Politicians Have Jilted A Generation – It’S Wrong To Say That Young People Have Never Had It So Good

[slacker]

Full article, comments interesting too:

Politicians have jilted a generation – it’s wrong to say that young people have never had it so good

The Spectator, even though largely supportive of the government, has increasingly become a critical voice on HPI and the effect it is having on under 40s.

Fraser Nelson in particular as written some very aggressive pieces (Is George Osborne’s ‘Help to Buy’ the equivalent of Bush’s sub-prime loans?).

Second, I will accuse recent governments of cynically stoking the housing market. This may improve their electoral chances by making people feel richer, increase the value of their own expenses-funded London homes and raise the value of some of those publicly-owned banks, but it spells calamity for the next generation. And it may be driving their parents to distraction too.

At the top of the market, the children of the wealthy are asking their parents for hundreds of thousands in mortgage down-payments that they could never save themselves, hurting both generations. Those from less affluent backgrounds are acquiring state-sponsored sub-prime mortgages which, if they go south, will cause a crash. Further down the income scale, millions more can’t afford to buy homes and are paying most of their income to buy-to-let speculators offering short-hold tenancies. Hundreds of thousands of young adults are attempting to raise families in cramped conditions, or else delaying marriage and childbirth far beyond previous generations.

Housing pressure is also keeping the poor in their place. More than 3.3 million people aged 20-34 are living with their parents. These young adults are caught in a vicious cycle: as secure work becomes scarce, they are unable to afford rent so cannot move to areas with jobs. Their parents, meanwhile, have to wait ever longer for their children to fly the nest.

[winkie]

Young people generally are not having it so good.....a few have never had it so good, all depends on who you were born to and where you were born.....fewer expensive resourses to be spread amoungst more people competing for them.

[iamnumerate]

It is not even under 40s. I have a friend who is 41 and missed the boat in the 90s and is still living at home and thinks she will never buy a house.

I love this comment

"I'm 25 and I earn above the average salary - but I have very little ability to save for a mortgage deposit as long as I'm paying rent. I don't want the government to help me, I just want them to get out of the way and let the private sector do what it usually does - fight to fulfil latent demand until prices come down sufficiently that the competition is based on quality rather than a mere existence (this has happened in everything from airlines to mobile phones). If the government's regulations both on construction and the land that was allowed to be used for housing were significantly reformed and liberalised, I don't think it'd take all that long before the new builds were pushing down the price rises sufficiently that "sitting on land" as you watch its potential value increase would diminish at a fast enough value that building the houses was actually worth it again. I don't want special treatment, I just want similar opportunities as my parents' generation to own my own home"

[slacker]

I probably overthink these things but I wonder if there isn't more to the current political situation than is obvious.

With Telegraph, Spectator etc. running a lot of anti-HPI pieces in last 12 months - maybe Gove or similar is heavily pushing behind the scenes for some sanity on it - and these right-wing press reports are just part of that offensive.

As I've said before, these guys are going to be at dinner parties weekly where senior medical/legal professionals are beating them up over cost of London property.

A married couple of very senior professionals can't afford more than an ex-LA near a good school right now.

[The Knimbies who say No]

Nah, the HPI tide of effluent is probably just now lapping at the doorsteps of the Media-Political complex in the UK. I don't think they really give a toss overall.

Edited April 29, 2014 by The Knimbies who say no

[silver surfer]

It's great seeing a new generation of journalists coming through who, because they are personally experiencing the oppressive weight of house price inflation, are pushing back via their columns.

Eventually it will force a change, NIMBYism will be vilified and planning regulations will be loosened.

The problem is the time scale, for this to work itself through will take years and the real beneficiaries won't be the current 20-40 cohort, it'll be the generation after them.

[crashmonitor]

It's great seeing a new generation of journalists coming through who, because they are personally experiencing the oppressive weight of house price inflation, are pushing back via their columns.

Eventually it will force a change, NIMBYism will be vilified and planning regulations will be loosened.

The problem is the time scale, for this to work itself through will take years and the real beneficiaries won't be the current 20-40 cohort, it'll be the generation after them.

Not my impression of young journos, I'm guessing a lot of them are establishment shoe ins with property provided for them by their parents. If so they are going to be complicit with house price inflation friendly policies. Not all twenty somethings have to worry about house prices many of them are born VIs.......,.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2554526/Newlywed-Euan-Blairs-new-3-6million-six-bedroom-marital-home-joint-owned-Mrs-Blair-MOTHER.html

[billybong]

Second, I will accuse recent governments of cynically stoking the housing market. This may improve their electoral chances by making people feel richer, increase the value of their own expenses-funded London homes and raise the value of some of those publicly-owned banks, but it spells calamity for the next generation. And it may be driving their parents to distraction too.

