Did they have it easier than us now?

My father readily admits that his generation had it way better than us now.

This is because it is true.

:)

people never used to go on foreigh holidays every year...

most households only had one car, one TV

everyone can afford top of the range entertainment devices these days

mostly beter off i'd say
 
people never used to go on foreigh holidays every year...

most households only had one car, one TV

everyone can afford top of the range entertainment devices these days

mostly beter off i'd say

Most households didn't have a car....and not everyone had a TV.
 
Good informative answers people, keep them coming! I find this very interesting.

The thing that strikes out the most for me is the house buying power (from a certain period, not back in the 50's, more late 70's, early 80's plus), the deposits required, the stretch on the mortgage and what you actually get for your money, relative to what you could get then, i.e, a 2-3 bed house, vs a 1-2 bed flat now.
 
Last edited:
You've totally missed the point. Are many baby boomers in massive debt on their houses? I doubt it. You're thinking of people in their mid 30s that bought houses in the peak. My parents (50+) split up over 10 years ago but are both mortgage-free or near enough. Houses were 3-4x your salary back then; it wasn't a ridiculous amount of debt to get into, it was a sensible amount. If you ask a baby-boomer how long they saved for their deposit it wasn't ~15yrs, it was a couple. What's insane now is that your average FTB on an average salary cannot buy an averagely priced home in their area. And when I say averagely-priced home, I of course mean a tiny box-esque 1-2 bed flat.

And the problem isn't just being able to buy a home. It's the ludicous rent that we pay too. How are you supposed to save for a 25% deposit when you pay 60% of your salary on your rent? :confused:

And has no-one thought what happens when we retire? Baby-boomers have awesome pensions, who here under 28yrs old has anything remotely resembling that? How are we supposed to pay thousands of pounds in rent every month when we're retired? It's not like our £40pw state pension will help will it? As it stands we're literally going to starve! :confused: I'd loev to know what percentage of our MPs are landlords..

To the OP, you should read 'The Pinch: How the Baby Boomers Took Their Children's Future' by David Willett's and 'Jilted Generation: How Britain Has Bankrupted Its Youth' by Ed Howker.

But they don't just talk about the housing market too, they talk about jobs (how jobs are hardly safe anymore) and the like. They touch on the social problems that this is causing. With people unable to find a steady job, and a home that is theirs; people are marrying later, having kids later (or not at all). Those parents that have had kids are both forced to work which leads to more issues. All this will cause even more problems in the future. They really are good reads.

Says it all (from Jilted Generation):
jilted_gen.jpg


As you can probably tell I do feel quite strongly about it, especially when it comes to the housing market. I'm not saying they didn't have tough times, but when it comes to a lot of things such as housing, jobs etc. we are pretty screwed.

You have fallen into the modern whining group of people.

When my folks bought their house they had nothing but the house, no carpets or even sofa and just the basics to get going - over the years they scrimped and saved and kitted out the house etc.

People these days expect to have all the trimmings and the house, they will not forgo one to fund the other. At the same stage of their married life as us my parents didn't have 2 cars, multiple computers, tv's and a lifestyle of spending for pleasure - they had a house and saved for the next thing they wanted in the house.

The mortgage may have been less in scale to earnings but the interest was more and they had vastly higher unemployment and lower wages with less choice or mobility - jobs were safe as there was less choice and people didn't have the mobility to move for work so people stayed put in the job they were given from school.

We have a far higher standard of living, more choice, more mobility and no real difference in in access to housing when it actually comes down to it.
 
You have fallen into the modern whining group of people.

When my folks bought their house they had nothing but the house, no carpets or even sofa and just the basics to get going - over the years they scrimped and saved and kitted out the house etc.

People these days expect to have all the trimmings and the house, they will not forgo one to fund the other. At the same stage of their married life as us my parents didn't have 2 cars, multiple computers, tv's and a lifestyle of spending for pleasure - they had a house and saved for the next thing they wanted in the house.

The mortgage may have been less in scale to earnings but the interest was more and they had vastly higher unemployment and lower wages with less choice or mobility - jobs were safe as there was less choice and people didn't have the mobility to move for work so people stayed put in the job they were given from school.

We have a far higher standard of living, more choice, more mobility and no real difference in in access to housing when it actually comes down to it.

