The Old Get Richer As Under-34s Fall Behind

[Cogs]

I don't think it was trollish. In fact, I think it was educational to the youth of today.

As for the kids being "quite sophisticated these days", if that were the case why do they bleat so much about not having the money to purchase a property.

House price inflation. I thought you might have heard about it, its been in the press a lot the last few years.

[bugged bunny]

How on earth do you convert a 3 bed home into flats, they must be tiny. Round this way there used to be lovely big houses overlooking the forest but gradually they have all been replaced by flats, good, you might say, but the flats are all luxury ones in the £300k to £500k bracket. In all honesty everything that gets built round here are flats but they are not much cheaper and in a good many instances, dearer that the houses.

A lot of the houses being converted are Victorian or post-war semis and some are done quite well.

My flat is half of what was originally a large two-bed Edwardian house. It's only a 1-bed but the rooms are a good size, with high ceilings, and it has a garden and garage. It's bigger than a lot of 2-bed newbuilds, and has a separate kitchen from the living-room diner and two independent entrances. I do not regard it as tiny. It's easily big enough for one person. It was a lot cheaper than buying a 2-bed house.

Having fled the South East it feels like luxury compared with what I could afford there 6 years ago on a much higher salary working much longer hours.

Edited March 20, 2007 by bugged bunny

[Hope]

I agree, every reason why we should relax planning and build more, let's have a free market. Additionally if good housing is plentiful the pensioners and boomers won't have to worry about IHT, silly stamp duty bands or council tax tied to unrealistic values, aside from the social duty to provide the populace with the primary need for decent housing.

But this is what I don't understand, in a free market, who is going to build houses cheaper than the going rate, so they won't be any more affordable. If you're saying that the only reason they are dear is because of shortgage of supply then why would builders be building flats (round here anyway) that are practically the same price as houses and still selling them.

I wouldn't mind the governments free money with IT and Stamp duty quite so much if it was used to indeed build quality starter homes.

[MarkG]

But this is what I don't understand, in a free market, who is going to build houses cheaper than the going rate, so they won't be any more affordable.

The free market cost of land in the UK is a few thousand pounds an acre. The government-controlled cost of land in the UK is hundreds of thousands of pounds an acre, probably many millions in much of the country.

Building houses is cheap, buying land that the government will allow you to build those houses on is what costs the money. Eliminate planning permission and houses will better and cheaper, since anyone will be able to buy some land and pay a builder to build a decent house for them.

[bpw]

Here is what you are all up against! I've posted repeatedly about intergenerational wealth transfer and with little comment or response. Its real and its the cause of misery for millions of youngsters. I hold out no hope for you since pensioners behave like hogs on a farm. They eat first and exlude their young until they have gorged on enough to allow them to sit around all day doing nothing. The analogy by the way was given to me by a very smart american who is about to retire. He knows only to well you cant pit young against old since there is always the same winner. Who sets the rules and who benefits?

Face it there is no political will to offend poor old pensioners even when the Bank of England effectively calls time out for the pigs. You have one hope and one only and thats emigration. Leave them behind to pay for their own pensions, health care, bus passes and dental plans. You are paying taxes to provide todays pensioners with benefits you'll dream of when you come to retire.

I'd like to see where all this "wealth" is, that I am supposed to have. If I sell my house I have to buy another, so where does that make me wealthy as regards property? Many of the older gen. are wealthy only in the fact that they own their own home outright and many others do not. If the price of houses fell to 50K for a 3 bed detached they would still be better off in terms of ownership.

If you want to maintain an 'us and them' mentality - a strong human tendency according to Freud, who taught us ....some of us! - much about in-groups and out-groups, try casting the protagonists in the 'drama' correctly.

[laurejon]

Even if house prices dropped 50% the vast majority of teenagers have neither the inclination, nor the interest in commiting to a 25yr mortgage.

Lets all be honest here, the world has changed. The profile of the average teenager today is someone stacking shelves in Tesco's, with big ears and spots, and has difficulty in commiting to speaking a whole sentence let alone signing up for 25yrs on a mortgage agreement.

We should leave the property market in the safe hands of the baby boomers, and let the young people enjoy themselves with late night opening, and a relaxation of class A drugs. Their behaviour in renting, and their outlook on life adds to the rich diversity of this great nation, and their spending habits contribute vastly to the new economy.

[bpw]

Laurjon

do you have a curly tail? You should be careful since the next time a young nurse, or doctor sees you they may call for a vet!

Even if house prices dropped 50% the vast majority of teenagers have neither the inclination, nor the interest in commiting to a 25yr mortgage.

Lets all be honest here, the world has changed. The profile of the average teenager today is someone stacking shelves in Tesco's, with big ears and spots, and has difficulty in commiting to speaking a whole sentence let alone signing up for 25yrs on a mortgage agreement.

We should leave the property market in the safe hands of the baby boomers, and let the young people enjoy themselves with late night opening, and a relaxation of class A drugs. Their behaviour in renting, and their outlook on life adds to the rich diversity of this great nation, and their spending habits contribute vastly to the new economy.

[time]

I'll settle for the elder generation living in a house they use most of. Do you have spare bedrooms? A separate dining room? Do you use them? Do you have rooms you just don't use at all most of the year? How about downsizing to a house you use all of? Not asking you to sell at below market price; people moving to smaller houses would start the slide in the market so we can get a hold on it.

As a healthy 31 year old mortgage free tax advisor, I have a few years left before I reach 65, so this isnt really my fight yet, but I must lend support to the over 65 years olds on this one. I can only say if some young buck tried to route me from my house, i would see it burnt to the ground first.

It is this governments policies and estate agents who are responsible not the old timers. Ask yourself how many immigrants have come to Britain since 1997. Some say as many as 3- 5 million or so. Lets say they live as couples thats 2 million homes less than what we would have had. I am not a racist, but come on this open door immigration poolicy was bound to end in disaster one way or the other a little mix is great, but half of the eastern block is up north along with 1/3 of population of Iraq and god knows where in Africa are in London, what was the government thinking. It had to of been planned, because I cant sneak a few fags past customs coming back from holiday yet all these immigrants just magically appear - on a island.

Some say conspiracy, i call it a Labour Government, that couldnt run a tap.

Edited March 20, 2007 by time

[BuyingBear]

But this is what I don't understand, in a free market, who is going to build houses cheaper than the going rate, so they won't be any more affordable. If you're saying that the only reason they are dear is because of shortgage of supply then why would builders be building flats (round here anyway) that are practically the same price as houses and still selling them.

Because it's the only thing the local planners and government density targets allow them to build. Want a big new house with a nice drive and big garden? You won't find such a product delivered by the market because the planning regulations make it unlawful, it's like the government stipulating that every make of car should come with a 1 litre engine, and nothing more... oh, but you can still choose the colour.

Your comment about the 'luxury apartments' simply confirms my point, people get what they are given, supply is that dire that people will buy any old crap for silly amounts of money. If people could buy decent new housing for the same money this dross wouldn't sell or be constructed in the first place, not to mention the fact these apartments aren't build for living, they're investment boxes for BTL muppets that just happen to provide (cramped) accommodation as a secondary benefit to their main purpose of existence, capital gain.

Edited March 20, 2007 by BuyingBear

[bugged bunny]

Here is what you are all up against! I've posted repeatedly about intergenerational wealth transfer and with little comment or response. Its real and its the cause of misery for millions of youngsters. I hold out no hope for you since pensioners behave like hogs on a farm. They eat first and exlude their young until they have gorged on enough to allow them to sit around all day doing nothing. The analogy by the way was given to me by a very smart american who is about to retire. He knows only to well you cant pit young against old since there is always the same winner. Who sets the rules and who benefits?

Face it there is no political will to offend poor old pensioners even when the Bank of England effectively calls time out for the pigs. You have one hope and one only and thats emigration. Leave them behind to pay for their own pensions, health care, bus passes and dental plans. You are paying taxes to provide todays pensioners with benefits you'll dream of when you come to retire.

You're right. Intergenerational war will break out eventually if the inequalities are allowed to continue.

Regarding emigration - great idea, but aren't the boomers pretty much the same everywhere in the developed world?

