statistic in the whole article: the fact that less than 10% of Boomers went to university. The rest of it is a fact-free zone.

it did seem to be hastily written. Though when you work for the telegraph you can get away writing piffle like this as your customers, for the most part agree with this nonsense.

Nothing new of course, but not as in your face and amateurish as previous articles dealing with this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warner's conclusion:

Yes, it's tough to get a decent, well-paid job, and a university education no longer comes free. Yet if Daddy is relatively well off and well connected then these apparent disadvantages cease to become obstacles. Less than 10pc of baby boomers enjoyed a university education, and very few of them indeed were brought up in centrally heated houses. So please, let's not blow a minor complaint out of proportion. I kind of buy the intergeneration unfairness thing, but then again, as a late baby boomer myself, not really. There are more important things to worry about.

What a fanny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally misleading fact too. You didn't need a degree in those days to obtain a decent or semi-decent job. In fact given the choice anyone with half a brain would choose that over needing a degree to end up in at best the same or equivalent job.

Also, is that figure even comparable with current numbers given the later reclassification of Polytechnics as Universities?

Most of the boomers I know went to a Poly, few if any went to what was then considered a Uni, so would they even be included in that "Less than 10pc of baby boomers [that] enjoyed a university education"?

Given the tone of the article I doubt Mr Warner is really that bothered about making sure it's a fair comparison, so probably not; and yet Polytech students enjoyed all the benefits of free higher education and student grants available to those at University.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys have given his article more thought than he did. Sounds like some drunk boomer down the pub. Wandering incoherent babble. Probably just used a dictaphone and did it in one take on the drive to the golf course.

A tough life indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am a 71 year old pre boomer born during WW11 and raised in the austerity and rationing.

I am a widower of 6 years with a 38 year old son, 29 year old daughter and young grand daughter.

I am not at all pleased with the way Britain has turned out and I worry about my children and grand children.

My worry is house prices.

Will my children survive a rise in interest rates?

I know that many of the hobbies I had will be denied to them because all their money goes on their houses.

This is cruel and life stunting. My wife and I had a sailing dinghy, caravan etc. and were able to travel.

My children cannot do this so easily.

What will my Grand daughter be able to do?

We don't live in London and we don't get London wages.

Now it is nothing like the 1940's when things were really tough, but in those days it was not money that was in short supply but commodities.

I remember the first time that I saw a banana, my younger sister thought it was a toy.

A friend of mine, living in Carmarthenshire and suffering rural poverty was regularly fed starling and wren stew, the product of her father's air rifle.

But, in those days, even though we lived in battered cities and played on bomb patches, we had optimism. Our parents who had fought and stayed the darkest of days were bursting with enthusiasm. I remember my father turning out for the local cricket team wearing his service khaki shorts, as did many of the other men. The few post war manufactured cars were owned by spivs and other questionable persons. Petrol was on ration, but we managed in our 1936 Morris to get about. Our neighbour had a thriving business sharpening knives. His stock in trade was a bicycle fitted with a lathe on the handlebars, turned by a belt from the back wheel.

You get the picture?

Everybody pulling together. Spivs and get rich quick merchants thoroughly despised and condemned.

Now, it's ever man for himself.

Look at the recent post about photo booths charging £5. Some utter tosser, probably in London where values are different, thinks that this is a reasonable price. But the Post Office is tied into the scam so that home photos are likely to be rejected.

I was once proud to be British.

Not now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am a 71 year old pre boomer born during WW11 and raised in the austerity and rationing.

I am a widower of 6 years with a 38 year old son, 29 year old daughter and young grand daughter.

I am not at all pleased with the way Britain has turned out and I worry about my children and grand children.

My worry is house prices.

Will my children survive a rise in interest rates?

I know that many of the hobbies I had will be denied to them because all their money goes on their houses.

This is cruel and life stunting. My wife and I had a sailing dinghy, caravan etc. and were able to travel.

My children cannot do this so easily.

What will my Grand daughter be able to do?

We don't live in London and we don't get London wages.

Now it is nothing like the 1940's when things were really tough, but in those days it was not money that was in short supply but commodities.

I remember the first time that I saw a banana, my younger sister thought it was a toy.

A friend of mine, living in Carmarthenshire and suffering rural poverty was regularly fed starling and wren stew, the product of her father's air rifle.