My parents also stated the same, that they had very little and had to save up for things to put in their house. But in todays climate, what percentage of people deck out their house based on easy credit (credit cards and the like) to buy fridges, tables, chairs, curtains, blinds, pots and pans, cookers.., etc and how many have the cash kicking around to do it debt-free?

Isn't credit a stark difference from then and now, but it appears today that a lot of people have a lot more things, but only some of them acquired said things with capital, rather than credit.

So therefore, today, many people will be paying back a large amount of additional debt (on top of a mortgage) for things like student loans, items acquired for emergencies (car break downs, etc), plus irresponsible spending based on a "I want it now" concept that is around today, which wasn't around previously as credit was so hard to get.
 
Last edited:
Born in Nigeria in 1958 but came back to England in 1960.

The house cost my Mum & Dad £200 and he was on about £4/week so that was cheap.
No hot water and we had an outside toilet but we always had a tin bath on a Sunday evening in front of the coal fire.
No telephone until about 1974 and my Dad didn't have a car until about 1968.
My Dad always played in Club bands so we were usually there on a weekend for entertainment.
We did have a TV but the only show I remember was Sunday Night at the London Palladium.
We only had 2 TV stations.
I only remember going to the pictures once with my Mum but I did go to a Saturday morning matinee for 3 old pence.


My first house in 1980 cost £6000 and I sold it 4 years later for £8500.
Our next house in 1984 cost £14,000 and I thought it was going to break us.
 
The houses being better back then thing is rubbish. I did some maths on this last time somebody said this and I think it worked out that in the 1980's an average preson buying an average house with an average job would be paying a far higher percentage of take home pay in mortgage payments than the same thing now.

I'll try and dig the post out.

Edit: Here it is

No but they would have been much better off.
Average wage back then, even not long ago was
£7,975
And the house price was
£35k
So around 4 times the average salary, look it now with salary of £25k and house prices of £190k that's 7 times the salary.

Ok, lets take your figures and run with them and see if this is really true. We'll assume your salary/house price figures are accurate.

We'll assume a 20% deposit in each case.

2012: £152k 35 year mortgage at 3.5% (3% above base rate)

£628 a month. So, just over 25% of pre-tax salary in 2012.

Lets go back to 1982 where the base rate was 13%.

1982: £38k 35 year mortgage at 16.5% (3% above base rate)

£386 a month. But the average pretax salary per month by your figures is only £666 a month! So the mortgage repayments take up HALF the pre-tax salary of the person in 1982 despite the house costing much less as a factor of the persons wage.

You think thats better off?
 
I guess being born in 1953, I am classed as a baby boomer. I have noticed a load of siht being uttered when talking about this group, how we had it so easy blah, blah, blah.

Was it harder ..... yes, most definitely.

The country was still recovering from the war, food rationing was partly still in force when I was born. Emergency housing was thrown up so the quality was very poor. I remember as a child, in one of the new houses, during the winter, icicles formed on the inside of the windows. My parents were glad to get this house as the rooms they were forced to rent beforehand had no running water. Heating was coal and when it was really windy the smoke was pushed back down into the room.

Cost of food ....... You have to remember this was before factory farming which led to lower costs of food, so food was expensive compared to wages. Wages were poor .... post war...this continues until the late 60's really. Unless you lived in a large town you usually had one source of food supply and you had to pay whatever price they charged. Food variety was very poor. Early on, you could not get the stuff taken for granted today and later
when it did arrive you could not afford it. Fish and chips was a pricey item. It gives you some idea. Diseases from poor nutrition existed.

Owning homes was a lifetime ambition, literally, it took you all your working life. The way mortgages were calculated was the old method, done once a year, they worked out your yearly interest on the loan then took off all your payments from that interest. I think it was the 80's before they started to change it to monthly calculation and when computers became more widespread they use today's method. Most people could not afford to even consider owning a home. Furniture, before a lot of manmade fabrics (80's) was expensive. Ditto clothes. Wearing hand downs was common. No washing machines or fridges.

Owning a car? When I grew up the only people I knew who had a car were salesmen. Well newish cars anyway. Others were falling apart and held together by various means. Transport was almost universally by bus ... cold rattley, smelly and noisy. Holidays before mass cheap air transport was, in my case by bus ... day outings to the countryside or by bus to the local coast.