At least he's not accusing the parents of intentionally stoking the bubble to the detriment of their children which the critics of the boomers often suggest.

He's accepting that the wicked policy of stoking house prices is a serious concern to old and young alike and causing serious harm to many people.

He's accepting that it's the governments to blame.

Even if rising house prices might have improved electoral chances there's no good reason or excuse to stoke a mega bubble like in London and previously a bubble in the rest of the country as well. If they must have house price increases then much smaller and more gradual rises would have been more than sufficient. The lunatic level of house prices are the result of a cack handed economic policy as well as being a wicked economic policy.

Edited April 29, 2014 by billybong

[fluffy666]

I probably overthink these things but I wonder if there isn't more to the current political situation than is obvious.

With Telegraph, Spectator etc. running a lot of anti-HPI pieces in last 12 months - maybe Gove or similar is heavily pushing behind the scenes for some sanity on it - and these right-wing press reports are just part of that offensive.

As I've said before, these guys are going to be at dinner parties weekly where senior medical/legal professionals are beating them up over cost of London property.

A married couple of very senior professionals can't afford more than an ex-LA near a good school right now.

It's probably more a case of newspapers having to reflect their readership.

In the 2000-06 bubble, a lot of people gained. RTB, anyone who had bought pre-2000, those getting into BTL.

Now, though, there are far fewer 'gainers'.

[Executive Sadman]

My folks say there is no problem. The under 35's today spend what they should be spending on a mortgage on £80 monthly sky packages, £80 mobile bills and a new £300 ipad or similar gadget every month.

[Billy soy]

My folks say there is no problem. The under 35's today spend what they should be spending on a mortgage on £80 monthly sky packages, £80 mobile bills and a new £300 ipad or similar gadget every month.

Many others say the same. Because their generation is the key to power in any election the governments of all colours have shielded them from economic reality, it's a lot easier to think you did it all by your own hardwork. The government are now airbrushing the last bubble from history, the same is being done to sub 40 year olds, it wasn't anything extraordinary, no bubble, you just missed the boat as you weren't hardworking enough or spent too much on iPads and package holidays.

[the_dork]

I probably overthink these things but I wonder if there isn't more to the current political situation than is obvious.

With Telegraph, Spectator etc. running a lot of anti-HPI pieces in last 12 months - maybe Gove or similar is heavily pushing behind the scenes for some sanity on it - and these right-wing press reports are just part of that offensive.

As I've said before, these guys are going to be at dinner parties weekly where senior medical/legal professionals are beating them up over cost of London property.

A married couple of very senior professionals can't afford more than an ex-LA near a good school right now.

There is no doubt that some in the Cabinet 'get it' (even Housing Ministers before they learn that they need to tow party line to progress their career). However, don't under-estimate the naked class war that Osbourne and Cameron want to fight. They are pretty openly fighting for the 1% (which just about excludes the doctors and lawyers you mention as well as everyone else)

[crashmonitor]

There is no doubt that some in the Cabinet 'get it' (even Housing Ministers before they learn that they need to tow party line to progress their career). However, don't under-estimate the naked class war that Osbourne and Cameron want to fight. They are pretty openly fighting for the 1% (which just about excludes the doctors and lawyers you mention as well as everyone else)

Don't count on any change when the Bollinger Bolsheviks get in led by the Milibot with his 4.5 million pound ''property empire'', inheritance assisted.

Edited April 29, 2014 by crashmonitor

[the_dork]

Certainly not! Labour are the party of middle class bourgeois and public sector workers only. Unlike the cons, there's a bit more pretence to be something more which is why I find them so ghastly

[winkie]

Two peas in a pod....+ another pea that will shack up with any pod.

[surreal estate]

It's probably more a case of newspapers having to reflect their readership.

In the 2000-06 bubble, a lot of people gained. RTB, anyone who had bought pre-2000, those getting into BTL.

Now, though, there are far fewer 'gainers'.

Newspapers and the rest of the media also have to take account of, and reflect the views of the main political parties who set the agenda. If none of the main parties are promoting a more 'enlightened' approach to housing policy then it is hard for them to report or comment upon it. We currently have no real 'opposition' in parliament and the few champions we once had (eg Vince Cable) have long since been silenced.

[cybernoid]

Is anyone actually saying the young have never had it so good?

Might the headline also read 'Its wrong to say that gravity makes things fall up'?

Comments are amusing once again. Every single article mentioning this problem has the young simply stating observable facts and the old denying reality. They sound so ridiculous, the argument always becomes those with the facts versus those without.

