Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Arpeggio

Dispatches: Britain's Wealth Gap | Monday 8pm

Recommended Posts

Switched that off when some ar@e said...the boomers didn't get a chance to go to uni so their opportunity's weren't as good as the milleniums.

 

Obviously written by a retard.

 

Cheap houses.

Real jobs

Jobs for life

Final salary pensions

State pensions

Massive hpi

Savings rates

Free healthcare

Free university's

Actual universitsitys' not pretend Poly's charging 9k a year.

No debt

Affordable cost of living

No wars

Antibiotics that work.

 

The ###t who made that statement should be ashamed of themselves

 

 

 

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

Switched that off when some ar@e said...the boomers didn't get a chance to go to uni so their opportunity's weren't as good as the milleniums.

 

Obviously written by a retard.

 

Cheap houses.

Real jobs

Jobs for life

Final salary pensions

State pensions

Massive hpi

Savings rates

Free healthcare

Free university's

Actual universitsitys' not pretend Poly's charging 9k a year.

No debt

Affordable cost of living

No wars

Antibiotics that work.

 

The ###t who made that statement should be ashamed of themselves

 

I agree with most of these points, but you're too biased.  Savings rates & HPI were driven by inflation - over 20% in the late 70's.

http://www.whatsthecost.com/historic.cpi.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about education (and, actually other 'relative' aspects) is that it doesn't actually matter, so long as you have the same relative level of education (or whatever).

So, if you were educated in the 1950s then to be in the top 20% or so you'd have gone to grammar school and got a few A levels.  Then you'd have got a job (at 18, remember) with suitable pay for the top 20%ish of the population.

These days to be in the top 20% you need to have had a university education and probably a masters to get that same job (now at 22, with a load of debt) with suitable pay for the top 20% of the population.

What you can't (shouldn't) do is say something like - when I was 18 in 1950 I knew people who went to university and they turned out to be megabucks rich - if only I had that opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dgul said:

The thing about education (and, actually other 'relative' aspects) is that it doesn't actually matter, so long as you have the same relative level of education (or whatever).

So, if you were educated in the 1950s then to be in the top 20% or so you'd have gone to grammar school and got a few A levels.  Then you'd have got a job (at 18, remember) with suitable pay for the top 20%ish of the population.

These days to be in the top 20% you need to have had a university education and probably a masters to get that same job (now at 22, with a load of debt) with suitable pay for the top 20% of the population.

What you can't (shouldn't) do is say something like - when I was 18 in 1950 I knew people who went to university and they turned out to be megabucks rich - if only I had that opportunity.

Its worth much more if you're in dent to get it.....

 

F###### criminals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect was the general passive acceptance, albeit sadly, that the next generation will be worse off than them. Without the belief/will, that your children's generations opportunities will be greater than your own a society stagnates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Just_Do_It said:

boomers ... since 1946!!!

They've only needed since 1999 to steal my childtens future.

 

Perhaps the 2007 collapse was planned in order for them to steal more supported by direct taxation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Just_Do_It said:

Sorry, disagree again - yes it's crazy since the turn of the century, but in my opinion due to QE.

House prices didn't exactly stay stagnant before 1999:

http://monevator.com/historical-uk-house-prices/

The main hpi has happened since 2002.

 

Its called a speculative mega bubble.

 

The previous 30 years were the ground work to give the greedy population the belief that you can't in fact loose with houses. Btl and leverage did not exist in any shape or fashion till the 90s.

The boomers ate puppets now they're making programs telling young people how lucky they are not to be them.

 

Do me favour...block me. So you don't read my next post....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

The main hpi has happened since 2002.

 

Its called a speculative mega bubble.

 

The previous 30 years were the ground work to give the greedy population the belief that you can't in fact loose with houses. Btl and leverage did not exist in any shape or fashion till the 90s.

The boomers ate puppets now they're making programs telling young people how lucky they are not to be them.

 

Do me favour...block me. So you don't read my next post....

 

What's your problem with me - we seem to agree on this!

 

I just acknowledge that everything ticked along okay until the late 90s!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dgul said:

The thing about education (and, actually other 'relative' aspects) is that it doesn't actually matter, so long as you have the same relative level of education (or whatever).