Education ...... A lot of rote learning. Exams were graded .. only a certain percentage got 'A', 'B' or 'C' grades so if you had an exam that year you could do well but end up with a 'C'. Universities were elitist and with the grade limitations getting on a course was hard if you did not come from the feeder grammer schools. If you were not from at least the middle class the system worked against you. I managed to get an offer in 1971, the first from my whole family to do so but the expectation was to go into a factory or learn a trade. I went to University, got a full grant due to a very supportive person at the University writing to the official Board. You could not live off a full grant anyway due to the high cost of books but it helped a great deal. I got my degree and started a better life. Promotion was usually dead men's shoes. Lots of areas were closed shops(I don't mean industrial but professional careers)

Entertainment was the pub, the cinema or the local dance hall. We actually had a television when I was young. It was still a rarity, the picture was ghostly and signals in our area were poor.

The people from my generation built this country up from the post war scarcity and helped the country to get back on it's feet so when we are now approaching or retired you can maybe, if you are honest, see why we say we deserve a decent pension.

Today's generation do have it easier. Daily living is not such a grind to exist. The cheaper cost and variety of food today means you are healthier or should be. A lot of older people being fat is often due to over_indulging in things they has no chance to get when younger. Chances to go to University and give yourself a chance in life are easy. Lots of things to entertain you. Cheap Japanese or now far Eastern electrics have transformed your life. As for being in some kind of power .. for most some leisure after the dailly grind was all you wanted.

Hope this helps:)

Great post, thankyou. I am a little younger than yourself but I see a difference between the way I think and 16-25 year olds now. No patience for anything.
When I was a kid we would go out for a day come home then the following day someone would ring up and say "oh we wanted to speak to you yesterday its quite important".
Now the "kids" will ring a phone 20-30 times repeatedly over and over until they get through, when you answer its "im hungry when are you getting home". When you get home you find they have eaten 6 packets of crisps, a packet of biscuits and all the ham out of the fridge, despite having a proper dinner at lunchtime 4 hours before. Its all now now now, i want i want i want now ;)
 
Great post, thankyou. I am a little younger than yourself but I see a difference between the way I think and 16-25 year olds now. No patience for anything.
When I was a kid we would go out for a day come home then the following day someone would ring up and say "oh we wanted to speak to you yesterday its quite important".
Now the "kids" will ring a phone 20-30 times repeatedly over and over until they get through, when you answer its "im hungry when are you getting home". When you get home you find they have eaten 6 packets of crisps, a packet of biscuits and all the ham out of the fridge, despite having a proper dinner at lunchtime 4 hours before. Its all now now now, i want i want i want now ;)

Lots of things I forgot because it is a wide area. Phones? Most people did not have phones in houses .. the local corner red box was the phone. I mentioned holidays but forgot to say that my father did not get holiday pay for years. You got holidays but no holiday pay so if you did not save or could not you had to work during holidays or starve. My mother, a nusing assistant, was sacked when she got married. It was common because it was assumed the wife had to be a home-maker and would have a child within the first or second year. Take out the female work force today and then calculate the unemployed. Different situation.

As we had no money growing up I still find it hard to spend. My nephew will say why don't you get yourself a new whatever and I will say that what I have will do the job or is still fine. You would save for something you really wanted. I am shocked by people going on holidays, for example, and paying off the cost and charges later. My generation saved for it and if you did not have the cash then there is always next year or do something cheaper.

My nephew would not go to school until my brother bought him a certain type of expensive trousers. wtf

The school I work in has kids who want the school transport to take them to the corner shop!!

The decade of cheap credit has led, as you say, to a generation of youngsters who want everything now. Having to save and wait for something meant you valued it more, something lost from the instant gratification generation.
 
I was born in 1952 so was 18 in 1970. My first proper job was at Lloyds bank were I earned £48 per month and paid a bit of rent and ran a motorcycle to get to work and back.

In 1974 I started working on construction sites as a junior engineer whilst training and for the first time took home over £100 per month but paid for digs and occasional trips home. I had moved from Hampshire to Lancashire meantime.

I had had one foreign holiday to Lloret de mar in 1971 and that would last me until I worked near Alicante in 1979 for a few months.

We bought our first house in 1982 which was a terrace in Lancashire and it cost £13700, my salary at the time was about £4000 gross and interest rates fluctuated between 8% and 12%. For about six months we lived in one room which was furnished as we could not afford to do it up.

I had owned a number of cars in the 1970's with bangernomics working well. I stopped using a car to save money. We did not use credit except for the mortgage and if we could not afford to buy for cash, we did not get it.
 
[TW]Fox;22213649 said:
The houses being better back then thing is rubbish. I did some maths on this last time somebody said this and I think it worked out that in the 1980's an average preson buying an average house with an average job would be paying a far higher percentage of take home pay in mortgage payments than the same thing now.

Mrs Dimple says no.

Back in 84 my wages were around £4000/year and our house cost £14,000.
Our house now costs £140,000 (10x more) but my wages have increased 5x.
During the late 80s house prices suddenly rocketed and it seems that only the last few years it has stabilised a bit.
 
Mrs Dimple says no.

Right but..

Back in 84 my wages were around £4000/year and our house cost £14,000.

Ok so assuming a 20% deposit and a mortgage of £11200 over 30 years but at 15% APR you'd have paid £142 a month on a pretax salary of £333 a month. So, your mortgage would have represented 40% or so of your takehome pay.

Our house now costs £140,000 (10x more) but my wages have increased 5x.

Right, so 5x 4000 is £20k. Same maths on the house, 20% deposit and a 30 year mortgage would be 112,000. At 4% that would be £539, which is less than a third of the pretax monthly salary you quoted.

Therefore in the 80's even using your figures, your mortgage would have taken up a greater percentage of your income than it would today (assuming the same position in your ownership cycle at each point)

So not sure why Mrs Dimple says no :p
 
Great post, thankyou. I am a little younger than yourself but I see a difference between the way I think and 16-25 year olds now. No patience for anything.
When I was a kid we would go out for a day come home then the following day someone would ring up and say "oh we wanted to speak to you yesterday its quite important".
Now the "kids" will ring a phone 20-30 times repeatedly over and over until they get through, when you answer its "im hungry when are you getting home". When you get home you find they have eaten 6 packets of crisps, a packet of biscuits and all the ham out of the fridge, despite having a proper dinner at lunchtime 4 hours before. Its all now now now, i want i want i want now ;)

Sorry but the older generation can be like this too.

The younger people didn't cause this mess but they don't help themselves either. I am 27.
 
Mrs Dimple said our mortgage never went above £90/month which was a lot in 1984 but peanuts in the 00's.

Which is my point - it's false to say people 'had it easier' in the 80's. I wasn't there but it seems to be the latest 'in-thing' to whinge and moan about how the 80's was a utopia of awesomeness but I really do think we need to have a little more respect for what it was like for most people 30 years ago.
 
I'm not going to get into the maths of it but I thought it was a given that houses are far more expensive now than they were back in the 70s-80s. Even in relative terms and allowing for inflation etc. I'll try to track down some links, if not I'll find the appropriate section in one of those two books as they certainly covered it in detail. Anyway, the mere fact that the average age of FTBs is 37yrs old says it all really. If nothing changes soon then we'll get to the point of having a whole generation of people locked out of owning their own home (how do you get a 25yr mortgage when you're 50?) and forced to rent. Let's not forget that with interest rates so low everyone who saves is technically still losing money due to inflation too..

This is quite relevant to this thread:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jun/25/economic-gap-young-old-worse

Housing was highlighted as a significant issue for young people by the thinktank, which produced an index measuring intergenerational inequality, incorporating nine measures such as youth unemployment, pension deficits, and affordability of housing against average young people's salary. Though the index primarily tracks economic measures, political participation and representation is also incorporated into the overall measure.

The cost of housing relative to the salary of those in their 20s has risen from six times annual salary in 2000 to 10 times larger by 2010, while the number of new homes built in the UK – which could relieve pressure on house prices and rent by alleviating demand – has also fallen sharply.

Youth unemployment versus overall joblessness was another key factor highlighted in the study: in 1990, young people were 50% more likely to be unemployed than the typical adult. By 2010, they were two-and-a-half times more likely to be jobless.

