The younger generation.

As a parent I think you're doing well to get your offspring on the ladder asap. Sod this whole concept of making this generation feel like they deserve things handed to them and they should be made to work for what they get. If you can afford to assist them in this life by helping them on to the ladder earlier then as a good parent you're probably going to do that. A good parent is also going to teach them properly that they will develop the morals and appreciation for what you have done for them. Simply put, if they take your efforts for granted then it's your fault.
 
balky12 said:
Not that I don't believe you, I wasn't around then. But £4 a week? And you needed £1900 for a deposit? It would take you almost 10 years to save if you put everything away??
Click to expand...

I was in a very similar position so I absolutely believe him.

You know the saying the truth is out there? Well for anyone who watched part 2 of the Super Rich and Us tonight will now probably understand how we arrived in the position we find ourselves in today. We have all been stuffed by the 1%
 
The example Faustus gave though is mind boggling. He says his first house was £7,500 and he was on £4 a week and needed 25% deposit so £1900. So saving everything he had would take him 10 years to get the deposit. His house compared to his annual salary 7500/208 is 36 times his annual salary.

That's like someone today on £25,000 buying there first house for a million...
 
platypus said:
I didn't deny that mortgage rates have never been cheaper. Conversely however, mortgages have never been more expensive, harder to obtain, nor have house prices ever been this expensive.
Click to expand...

I'd question the first point on that paragraph with regards to mortgages never having been harder to obtain. The MMR has certainly made mortgages more difficult compared to say 2008 levels, when the money supply was in full flow.

However, mortgages 30 or 40 years ago were far more difficult to obtain. There was a far smaller mortgage market then, and it was limited mostly to just regional building societies - the concept of a nationwide (excuse the pun) building society didn't really exist. That meant you had local lending for local properties, and generally the market was well understood. But, the amounts that they would lend were far more conservative than today, and it was not at all uncommon that a working wife's salary would not be taken into account, and almost definitely not if you were not married.

Not only were the borrowing ratios lower but in many cases you had to save your deposit with your future lender in order to demonstrate that you had financial discipline. There was little ability to take the deposit and shop around - that didn't really start until the 1980s.

I don't doubt the comment that house prices are more expensive now though. Although money supply and amount able to be borrowed has increased it has not kept pace with the rise in house prices. Not really surprising, when the increased money supply stoked demand and is pretty much solely responsible for the steep rise in the first place.
 
No, it's just nonsense. He listed a set of facts earlier which I and other people debunked, and then he's ignored it and added more nonsense.

Him and Billies Bangers also been consistently ignoring the facts that people have presented and instead just sticking to their narrative. I don't think there's much sense in arguing with them anymore.

If you read through their posts, I'm clearly entitled, my posts reek of entitlement, I'm poor, I don't want other people to have things I don't have, I don't go out and get mine, Billies has spent a fortune for my education, and I'm the stereotypical example of the younger generation.
 
Last edited:
Billies Bangers said:
I was in a very similar position so I absolutely believe him.

You know the saying the truth is out there? Well for anyone who watched part 2 of the Super Rich and Us tonight will now probably understand how we arrived in the position we find ourselves in today. We have all been stuffed by the 1%
Click to expand...
Yes we have all been stuffed. To lay all the blame on the 1% though is just absolving blame.
 
balky12 said:
The example Faustus gave though is mind boggling. He says his first house was £7,500 and he was on £4 a week and needed 25% deposit so £1900. So saving everything he had would take him 10 years to get the deposit. His house compared to his annual salary 7500/208 is 36 times his annual salary.

That's like someone today on £25,000 buying there first house for a million...
Click to expand...

In 1974 I was on a Michelin Apprenticeship at £16 a week.
In 1980 I was on around £85 a week and my house cost £6000.
 
balky12 said:
Which is reasonable. Your house cost just over your annual salary...
Click to expand...

Yeah, Faustus has definitely got his sums wrong.

My Mum & Dad came back to England from Nigeria in 1960 and their first house cost £200 :eek:
Now to put that in perspective just after they bought the house my Dad bought a Fender Stratocaster guitar which cost £120.
I have no idea what his wages were.
 
platypus said:
Yes we have all been stuffed. To lay all the blame on the 1% though is just absolving blame.
Click to expand...

Really? I dont think you are doing too badly yourself:

platypus said:
We're doing pretty well, we're on course to have the mortgage paid off in ten years time, and the property has gone up in value another £100k (ridiculous) since we bought it, and our tenants cover the mortgage fees and our rent in France so its currently a good situation.

Company pension is ludicrously good, we're extremely lucky and put away about £3k/month at the moment after payments for bills and into savings are made. It will change, but despite how I feel we're still young.
Click to expand...

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27327530&postcount=8

So as a landlord with a hugely increased in value house and a "ludicrously good" pension pot, why do you feel "stuffed"?
 
Dimple said:
In 1974 I was on a Michelin Apprenticeship at £16 a week.
In 1980 I was on around £85 a week and my house cost £6000.
Click to expand...

Oh to be able to buy a house for 1.35x salary.

My first house cost £180k in 2006, when Mrs-Cheesyboy-to-be and I had combined income of around £40-45k. Deposit was only 5%, but that was still more than 20% of combined annual gross, and repayments were around 25% of gross.
 
balky12 said:
The example Faustus gave though is mind boggling. He says his first house was £7,500 and he was on £4 a week and needed 25% deposit so £1900. So saving everything he had would take him 10 years to get the deposit. His house compared to his annual salary 7500/208 is 36 times his annual salary.

That's like someone today on £25,000 buying there first house for a million...
Click to expand...

Well I can add my statistic - £4. 18s. 4d a week, our property cost £7,050 so very similar. I think our deposit was just over £1800. Like Faustus though my future wife was also working £3. 17s 6d :D so that helped enormously. We also had to have a guarantor. Including existing savings it took 6 years.

Thank goodness we had it cushy eh?
 
Richie said:
Really? I dont think you are doing too badly yourself:



http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27327530&postcount=8

So as a landlord with a hugely increased in value house and a "ludicrously good" pension pot, why do you feel "stuffed"?
Click to expand...
Yes we are in an incredibley good position in regards to the house and pension, but we've worked very, very hard for it. The pension is only good because its a perk of my company, it's not because the pension system as a whole is in good shape, because it isn't. However to get the house we had to stump up a huge deposit, and have had a significantly higher mortgage than previous generations. And we're far from rich, way off this supposed "1%", and more importantly we're part of society and a generation that is repeatedly criticised for being lazy and expecting too much, and that's what gets me going most of all.

How have I "been stuffed"? No free education, increased taxes, crap state pension, higher retirement age, a significantly higher mortgage, mortgage fees (these were only introduced in the 90s!), higher deposit required, and so on, many of the reasons for which I've posted in this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom