Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Millennials own just 3% of all Household Wealth!!!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 424
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

16 minutes ago, kzb said:

These things were outside democratic control.

I would argue they are a result of democratic control, its happens when you have one very large generation who dictates to other generations what they want.

Equality it will be Boomer children who go on to dictate policy when the vote is finally transferred away from boomers in 5-10 years time.

I would argue wealth transfer from the boomers to the then 40 somethings will be very popular, and any party putting that forward will win.

Just as those parties who were aiming for boomers won, the same will happen.

Remember when the tories were in control in the 90's housing crash? they were unelectable for 10 years. That was and currently still is the power of the boomer vote.

Have you been to planning meetings? its a sea of grey hairs holding up development, often bringing their grandchildren along (where as they supposed to live in the future?) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

Not telling people like @jiltedjen she's making it up would be progress

I had a feeling I've assumed Jen was female in the past and was wrong ?!

I don't want to be unsympathetic to people genuinely short-changed.  I do not want house prices to be high, why do you think I am on here?

So, if you want a group love-in be my guest and you are welcome to it.

But if you want to actually do something about it, what is that?  Confiscate boomer property?  Tax pensions more?  Would that make you feel better?

How do we make housing more affordable?  People on here say raise interest rates that will drive down prices.  Well it might, but it will also increase your mortgage payment and any other debts.  So you can't win with interest rates, there has to be another approach.  Maybe there are just too many very well-off individuals in London.  Someone mentioned above that their friend found out the London salary was 3X for the same job in Manchester.  How is that going on?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dugsbody said:

Yes, exactly!!!

But from there you have to understand further why this isn't a good thing. Our generations will still be paying off those houses for years longer than the boomer generation had to and we are just completely priced out of owning the same quality that boomers did at the same age.

I'm not sure that is necessarily true to be honest.  The affordability was based on 25 year mortgage terms so are quite comparable.  25 years is 25 years.

And you've just told us about your Gen X mates on £200k making £500k on HPI in London.  Am I meant to be sympathetic that you lost out because you opted not to buy at the same time as them?  Well guess what, neither did I and neither will I ever earn £200k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jiltedjen said:

I would argue they are a result of democratic control, its happens when you have one very large generation who dictates to other generations what they want

Nobody, except estate agents (of all ages), ever voted for high house prices.

Before you came along, the most pressing problem we faced was lack of jobs.  This was the problem of most concern from about 1977 till Tony Blair took over and started splurging money.  It's still a massive problem in southern Europe.

In the EU, the workers pay even more social security (NI) payments than we do, and a lot of that goes on much more generous state pensions.

Here we opted to have the infamous "flexible workforce" with lower taxes.  Basically it was seen as a choice between flexible jobs or no jobs at all.  And it worked, througout your adult life down south you have experienced only high employment.  But there has been a cost, the global corporations are in charge now.  Not boomers per se, but global corporations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, kzb said:

Someone mentioned above that their friend found out the London salary

That was me and we explained it due to London cost of living. Come on this is Inception level of convos about convos reference previous convos from like a day ago.

What to do - remove the props, bungs and wheezes to see where the market is actually at. Second home levy regional decision so Cornwall can hammer if like + cash to local council to help them pay for loss of having empty homes not contrib to economy.

Max 5x single earnings lending by bank or 3.5 joint in law as prudential measures.

Edited by Staffsknot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, kzb said:

I'm not sure that is necessarily true to be honest.  The affordability was based on 25 year mortgage terms so are quite comparable.  25 years is 25 years.

And you've just told us about your Gen X mates on £200k making £500k on HPI in London.  Am I meant to be sympathetic that you lost out because you opted not to buy at the same time as them?  Well guess what, neither did I and neither will I ever earn £200k.

Sigh.

You are incapable of understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, dugsbody said:

Sigh.

You are incapable of understanding.

I think I am all too good at that for your liking.

Life is hard.  It always has been for 90%+ of the population.

When I was a kid we thought we'd be holidaying on the moon, flying round the world on supersonic jets and have robots to do our chores.

Nuclear power was going to be to cheap to bother metering.

Well welcome to reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

That was me and we explained it due to London cost of living. Come on this is Inception level of convos about convos reference previous convos from like a day ago.

What to do - remove the props, bungs and wheezes to see where the market is actually at. Second home levy regional decision so Cornwall can hammer if like + cash to local council to help them pay for loss of having empty homes not contrib to economy.

Max 5x single earnings lending by bank or 3.5 joint in law as prudential measures.

Why not simply confiscate our house and pensions for yourselves?   Take it, so you can buy that £530k flat in London.  Me and the wife can live in some special state facility somewhere while you can get on with your great lives in London.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, kzb said:

I think I am all too good at that for your liking.

Life is hard.  It always has been for 90%+ of the population.

When I was a kid we thought we'd be holidaying on the moon, flying round the world on supersonic jets and have robots to do our chores.

Nuclear power was going to be to cheap to bother metering.

Well welcome to reality.

What do your childhood fantasies have to do with priced out generations? Oh yeah... nothing.