So, if you were educated in the 1950s then to be in the top 20% or so you'd have gone to grammar school and got a few A levels.  Then you'd have got a job (at 18, remember) with suitable pay for the top 20%ish of the population.

These days to be in the top 20% you need to have had a university education and probably a masters to get that same job (now at 22, with a load of debt) with suitable pay for the top 20% of the population.

What you can't (shouldn't) do is say something like - when I was 18 in 1950 I knew people who went to university and they turned out to be megabucks rich - if only I had that opportunity.

From memory in the 60's if you had 5 'O' levels you were in the top 20%; a couple of 'A' levels put you in the top 10% and a degree put you in the top 5% in terms of educational achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rate this at 7/10. It mentions many of the point we make, but fails to mention that the biggest recipients of the housing boom are banks and other finantial institutions.

 

One thing I despise is showin millenials as Social Justice Warriors with neon coloured hair lefties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Not mentioning the 1984 house planning permission building act (whatever the ****** its called)

-Not mentioning Nimby opposition new new homes

-Not mentionging BTL scourge and their estate agent spawn

-Not mentioning Savings rates in banks are near 0%

- Not menitioning we ******ed off our manufacturing industry to china

-Not mentioning the sell off of public housing

-Not mentioning increasing cost of going to uni, when uni jobs like it programmer being offshored to india

 

 

so on so on so on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the upshot, from a boomer's point of view - you can't afford children and youll never retire, but we've paid in all our lives and we can so wibble?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

Switched that off when some ar@e said...the boomers didn't get a chance to go to uni so their opportunity's weren't as good as the milleniums.

You have to remember that was in the days before the liberal left insisted education education education. Net result you need a degree for professions that previously were learnt on the job. 

In so many areas supposed advancements have had the exact opposite effect, the Big Bang was meant to free up finance for everyone instead it created financialization and only indebted all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

Switched that off when some ar@e said...the boomers didn't get a chance to go to uni so their opportunity's weren't as good as the milleniums.

 

Obviously written by a retard.

 

Cheap houses.

Real jobs

Jobs for life

Final salary pensions

State pensions

Massive hpi

Savings rates

Free healthcare

Free university's

Actual universitsitys' not pretend Poly's charging 9k a year.

No debt

Affordable cost of living

No wars

Antibiotics that work.

 

The ###t who made that statement should be ashamed of themselves

 

 

 

Who couldn't fail to agree with the above ? but what was conspicuously absent was the external landscape with two big drivers automation and globalisation that means even if we reset all the above I am not sure today's younger generations will be able to improve their life chances.

For every A*** of a boomer there are parents who are sacrificing their future to help their kids which doesn't play well. The caricatures are had it too good baby boomer on final salary pension and young person partying, protesting and buying gadgets. It is more complicated than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did they just scratch the surface or dig in deep to know the cause and how to address it?

With full consideration of the younger generation and renters(myself being one) should an average boomer be blamed or credited for the opportunities he/she had? Is it a case of being at the right place and right time? IOW pure luck?

Why are these opportunities not available to younger generation?

1. More people chasing less resources?

2. Globalisation? Export prosperity / Import poverty ?

3. Uncontrolled HPI, QE ?

4. State intervention/mismanagement?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blod said:

You have to remember that was in the days before the liberal left insisted education education education. Net result you need a degree for professions that previously were learnt on the job. 

In so many areas supposed advancements have had the exact opposite effect, the Big Bang was meant to free up finance for everyone instead it created financialization and only indebted all.

You probably don't need to get a degree to get into every profession, accountancy comes to mind. I think the university generation know the score, it is a three year rite of passage, it's not real debt (most will get written off by the taxpayer), it's 80% a waste of time from the education perspective and definitely a slegehammer to crack a nut. But it is our culture now, parents and children will not be denied that rite of passage and where the f%%k would the parasites of Oxford and Cambridge be without the country putting almost its entire youth orientated resources into the University system as opposed to building social housing like we used to. And indeed think of those poor Oxbridge folk that have just paid 500k for former slum housing  in sink Labour wards all predicated on the Government spunking resourses on education, education, education.

Edited by crashmonitor

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:   109 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.