In the foreword to the report, Prof Laurence Kotlikoff of Boston university warned that the effects of policies on young people are tantamount to "fiscal child abuse". "Developed economies have not only engaged in fiscal child abuse and left their children with severely damaged economies, they have also practised educational, health, and environmental child abuse. In combination, these policies are putting an end to every parent's most fervent dream – leaving his or her children better off …

"As the Intergenerational Foundation's vitally important Intergenerational Index makes vividly clear, the UK is failing miserably on each of these counts."

I think it's clear that this isn't in young people's heads, there are some serious inter-generational issues/politicies that need sorting out. You can put it down to whining but this is politics, this is how things get even'd out in the long run and it's up to the kids of baby-boomers to get a slice of the pie. If we sit back and do nothing we'll be screwed.

No one will argue that there were tough times in the 70-80s but can't a lot of that be put down to changes in technology anyway? Won't we look back to the 00s with disgust and say 'I can't believe we didn't have so and so' etc?
 
[TW]Fox;22215166 said:
Which is my point - it's false to say people 'had it easier' in the 80's. I wasn't there but it seems to be the latest 'in-thing' to whinge and moan about how the 80's was a utopia of awesomeness but I really do think we need to have a little more respect for what it was like for most people 30 years ago.

I talk with (and, more importantly, listen to) a fair few people who are very old, some into their 90s. I've been doing that for many years. I like learning about the past and getting first person perspectives is particularly interesting. I also have some interest in late medieval English history and ancient Roman and Greek history, so I've read a lot.

(As an aside, thanks to my Latin teacher for starting me on that - he was a brilliant teacher who made Latin interesting by teaching it in the context of the culture it was used in, when it was a living, everyday language).

Something I've noticed over and over again is the same sort of cross-generational comments. Things were better in the past, the previous generation are narrow-minded fools who screwed everything up, the next generation are selfish fools who are wasting everything we worked hard to give them...etc. One of the things most often said by multiple generations is that things were better in the past. It's not usually true. It's only true as a society approaches collapse. Usually, it's a result of selective memory, nostalgia, wishful thinking and taking things for granted because they've become normal.

My mother, for example, looks back fondly to the 1950s. She overlooks the infant mortality, the fatal levels of pollution(*), the scarcity of opportunities, the limited education unless you could afford the fees, the working conditions (50 hours a week in a job that might kill you was normal for men in those days), the limited choice of food, the outside toilets, the lack of central heating, the lack of running hot water, the limited medicine (when was the last time you heard of anyone dying of, for example, rheumatic fever?), etc, etc.





* No joke. Many people died directly from the toxicity of the air pollution and nobody knows how many more died later from diseases caused by it. For example:

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/education/teens/case-studies/great-smog
 
On the house front - you wonder how much of an impact on being able to afford a house is caused by people spending money on other things e.g. the latest gadgets, the new car every couple of years, the 3 holidays a year.

Perhaps if the complainers wound back their spending on pish, they would be better able to afford a house?
 
[TW]Fox;22213649 said:
The houses being better back then thing is rubbish. I did some maths on this last time somebody said this and I think it worked out that in the 1980's an average preson buying an average house with an average job would be paying a far higher percentage of take home pay in mortgage payments than the same thing now.

I'll try and dig the post out.

Edit: Here it is



Ok, lets take your figures and run with them and see if this is really true. We'll assume your salary/house price figures are accurate.

We'll assume a 20% deposit in each case.

2012: £152k 35 year mortgage at 3.5% (3% above base rate)

£628 a month. So, just over 25% of pre-tax salary in 2012.

Lets go back to 1982 where the base rate was 13%.

1982: £38k 35 year mortgage at 16.5% (3% above base rate)

£386 a month. But the average pretax salary per month by your figures is only £666 a month! So the mortgage repayments take up HALF the pre-tax salary of the person in 1982 despite the house costing much less as a factor of the persons wage.

You think thats better off?

I did a similar calculation a while ago and came to the same conclusion.
One thing that you fail to account for is the fact that wage inflation was much higher back then though.
So, while the initial payments at the time the mortgage is taken out may be higher, the longer term amount over several years is less that what we pay now.

The lower (wage) inflation environment means people are encumbered by their mortgages for a longer period these days.
 
Back
Top Bottom