P.S. It's 'too', not 'to'. But I'll let that one slip as your generation left school at 15 to go down the mines and pay for those triple locks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, kzb said:

Why not simply confiscate our house and pensions for yourselves?   Take it, so you can buy that £530k flat in London.  Me and the wife can live in some special state facility somewhere while you can get on with your great lives in London.

My wife and I.

Sorry to correct you again, but I do have to start to question intellect after two such rudimentary back-to-back linguistic oversights. 

Edited by MonsieurCopperCrutch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kzb said:

I think I am all too good at that for your liking.

Life is hard.  It always has been for 90%+ of the population.

When I was a kid we thought we'd be holidaying on the moon, flying round the world on supersonic jets and have robots to do our chores.

Nuclear power was going to be to cheap to bother metering.

Well welcome to reality.

So somebody from the generation which reached 80% homeownership is here to tell us life is hard and unfair because he didn't get to fly to the moon and have a robot butler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dorkins said:

So somebody from the generation which reached 80% homeownership is here to tell us life is hard and unfair because he didn't get to fly to the moon and have a robot butler.

It’s all about expectations 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

That was me and we explained it due to London cost of living.

 

On this point.......living in London is not expensive if no rent or debt to pay.....CT banding is the lowest in the country, water rates also value for value..... don't need to run a car, food if purchased in the right places less and of better variety, public transport cheaper and abundant......plenty of people about to do small jobs around the home and an excess of secondhand goods for give away prices.......easy access to anything you want for less, apart from housing.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, kzb said:

So you can't win with interest rates,

perhaps not if you have already bought, but this site is full of people who have been hoping for a crash, in order to buy, who would then win big. I've given up on this as too much time has ticked by, but would now only borrow a small amount such that I can afford interest rates hikes. Of course this (a crash) could then effectively see much perhaps most of my savings wiped out. But I won't be paying 12k p/a rent for the rest of my life.

Edited by nickb1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, kzb said:

  Like I keep saying, no-one ever voted for high house prices, tuition fees, exporting jobs or doing away with DB pensions.  These things were outside democratic control.
 

I do not agree with the idea that house prices, tutition fees or DB pensions were outside democratic control.

If the UK government had built 500,000 social houses per year, then demand for OO houses would drop, and the BTL brigade would have been shafted.  The decision not to build was a political decision based on the belief that high house prices are a good idea.  Since many people regard their house as an investment, then maintenance of high house prices will be beneficial for the political party that keeps them high. Similarly, introduction of CGT on primary residence would dampen demand, as would a LVT.

Both tuition fees and the loss of DB pensions were political choices.  Other countries have very low or zero tuition fees.

We have been around the DB pensions debate already many times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, skinnylattej said:

I do not agree with the idea that house prices, tutition fees or DB pensions were outside democratic control.

since both major political parties have effectively collaborated on these things, plus NHS privatisation, I think there is something in the view that they have taken place outside of democratic control.

Corbyn might have made a difference but was not allowed to by MSM and TPTB. Now we have the ridiculous spectacle of Starmer and Mandie blaming their latest electoral debacle on Corbyn, under whom Hartlepool was retained twice and under whom there was stronger performance by labour  in council elections.

Edited by nickb1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, skinnylattej said:

I do not agree with the idea that house prices, tutition fees or DB pensions were outside democratic control.

If the UK government had built 500,000 social houses per year, then demand for OO houses would drop, and the BTL brigade would have been shafted.  The decision not to build was a political decision based on the belief that high house prices are a good idea.  Since many people regard their house as an investment, then maintenance of high house prices will be beneficial for the political party that keeps them high. Similarly, introduction of CGT on primary residence would dampen demand, as would a LVT.

Both tuition fees and the loss of DB pensions were political choices.  Other countries have very low or zero tuition fees.

We have been around the DB pensions debate already many times.

Not to mention:

- boomers spent all the North Sea oil and didn’t set up a state wealth fund

- had free education (while raising uni fees for their kids)

- cheap houses

- gold plated pensions

- punished the conversations for allowing the 90’s crash (proving boomers do vote for high house prices) 

- voted against building more houses

- threw us out of Europe on a bad deal

- now overwhelming the NHS which they never paid enough into

- overwhelming local councils as the infrastructure crumbles  

Edited by jiltedjen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, jiltedjen said:

Not to mention:

- boomers spent all the North Sea oil and didn’t set up a state wealth fund

- had free education (while raising uni fees for their kids)

- cheap houses

- gold plated pensions

- punished the conversations for allowing the 90’s crash (proving boomers do vote for high house prices) 

- voted against building more houses

- threw us out of Europe on a bad deal

- now overwhelming the NHS which they never paid enough into

- overwhelming local councils as the infrastructure crumbles  

And don't forget the most recent thing of shutting down the country to protect them from natures latest virus.  If and when this will get added to the list of boomer gripes I don't know...maybe it's too much to contemplate right now.

Despite the the fptp voting system it's amazing no one has capitalised on the boomer's impending political influence declining and fill the void.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kzb said:

Why not simply confiscate our house and pensions for yourselves?   Take it, so you can buy that £530k flat in London.  Me and the wife can live in some special state facility somewhere while you can get on with your great lives in London.

