The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
Yeah those 4 bags really help get you over the line on a 300k gaff.
Here's a wild thought, going off piste a bit, maybe save for a few years?
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
As a boomer, and a landlord, I would like to say that I agree with your sentiments.
I still own the house I was able to buy back in 1985 (selling it in summer). A while ago, I did an estimate of what had happened to the value of the house, compared with what had happened to the salaries of the job I had at the ad agency in London before I left in 1993. Basically at the time (some 20 years later), the salary appeared to have improved by 80% but the house value by 500%.
The major caveat, of course, is that we are talking London. But that is still a hell of a long-term imbalance.
And what was the interest rate in 1985? 13-14%.
again, complaining about interest rates is like complaining about a hike in fees at your private members club. Suck it up or sell, move back in with your parents, move to somewhere more affordable, perhaps? Get a second job? Go without? Did that sound like a realistic thing to do back then? Nope. Well, guess what, nothing's changed.
I know I'm generalising a bit here but when you see some TV programmes and they are interviewing twenty somethings about struggling to get on the housing ladder they are invariably down the pub and playing with the latest iPhone. If you want something that badly you have to make sacrifices but nowadays people want everything and then bleat when they can't afford to buy a property. It's about priorities in a lot of instances.
What a load of bollox. Save a huge deposit (unless you want to be crippled with the repayments) and jump through hoops to prove you can pay a mortgage which is 60% of the rent you've been paying for the last decade without fail.
You're so out of touch with reality its unreal.
A lot of negative equity scenarios arose in the nineties too - too simplistic to say it was easier back then than now.
London prices are the extreme examples to use.
Going forward the work from home options may help adjust prices a little and make some people realise they can be in Zone 4 and much further out where gradually affordability improves.
I didn't get this reference however to 'hoops' to prove you can afford the mortgage. Not sure that's much more than a monthly budget with all costs considered. That is not really unreasonable or new I don't think; and, is actually a good discipline.
I know I'm generalising a bit here but when you see some TV programmes and they are interviewing twenty somethings about struggling to get on the housing ladder they are invariably down the pub and playing with the latest iPhone. If you want something that badly you have to make sacrifices but nowadays people want everything and then bleat when they can't afford to buy a property. It's about priorities in a lot of instances.
Jeez, what should younger generations do, go to work, and have nothing else in their lives? How dare they might go for a drink, how dare they have something which allows them to function in a digital economy like the UKs. They should just do nothing, other then save so they buy a house/flat that is massively more expensive then the generation before had. Who could get a mortgage cheaper and easier on a property that was at worst 3 times their salary.
Must be a fucking breeze being a boomer, cheap property brought and sitting on massive profits, final salary pensions, massive sense of entitlement and a willingness to pull up the draw bridge on the ones coming behind, which they're parents would never have done.
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
1. But they literally have to, unless they want to live in squalid conditions, or much further away from their place of work, in which case the price of transport basically make up the difference anyway
2. Have you literally ever looked at any of the new builds that most of the new government initiatives like help to buy loan etc actually cover? Easily north of £450k
3. So people should live with, raise their families at their parents home into their 30s?
4. Why kill yourself like that? Live in the real world please.
5. The previous generation bought lovely large homes for the same price as today's deposit.
1. No they don't, they choose to. I've had this conversation so many times with people at work. Moaning their rent is £1500 in somewhere like Battersea so means they can't save to buy a house. When I suggest they rent a room somewhere else, say Dartford for 3 years at £400 a month and save the best part of £10k a year after Travel expenses they aren't interested. That's a choice and many have moved out of their parents house in their early 20's where often they didn't even pay any rent!
2. LISA's you can use for a £75k property, £200k property etc, you are getting a 25% bonus on whatever you save (up to £4k savings a year) and if you invest it wisely much more, my daughters saved for the last 3 years the £4k so £12k in, government have topped that up to £15k and with growth it's almost £20k.
3. Not what I said,
4. It's what we did and almost everyone of my age that I know did the same to a greater or lesser degree, sometimes you have to make sacrifices for what you want, didn't have a car, worked 5/6 nights a week on top of the day job (the best part of the evening work was I also wasn't spending).
