To be perfectly honest, you need to drop the 'sense of entitlement' argument. That may be true for some people (council tenants for example..) but using that as a catch-all argument is wrong and quite patronising. It's starting to wind me up.
I agree, not everyone is filled with this entitlement, but many are and wrongly so in my opinion. Saying they had free higher education is all well and good until you consider the numbers attending university then compared to now. Interesting, don't you think, that even though the cost of higher education is at an all time high, more people than ever are going to university. Regarding final salary pensions, they are similar to the 100% mortgage situation we have seen. IE not sustainable and in need of reform. By your logic, should we also be advocating 100% mortgages and 10x salary mortgages just because people 10 years ago were getting them? No of course not - the financial landscape has changed, just like it changed for people from the 80's into the 90's and into the 00's. Giving people what previous generations had just because you feel it would be fairer seems to be the crux of your argument. We could do that and carry on being irresponsible, but eventually it catches up and you get a boom or bust economy.
The reason people such as myself are on here moaning is not because we're not doing anything about our personal circumstances, but because this is a forum where we're free to whinge and moan about the way the cookie has crumbled.
I never said otherwise. Does not change the truth though.
And you know what? We've got a point. I could spit all sorts of links out proving there is a massive housing issue
Again I have said all along there is a problem with housing.
our parents had it easier, we'll never be as rich as them etc. until the cows come home.
I doubt they did, not really. 8-10% interest rates as standard (as high as 16% for a period in the early 80's) + tripling of house prices in 10 years + high unemployment. They had just as many challenges, arguably more. I wouldn't want to be living in the 80's to be honest. But people back then had a healthier respect for money. Credit was not freely available and you had to save for the things you want, not simply sign a credit form and have it delivered. The mindset today towards money is terrible in comparison.
But to say that we are exaggerating the issue is just ridiculous. Like I said pages and pages ago, I wouldn't buy a Nissan Micra for £100k if I could afford it, because it's not good value for money. Neither is £500k for a 2 bedroom flat in zone 3. That my friend is what you call 'market value'.
Depends on how you look at it. If it is worth £600k after a few years it would be worth it.
It works the other way you know. If people refuse to buy a 2 bedroom flat at £500k, what happens? The price goes down.
Or, which is more likely, someone else will buy it. Chances are, with London, that person will see a healthy increase in property value within a few years. Actually, that is true for property in many places for that matter. So saying it is not value for money seems a little short sighted.
To say we are somehow not helping the cause by doing so is just hilarious.
Never said you were not helping 'the cause' only some people are disingenuous with their "I can't afford to buy" statements. It is not that they can't, merely that they won't. Look at that situation on a national scale and clearly it makes the problem seem worse than it actually is because all the statistics see is "people not buying" not "people not buying by choice". As I have said, it is pretty bad anyway and needs attention, but more people could be buying than are doing. Some in here could buy tomorrow if they wanted. So answer me honestly, hand on heart -Could you?
The reasons tend to be property in the area they want to live is too expensive, or they feel it is not value for money. Or they don't want to leave the area they are renting in or have lived in for a long time. Back in the 70's I could understand such reticence. But with todays communication networks, relatively good transport links, cheap finance (for things such as cars) - getting from A-B is not really difficult. How many people live and work in London, for example, compared to how many commute in? I would go about an hour or or so out of town and see what was on offer. For example, £300k would get you a nice 3 bed semi in Sevenoaks which is a very nice part of the world. Good rail and transport links too. Cheaper than a 2 bed flat in the city but it is an hour or so out of town. For me that would be the way forwards but then I am used to commuting and don't expect to roll out of bed and into my work place.
And you know what? We are entitled. Entitled to complain about the situation we're in.
Every generation faces challenges. Housing prices is ours. But the truth is as a nation we have better employment rates, better wages, better sandards of living, better working rights, better working conditions, better education, better prospects, better mobility, better infrastructure. Pretty much better everything else than what my parents generation had. Can you seriously say it is not so?