So mention removing props, which will drop house prices as is your stated aim back to affordible levels, and you chuck out a spurious argument of why don't we take your pension.

So here we are a boomer stated if your house falls in value its Game Over Man, Game Over! Hysterically like Private Hudson.

Ironically you may indeed in later life end up in a special facility - retirement care but that is based on need and most of it funded by social care funds not yourself unless law changes.

Nobody is confiscating your wealth - just removing artificial props which you seem masdively in favour of by this response - I believe we have achieved Buckaroo moment - you don't want anything to affect your house value.

@jiltedjen you said was in fantasy land for saying she'd had it hard and told her actual experience - you want the status quo of that to continue. A sh!t band and sh!t situation.

Edited by Staffsknot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, skinnylattej said:

I do not agree with the idea that house prices, tutition fees or DB pensions were outside democratic control.

If the UK government had built 500,000 social houses per year, then demand for OO houses would drop, and the BTL brigade would have been shafted.  The decision not to build was a political decision based on the belief that high house prices are a good idea.  Since many people regard their house as an investment, then maintenance of high house prices will be beneficial for the political party that keeps them high. Similarly, introduction of CGT on primary residence would dampen demand, as would a LVT.

Both tuition fees and the loss of DB pensions were political choices.  Other countries have very low or zero tuition fees.

We have been around the DB pensions debate already many times.

I think a lot of people don't care about others not being able to afford  decent housing@Si1would you agree?

And just feel happy that their house is worth more.

Edited by iamnumerate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nickb1 said:

perhaps not if you have already bought, but this site is full of people who have been hoping for a crash, in order to buy, who would then win big.

If the crash is to be caused by higher interest rates, I don't see why it would help.  It's swings and roundabouts, ending up with much the same monthly mortgage payment.

In fact you could argue (to those who seem more interested in the financial investment view of property) that low interest on high prices means you are buying your asset for less interest paid to a bank, so it's better that way round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GregBowman said:

It’s all about expectations 😉

Yes that's the point. 

I see myself as Generation Jones:

...the cohort as those born from 1954 to 1964 in the U.S. who came of age during the oil crisis, stagflation, and the Carter presidency, rather than during the 1960s, but slightly before Gen X.

Jonesers inherited an optimistic outlook as children in the 1960s, but were then confronted with a different reality as they came of age during the shift from a manufacturing to a service economy, which ushered in a long period of mass unemployment, and de-industrialization arrived full force in the mid-late 1970s and 1980s, leaving them with a certain unrequited "jonesing" quality for the more prosperous days of the past.

Key characteristics assigned to members are pessimism, distrust of government, and general cynicism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Jones

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jiltedjen said:

Not to mention:

 

boomers spent all the North Sea oil and didn’t set up a state wealth fund - we would of been 20-30 nowhere near decision making

- had free education (while raising uni fees for their kids) very few of us went to uni all education pre that is free 

- cheap houses cheaper

- gold plated pensions - the minority 

- punished the conversations for allowing the 90’s crash (proving boomers do vote for high house prices)  do you mean conservatives ? it was just the end of a cycle 

- voted against building more houses in some areas 

- threw us out of Europe on a bad deal its called democracy but the 25-44 vote was nearly 50/50

- now overwhelming the NHS which they never paid enough into - I have private healthcare and paid millions in tax through my company VAT etc

- overwhelming local councils as the infrastructure crumbles  don't know what your blathering on about I consume the basics street lighting, bin collections etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

So mention removing props, which will drop house prices as is your stated aim back to affordible levels, and you chuck out a spurious argument of why don't we take your pension.

So here we are a boomer stated if your house falls in value its Game Over Man, Game Over! Hysterically like Private Hudson.

Ironically you may indeed in later life end up in a special facility - retirement care but that is based on need and most of it funded by social care funds not yourself unless law changes.

Nobody is confiscating your wealth - just removing artificial props which you seem masdively in favour of by this response - I believe we have achieved Buckaroo moment - you don't want anything to affect your house value.

@jiltedjen you said was in fantasy land for saying she'd had it hard and told her actual experience - you want the status quo of that to continue. A sh!t band and sh!t situation.

A complete misrepresentation throughout I'm afraid.

My house value is of no interest to me.  It's an ex-council house worth maybe £130k if I spent thousands doing it up.  There is no prospect of us realising a significant cash sum from the property and neither would I want to.

As thing stand my old age care would be paid for by myself including signing the house over when it came to it.  Since property ownership is apparently 80% amongst boomers perhaps you should be pleased this burden will not fall on the taxpayer as much as it would have otherwise.

The conversation up until recently has not been about removing props for house prices.  It has been about boomers being too well off and why money should be transferred from them to Millennials.  The language has been full of hate speak which would not be tolerated against any other grouping in society.  Your views are based on untruths and misconceptions promulgated through your social bubble.

As for JJ, someone commented above has s/he had it that bad?  Seems s/he is a property owner now and isn't doing too bad actually.  You could go back in time and find no end of boomers in the 1980's who were in terrible situations.  Seen Boys from the Blackstuff?

 

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • 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.