But, in those days, even though we lived in battered cities and played on bomb patches, we had optimism. Our parents who had fought and stayed the darkest of days were bursting with enthusiasm. I remember my father turning out for the local cricket team wearing his service khaki shorts, as did many of the other men. The few post war manufactured cars were owned by spivs and other questionable persons. Petrol was on ration, but we managed in our 1936 Morris to get about. Our neighbour had a thriving business sharpening knives. His stock in trade was a bicycle fitted with a lathe on the handlebars, turned by a belt from the back wheel.

You get the picture?

Everybody pulling together. Spivs and get rich quick merchants thoroughly despised and condemned.

Now, it's ever man for himself.

Look at the recent post about photo booths charging £5. Some utter tosser, probably in London where values are different, thinks that this is a reasonable price. But the Post Office is tied into the scam so that home photos are likely to be rejected.

I was once proud to be British.

Not now.

Unfortunately lots of people live in London and don't get London wages either. The minimum wage is the same everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jermey warner troll article.

2nd highest rated comment blaming intergenerational inequality on... can you guess? yup ipads, holidays and internships.

Try to laugh your way through this drivel.

http://blogs.telegra...had-it-so-good/

"Lots of stuff in this morning's press about "intergenerational unfairness" on the back of the Tory leadership's pledge to protect pension spending but cut more from working age benefits – for example, see this piece by Janan Ganesh in this morning's Financial Times (£). Like most complaints, it contains elements of truth. It's not just that baby boomers have done particularly well from the post war surge in house and other asset prices; it's also that public spending seems increasingly to favour this "lucky generation" over younger ones. It's unfortunate in some respects, but ageing populations will naturally push democratically elected governments into prioritising spending on pensions and healthcare over investment in the future – education, infrastructure, training and so on. Having led the good life, older generations are accused of bequeathing on their descendents an inheritance of only mountainous debt.

As I say, there are elements of truth in this contention, but set against myriad other problems that confront society, it seems a strangely irrelevant one, and in many respects it's also just a load of whinging tosh. Besides, it is not at all clear what, if anything, can or should be done about it.

No political leader who proposes means testing of pensions can expect to survive in power for long."

So basically it may be true, but what are you going to do about it is jeremey's take on it.

There seems to be a lot of rambling like this, it seems to me to be an attempt to drown out the fact that if the young don`t play Ponzi ball, the old can`t get rich off bricks and mortar? It is pretty simple, if the numbers don`t sign up for mortgage debt, than the numbers who can downsize and still buy shiny things and holidays has to dwindle? This mini-boom is going to implode soon, 2007 was the last opportunity for the majority of people to cash in property chips and get more than they thought possible. Now it is just select areas, mainly in London, where people can rely on getting top dollar for their bricks. The writer is just writing for a readership that want to believe it will all magically keep going their way. It wont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a lot of rambling like this, it seems to me to be an attempt to drown out the fact that if the young don`t play Ponzi ball, the old can`t get rich off bricks and mortar? It is pretty simple, if the numbers don`t sign up for mortgage debt, than the numbers who can downsize and still buy shiny things and holidays has to dwindle? This mini-boom is going to implode soon, 2007 was the last opportunity for the majority of people to cash in property chips and get more than they thought possible. Now it is just select areas, mainly in London, where people can rely on getting top dollar for their bricks. The writer is just writing for a readership that want to believe it will all magically keep going their way. It wont.

The writer is just writing for a readership that want to believe it will all magically keep going their way. It wont.

True, they are completely insulated from reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, they are completely insulated from reality.

Well I think they know the reality is out there, but they just want to soak up nonsense in the paper that says otherwise, a bit like eating comfort food when the weather is bad. When things first started to go T*its up for property I noticed that the housing mentalists at work were watching LLL etc with the sound up a couple of notches, almost like they were trying to drown out what was happening and keep living the dream :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somewhat ironic that the first two words of Jeremy Warner's enormous whinge are "Stop Whingeing".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They get benefit top ups though to make living in London (housing wise) possible?

Sure, in-work benefits subsidise wages in them same way that they do everywhere else.

This might mitigate the housing situation if you're in social housing with a HB appropriate rent, but lots of people end up not just in shared houses but in shared rooms, or bedsits barely twice the size of a single bed, or with multiple hour commutes on buses because there's not even that in their price bracket where they work and the trains are too expensive.

It also doesn't really counter the fact that as soon as any commodity (including basics such as food) hits London it has a premium wacked on it, presumably because businesses also have ridiculous property costs in the capital?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only one statistic in the whole article: the fact that less than 10% of Boomers went to university. The rest of it is a fact-free zone.