[Hope]

The free market cost of land in the UK is a few thousand pounds an acre. The government-controlled cost of land in the UK is hundreds of thousands of pounds an acre, probably many millions in much of the country.

Building houses is cheap, buying land that the government will allow you to build those houses on is what costs the money. Eliminate planning permission and houses will better and cheaper, since anyone will be able to buy some land and pay a builder to build a decent house for them.

Ok, I think I see where you're coming from, land with planning permission has always been dearer than that without, is that what you mean by 'government-controlled cost of land' ? sorry if it is a daft question. I don't think you can ever do away with planning permission, relax it yes but do you really think that would make people sell land for less money, surely builders would then just buy up swathes of it to make even more profit.

[time]

Getting rid of planning permission is a great idea, until some idiot comes along and builds a extension blocking out sun from you just finished conservatory, then you tend think maybe planning aint so bad.

[MarkG]

surely builders would then just buy up swathes of it to make even more profit.

Where are they going to get the money to buy up all the land in the country?

Getting rid of planning permission is a great idea, until some idiot comes along and builds a extension blocking out sun from you just finished conservatory, then you tend think maybe planning aint so bad.

If you don't like it, then buy the land around your house so no-one else can do that. There's enough land in the UK for everyone to have an acre of their own... but thanks to the planning system we have to live in the world's most expensive crap houses instead.

[Hope]

Because it's the only thing the local planners and government density targets allow them to build. Want a big new house with a nice drive and big garden? You won't find such a product delivered by the market because the planning regulations make it unlawful, it's like the government stipulating that every make of car should come with a 1 litre engine, and nothing more... oh, but you can still choose the colour.

Your comment about the 'luxury apartments' simply confirms my point, people get what they are given, supply is that dire that people will buy any old crap for silly amounts of money. If people could buy decent new housing for the same money this dross wouldn't sell or be constructed in the first place, not to mention the fact these apartments aren't build for living, they're investment boxes for BTL muppets that just happen to provide (cramped) accommodation as a secondary benefit to their main purpose of existence, capital gain.

I'm still trying to understand it in the context of the argument of shortage of supply being the reason for HPI and forgive me, but the old brain is trying hard to keep up here. I am saying that round here people are paying £300 to £500k for luxury flats and maybe £220k ish for Barret type builds when there are 3 bed semis for sale at £250k ish, so they seem to choose them yes ? otherwise surely the houses would be 3 bed semis would be dearer. I can honestly say that I know of a new development half an hour away, still easily commutable to the city where you can buy a 3 bed house for £200k ish, so why buy a pokey one or two bed flat instead.

Also, out of interest, if a builder applies to build flats is it the builder or the council who decide whether they can be luxury ones or Barret type ones or is that just down to whoever buys the plot in the first place.

[time]

I'm still trying to understand it in the context of the argument of shortage of supply being the reason for HPI and forgive me, but the old brain is trying hard to keep up here. I am saying that round here people are paying £300 to £500k for luxury flats and maybe £220k ish for Barret type builds when there are 3 bed semis for sale at £250k ish, so they seem to choose them yes ? otherwise surely the houses would be 3 bed semis would be dearer. I can honestly say that I know of a new development half an hour away, still easily commutable to the city where you can buy a 3 bed house for £200k ish, so why buy a pokey one or two bed flat instead.

Also, out of interest, if a builder applies to build flats is it the builder or the council who decide whether they can be luxury ones or Barret type ones or is that just down to whoever buys the plot in the first place.

Shortage of supply for affordable housing.

[Hope]

Where are they going to get the money to buy up all the land in the country?

If you don't like it, then buy the land around your house so no-one else can do that. There's enough land in the UK for everyone to have an acre of their own... but thanks to the planning system we have to live in the world's most expensive crap houses instead.

Ahh, but surely that is just Nimbi ism (sorry, can't spell it) in another form, in other words, now I've got what I want I'm alright Jack and buggar you.

[laurejon]

I think it has been pointed out.