Paying so much on rent for an insecure tenure, paying off someone else's mortgage whilst they take advantage of a corrupt market.
Corrupt how? You are welcome to buy any property you like and rent it out as long as you can afford it. In that regard it pretty much resembles any other type of market. There are plenty of properties out there to buy and plenty of them are affordable, but it seems they are beneath some people. Some people want to live in a highly sought after area in a 4 bed house that only costs £200k because that would be more in line with the kind of house their parents had/have. Really, this whole "its not fair because previous generations had it...." is getting a bit tired not to mention very self absorbed. Previous generations also had lower wages, poorer health, more occupational related deaths, worse working rights and environments (particularly after Maggie smashed the unions), less technology, less social mobility, less opportunities - the list goes on but never gets mentioned eh?
Not having anything remotely resembling a decent pension.
I don't either. But I have a plan and I am working towards goals to try and ensure I retire with a credible pension. Do you have a plan?
Not being able to redecorate. Not having anywhere make your own home. Not thinking about settling into a community because you could be handed your notice at any time.
Can't redecorate, or won't? As I have said, there are plenty of places you could be making your own home but from what you have said, you don't want to? That seems to be your choice and not a lot to do with actual (in the literal sense) affordability?
Seeing council tenants that have already paid under market rates for their whole life get massive discounts on nonsensical Right-to-Buy.
They have also (usually) been living on under going rate wages too. So I guess it is all relative no? Also don't forget that council tenants generally don't have any choice on where they are placed. It's luck of the draw, the way the cookie crumbles and all that.
Having already worked incredibly hard in a career, only to have know-it-alls constantly tell you that you haven't done enough.
By the sound of it you have done plenty. But you feel like you are entitled to better. So hold out for better, it is your prerogative. I suspect that not much will change in your lifetime, but never say never!
You know what? All these things are worth complaining about and absolutely will continue to. You complain hard enough and things will change. It's only a matter of time.
Hmmm, OK well for your sake I hope you are right and, as above, it is your prerogative to hold out for them.
Down here, the biggest NIMBY's are the council themselves. They have rejected countless applications for new housing, to the point where central government has had to step in and force it on them.
Yes, it can be very political. They are trying to secure votes for themselves afterall!
But therein lies another problem. Traffic and infrastructure. With the new housing to be built by 2030, our city (Truro) will almost double in size (7000 new houses). Truro is not like a spiderweb, it is more like a line (the main road) with housing on either side. The traffic is already close to standstill, and proposed new roads to partly bypass the city have been scrapped, citing lack of money to build them. The developers rejected the idea that they should help finance any new roads (got to love developers, eh?)
The latest commissioned report stated that no new roads would be needed at all, which everybody knows is completely wrong. The previous report they commissioned stated that existing roads would not be able to cope - so their solution was to commission another report. They liked the findings of the 2nd report better (it said more traffic lights would solve everything)
Again, I agree. Same with the proposed developments in our town. Nobody seems to want to pay for the required infrastructure (or even aknowledge it is needed). I have my reservations, but I have seen other towns in the county that have received some healthy investment due to new housing. I believe the TV programs call them 'up and coming' areas
So here we're damned if we do, damned if we don't. We certainly need the housing, there's no doubt. And I won't oppose it at all. But the way it's being built with no thought to how all these extra cars will impact the area is a serious concern. It will soon take over an hour to drive from one end of Truro to the other, and the distance is only about 6 miles.
Indeed, and it isn't just roads. Schools, doctors, hospitals, local services in general will be under incredible strain. It isn't simply a case of building new houses on any patch of free land. I think developers need to start taking their portion of the responsibility for it. If they want to reap the benefits of the profit they are looking to make they are going to have to at least part fund some of the other work that will be needed.
We could re-nationalise home building, although given government propensity to waste money I am not convinced that is a great course of action!
) has increased in value by £80,000 in two years...