But what percentage of boomers went to a Polytechnic which is all these New Universities are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

90% of baby boomers didn't even have to go to university. Seems unbelievable now.

What a bunch of slackers. ;)

Edit to add :- You know when you have to show the older generation how to do stuff on a computer, or how to set up their Tv/sky box. It's not that they didn't have it when they were young, it because they are thick a pig shite!

No wonder this country has gone to the dogs. :lol:

Edited by XswampyX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what percentage of boomers went to a Polytechnic which is all these New Universities are.

Boomers were born anywhere between 1945 to 1964 so they'd be entering further education between 1963 and 1982 approximately.

Government figures aren't particularly useful for working this out as they only have a figure for the first year of each decade showing the number of students in further education (Polytechs and similar) and higher education (Universities) in that year only:

1951 and onwards show learners at a single point in the year, earlier data cover numbers who attended at any time during the year

So, excluding Adult Education Centres, which the boomers also had the opportunity to use; and only including first degrees as higher degrees would essentially involve counting these people twice:

In 1960 there were 1,352,000 in further education, and 22,426 in higher education

In 1970 there were 1,795,000 in further education, and 51,189 in higher education

In 1980 there were 1,800,000 in further education, and 68,150 in higher education

So if the article was correct and those higher education figures represent 10% of boomers (which is probably slightly generous as the higher education figures include foreign students who I'd guess would be less well represented proportionally in further education) then the number of students attending further education institutes in 1960 (in lieu of 1963), 1970 and 1980 was 603%, 350% and 264% of the total boomer population :blink: Either Warner got his maths very wrong or there were an awful lot of mature students from the previous generation (doubtful, given the Adult Education Centres had 877,000 students in 1960; 1,320,000 in 1970; and 1,543,000 in 1980).

Anyway, the further education numbers are much higher than the university figures so any reliance on the later is totally disingenuous. A rough calculation, assuming a three year course length and similar yearly figures within each decade, of the total number of people who entered both further and higher education (and therefore had access to higher education as it's now classified, both for free and with the benefit of student grants) over the period of 1963 to 1982 is approximately 12,145,391 or approximately 84% of the remaining boomer population. I don't have the demographic breakdown for how many boomers died in the interevening years so would expect the original percentage to be lower than this, but it would certainly remain well in excess of 10%

Data from here http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parliament.uk%2Fbriefing-papers%2Fsn04252.pdf&ei=_arMUuywI5GjhgeqioH4Dg&usg=AFQjCNHR_H7QHnRNuGrRWUA5sOsZp3Mvig&bvm=bv.58187178,d.ZG4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today is not a great time to be graduating, when there seem to be less jobs, and having a load of debt.

When I left Uni, there were no jobs, but I didn't owe much.

A lot of younger people do not bother with a landline, so a mobile phone is not an extravagance. That tablet costs a lot less than that monster beige box we all used some years back and is portable. Also makes these people more mobile if need be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today is not a great time to be graduating, when there seem to be less jobs, and having a load of debt.

When I left Uni, there were no jobs, but I didn't owe much.

A lot of younger people do not bother with a landline, so a mobile phone is not an extravagance. That tablet costs a lot less than that monster beige box we all used some years back and is portable. Also makes these people more mobile if need be.

The irony being that they don`t need to be mobile because they are for the most part unemployed, and they don`t really need to be communicating like the CEO of a major company every day, although some sheeple, employed and unemployed think that this is the necessary way to act in public now? Getting pretty sick of seeing people glued to "Tablets" phones, kindles etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony being that they don`t need to be mobile because they are for the most part unemployed, and they don`t really need to be communicating like the CEO of a major company every day, although some sheeple, employed and unemployed think that this is the necessary way to act in public now? Getting pretty sick of seeing people glued to "Tablets" phones, kindles etc.

It's an arms race in way though? Having the latest technology means I know my way around it (essential as I work in digital) but also I can properly work anywhere, this is a great advantage. Not being a slave to mobile and not forgetting your manners is another thing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony being that they don`t need to be mobile because they are for the most part unemployed, and they don`t really need to be communicating like the CEO of a major company every day, although some sheeple, employed and unemployed think that this is the necessary way to act in public now? Getting pretty sick of seeing people glued to "Tablets" phones, kindles etc.

Using my tablet and smartphone mostly on the bus but also at the the stop and when I have 10 spare minutes anywhere, saves me work time in the office and lets me leave early.

It's just how things have moved on

Edited by Si1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.