5 Million new arrivals under the watch of New Labour, what provisions have been made with regard to housing?.

None whatsoever, so I think it would be a good idea to point the finger at the culprits, New Labour, which is Gordon Brown and Tony Blair, not the immigrants who are only taking up the offer, or the elderly who had the foresight to build enough houses by voting for the right Party, during their younger years.

[rnicoll]

It's not about whether it's enough for me is it, it's about whether it's enough for you to get what you want. I'm guessing it probably isn't but hopefully if things turn around it will be.

If people occupying large houses all sold up to buy smaller ones, then surely the demand for this type of property would shoot up further, so I don't quite see how that would be a guarantee and why should anyone give up something they worked for just on a maybe because lets face it no one knows. If there wasn't the demand and cheap credit I doubt prices would have gone up so much in the first place and for those things there are alot more places to point the finger at than one generation with increased value in their homes. The government and banks have far more to answer for in the whole mess than people who have done no more than worked and bought a home, yes, the very thing you all want to do and if you could, you wouldn't expect people to hate you for it would you ?

Sorry, bad day, ranting less now; to be honest, I'm not too bothered by people having a home of their own.

What bothers me is the people who blindly deny that the housing market can come down. I hear again and again people just parrot "Oh, no, house prices don't ever go down", and it makes me want to grab them and go "But... they have! Did you miss the 80s???". They're blind optimism is part of what's holding prices so artificially high.

What really bothers me is people who just can't accept the reality facing my generation. I cannot afford a flat where I currently live. There are some delightful 2 car garages in my price ranges, but nothing with, say, indoor plumbing. So, I've been looking at moving (which recently all fell through, which is part of why I'm so ranty at the moment, but nevermind), but may have to commute here frequently.

So my parents suggest I should get a weekend place here.

Apparently, the concept of "No, there is nothing fit for human habitation that I can afford" just doesn't exist in their world view. Apparently, what I really mean is "I can't afford a nice 3 bedroom place in the good part of town", or somesuch.

But anyway, so I'm looking at moving, and I figure I've just about saved enough I can buy a one bedroom flat. I look around, and find a really nice one bedroom flat for £135,000-ish - expensive on my budget, but not unworkable, and I can pay the mortgage off by the time I'm 50, giving me 20 years (given how pension age is going up) to save for the next run on the ladder. I plan viewings, work out a mortgage, get recommendations on a solicitor, and proudly show my parents this flat I'm looking at, and what do they say?

"That's tiny!"

I nearly cried. Seriously. I mean, I've lived in tiny places with friends for the 6 years since I graduated, saved large parts of my income, had some incredible luck with pay rises, and am really pleased that I've found a one bedroom place I can call my own, and all I get is "But that's tiny!" About 6 hours later, my plans of moving crumbled underneath me (that was not a good week), so I'm now living in an attic conversion for 10% extra rent, from September.

And it's not just my parents. Other relatives, people I work with, I get similar feedback. People complain about only having two spare bedrooms, while I wish that between the three of us we could afford one. I've had to move around 15 times in 9 years as places we rented were sold out from under us to take advantage of rising house prices. Every time house prices are in the news, house price increases are treated like money falling from the sky, while even hints of drops are treated as if the sky is falling.

If my generation seems to have no willigness to save, it's because we have nothing to save for. Putting 35% of my net income aside each month means I can just about keep up with the housing market. It's depressing. That's more than my entire luxuries spending budget, saved each month, just to stay still, can you blame most people for just giving up and blowing the money on alcohol in an attempt to forget how much of a mess they're in?

Edit: Sorry, half of a converted attic.

Edited March 20, 2007 by rnicoll

[rnicoll]

One of the greatest pleasures elderly people have is visits from the children's families. Where are the Children and Grand Children going to stay at Christmas if Granny and Granddad have moved out into a shoebox?

If housing costs don't go down, what grandchildren? I can barely afford my own 10x10 room, what hope do I have of starting a family?

[MarkG]

If my generation seems to have no willigness to save, it's because we have nothing to save for. Putting 35% of my net income aside each month means I can just about keep up with the housing market.

Bingo.

Unfortunately the Boomers just don't get it. They bought affordable houses and then saw their mortgages destroyed by wage inflation anyway... they seem utterly unable to understand that life is very different for today's kids who have to pay insane amounts of money for a shitty flat and have no wage inflation to look forward to.