[The Knimbies who say No]

Jeremy Warner said precisely that on 7th January 2014:

"Stop Whingeing. The young have never had it so good"

You'll have to Google it as I can't cut and paste into the forum anymore for some reason.

[cybernoid]

Jeremy Warner said precisely that on 7th January 2014:

"Stop Whingeing. The young have never had it so good"

You'll have to Google it as I can't cut and paste into the forum anymore for some reason.

I don't think I could bear to read it.

Its like the flat earthers are being taken seriously, how does it get into print? If I said the moon was made out of cheese would there be an actual debate about it? Perhaps those that hold that view need to see a psychiatrist.

[Venger]

I don't think I could bear to read it.

Its like the flat earthers are being taken seriously, how does it get into print? If I said the moon was made out of cheese would there be an actual debate about it? Perhaps those that hold that view need to see a psychiatrist.

Read it, if you haven't already. Be thankful to the rich boomers, and stop buying ipods, just save and save against forever hpi with no life whatsoever.

This thread was all about it, and some excellent points made by hpcers. http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=195848

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.

[@contradevian]

It's great seeing a new generation of journalists coming through who, because they are personally experiencing the oppressive weight of house price inflation, are pushing back via their columns.

Eventually it will force a change, NIMBYism will be vilified and planning regulations will be loosened.

The problem is the time scale, for this to work itself through will take years and the real beneficiaries won't be the current 20-40 cohort, it'll be the generation after them.

Biggest problem are the local papers though. Most local papers are dependent on Estate Agents advertising so not a single bad word can be said about them or the 'property market.'

However they cheer lead and promote any scatty band of NIMBY's opposing even the most modest of developments.

I call our local rag 'Nimby News'

Edited April 29, 2014 by aSecureTenant

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

There is no doubt that some in the Cabinet 'get it' (even Housing Ministers before they learn that they need to tow party line to progress their career). However, don't under-estimate the naked class war that Osbourne and Cameron want to fight. They are pretty openly fighting for the 1% (which just about excludes the doctors and lawyers you mention as well as everyone else)

To be fair to the cabinet, whilst most of them are rich, they are not that rich. The odd few millionaires, but no Billionaires. Last year I earned more than prime minister, though perhaps don't have quite the samer benefit of family wealth. People on £20k (but in receipt of tax credits) will hate me saying this, but even earning £200k-300k in on year doesn't make you rich. Rich is probably having £10m plus in the bank, and rich beyond the dreams of avarice is probably having a Billion plus.

I think the London property market is now so ridiculously warped that even those with the odd few million are starting to notice.

[Executive Sadman]

To be fair to the cabinet, whilst most of them are rich, they are not that rich. The odd few millionaires, but no Billionaires. Last year I earned more than prime minister, though perhaps don't have quite the samer benefit of family wealth. People on £20k (but in receipt of tax credits) will hate me saying this, but even earning £200k-300k in on year doesn't make you rich. Rich is probably having £10m plus in the bank, and rich beyond the dreams of avarice is probably having a Billion plus.

I think the London property market is now so ridiculously warped that even those with the odd few million are starting to notice.

Richer than about 98% of earners.

Its rich by any typical measure.

Although its interesting that you say 'one year'

Im a firm believer tax allowances and rates for both income tax and capital gains should be accrued over a working lifetime.

I don't see why someone (lets say a mid level football player - im guessing here, no idea what they earn) who earn's £250-300k a year for ten years then nothing much else until retirement should be taxed far more than someone who earns £60k a year over 30 or 40 years and yet in aggregate they both have a similar pre-tax income.

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

Richer than about 98% of earners.

Its rich by any typical measure.

Although its interesting that you say 'one year'

Im a firm believer tax allowances and rates for both income tax and capital gains should be accrued over a working lifetime.

I don't see why someone (lets say a mid level football player - im guessing here, no idea what they earn) who earn's £250-300k a year for ten years then nothing much else until retirement should be taxed far more than someone who earns £60k a year over 30 or 40 years and yet in aggregate they both have a similar pre-tax income.

That's probably a contributor to why 50% of football player go bankrupt after retirement. They get used to the high life spending too much, pay a lot of tax and get fleeced by financial advisors.

My own game is sales, and most people are unhappy if they don't earn £100k, but each year a few earn £200-300k, but usually not the same people.

[slacker]

It's all rigged to stop post-boomer generations accumulating any wealth.

Which is why even high-earners (by historic measures) are bitching. The weight of tax is on income and there is very little on wealth itself.

So anyone who has accumulated wealth can live at relatively low expense (£1500 council tax etc.) even though their assets are in the millions.

Assets become ever more expensive to buy, whilst the after-tax income of most is going in the opposite direction.

It's a special club and you're not invited.