There are only two real reasons for a kid to save today: to have enough money to emigrate, or to be able to buy a house here after a crash. Saving to buy a house at bubble prices is crazy.

[laurejon]

Lets be honest, it has never been the case that a FTB'er can buy a house.

Everyone starts out in a studio flat, then the luxury of a seperate bedroom with a flushing close coupled lavatory, then a two bed mid terrace, then a detached.

However if I were you I would hang onto my deposit, houses are going to get cheaper, much much cheaper very soon.

What you would buy today for 135k, you could buy in 2010 for 40K!!!!.

The option you have, 90k of negative equity in 2010, or a large lump of cash in your back pocket and a real house.

[rnicoll]

However if I were you I would hang onto my deposit, houses are going to get cheaper, much much cheaper very soon.

What you would buy today for 135k, you could buy in 2010 for 40K!!!!.

The option you have, 90k of negative equity in 2010, or a large lump of cash in your back pocket and a real house.

I hope you're right. As it is, work is keeping me in an area I stand no chance of buying, for at least another year, probably two. On the other hand, if everything goes to plan it will be making it worth my while, to the tune of... well, enough to get me onto the housing ladder, anyway

[MRMX9]

Lets be honest, it has never been the case that a FTB'er can buy a house.

Everyone starts out in a studio flat, then the luxury of a seperate bedroom with a flushing close coupled lavatory, then a two bed mid terrace, then a detached.

However if I were you I would hang onto my deposit, houses are going to get cheaper, much much cheaper very soon.

What you would buy today for 135k, you could buy in 2010 for 40K!!!!.

The option you have, 90k of negative equity in 2010, or a large lump of cash in your back pocket and a real house.

My parents bought a 3 bed house - they were first time buyers! Of course they bought their house for £4,000 in 1969 and its now worth £300k

I earn two and a half times what my father did when he retired 5 years ago and all I can ever look forward to owning in London is a crappy one bed leasehold flat (which you will never really own due to the rip off service charges etc which you have no control over).

I am in a better position than most though as I can afford to rent privately - its young people with families in London I feel sorry for! No wonder kids are running riot on skunk and killing each other - whats the point of working hard anymore as it gets you nowhere!

[laurejon]

Bingo.

Unfortunately the Boomers just don't get it. They bought affordable houses and then saw their mortgages destroyed by wage inflation anyway... they seem utterly unable to understand that life is very different for today's kids who have to pay insane amounts of money for a shitty flat and have no wage inflation to look forward to.

There are only two real reasons for a kid to save today: to have enough money to emigrate, or to be able to buy a house here after a crash. Saving to buy a house at bubble prices is crazy.

Mark

The saying is you get the politics you deserve. New Labour were voted in by the young generation, in the beginning they applauded Blairs connections to Pop Stars, and the "New Way".

Unfortunately there is no such thing as a "New Way" things have to be earnt, with sweat blood and tears, that is how a nation becomes strong, and prosperous.

The boomers stood on the shoulders of giants, those giants not only fought two world wars, fell to protect other nations, but also rebuilt virtually overnight this country in terms of infrastructure, and the economy.

New Labours policies of living on debt, creating an education system that is inferior to that of the third world, all in the name of social justice is the real reasons behind our demise.

The boomers are the parents of the young, and I can assure you they despair as much, if not more as to where we are all heading. The boomers are constantly criticised for helping their children (Silver Spoon) yet the continue to do the best they can.

The answer is simple, get the politics we deserve, and to achieve that the young will have to engage in politics and they will have to get off their backsides and protest, and they will certainly have to cast their votes come election time.

We can no longer rely on the pink rinse leg bandaged on zimmer frames to give us the politics we deserve, we willl have to get out and do our duty come election time.

[REP013]

Can I just clarify something

Boomers, born 1951 - 1971 so the "youngest would be 35 / 36. I suspect these people, like myself, are not necessarily those that do not understand the challenges faced by todays FTB's. I say this especially, according to some statistics I recently read on here, because the average age of the FTB is now 34.

Get off the boomers cases!