5. Depend's on when you are talking. I bought in about 91 and a family home was getting towards £100k and interest rates were well into double figures.
1. You literally said "no they dont" and then the very next sentence repeated what i said - move further out, spend an hour on an overcrowded train and spend the difference in travel expenses. You're then suggesting they get a second job on top of that? Get real.
2. Where on earth are you seeing £75k properties? In the south east?! Are you mental?
3. Yes it is. You said they should stay with their parents well into their 30s, as that's how long it would take to save a decent deposit. You're also suggesting they "didn't have to pay any rent" at their parents house. I'm literally arguing with a stereotypical middle class, middle aged man, aren't i?
4. Bullshit its what "everyone" "your age" did. Another caveat - the average wage at that time made affording a home achievable, it isnt now.
5. Complaining about interest rates is literally like complaining about a hike in fees for a private members club.
1. Exactly they don't have to rent a flat in Clapham/London etc, and no the saving wouldn't all go on travel as I highlighted unless train travel from Dartford to London is now £12k a year. As for getting real, 2nd jobs were common place when I bought otherwise I'd have struggled to buy.
2. Who said anything about the south east? But in the SE £130k would get you a 2 bed house/flat in a reasonable area.
3. No, I didn't say stay with parents into your 30's, get married, have kids etc whilst living there. To be clear a lot (but certainly not all) say 22-25 year olds don't need to move out of the parents home.
4. Dunno what the average wage was, from memory I was on about £10k so bought at circa 8-9x salary (not the best example as I worked for a bank and got a cheap 5% mortgage).
5. Wasn't complaining, merely stating a fact, a 70k mortgage in the early 90's at 10% rate has about the same monthly repayment as a £350k mortgage now at 2% (allowing for inflation).
I'm not saying buying a house is easy now, but i'm also saying for most it never was, whether you were my parents (bought in the late 60's) where they lived the first few years of their married lives renting a room from a family member and saving every penny for 5 years to get a deposit or me (early 90's) doing two jobs and living in effect in a bedsit in Bethnal Green whilst I saved.
It's about choices, what gets me is when some people moan they can't afford a house when they clearly can but they choose to not be able to afford to due to the choices they make. What they really mean is I still want to be able to rent my flat in a nice area, go out, have a nice car, not sacrifice much and still want to be able to save a deposit. If i'd have gone down that route i'd probably also still be renting (although hopefully not a bed sit in Bethnal Green despite it being a much improved area!).
I'd happily run through with anyone their finances and show you what can be done. Done it many times with younger staff, some have took it on board to a greater or lesser degree, some not.
I know I'm generalising a bit here but when you see some TV programmes and they are interviewing twenty somethings about struggling to get on the housing ladder they are invariably down the pub and playing with the latest iPhone. If you want something that badly you have to make sacrifices but nowadays people want everything and then bleat when they can't afford to buy a property. It's about priorities in a lot of instances.
Jeez, what should younger generations do, go to work, and have nothing else in their lives? How dare they might go for a drink, how dare they have something which allows them to function in a digital economy like the UKs. They should just do nothing, other then save so they buy a house/flat that is massively more expensive then the generation before had. Who could get a mortgage cheaper and easier on a property that was at worst 3 times their salary.
Must be a fucking breeze being a boomer, cheap property brought and sitting on massive profits, final salary pensions, massive sense of entitlement and a willingness to pull up the draw bridge on the ones coming behind, which they're parents would never have done.
yeah because we never had to save mate, never had to cope with interest rates of 15%, never had the issue of negative equity, never had to worry about being made redundant on the very day we completed on a house purchase. You are right, it was a breeze.
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
1. But they literally have to, unless they want to live in squalid conditions, or much further away from their place of work, in which case the price of transport basically make up the difference anyway
2. Have you literally ever looked at any of the new builds that most of the new government initiatives like help to buy loan etc actually cover? Easily north of £450k
3. So people should live with, raise their families at their parents home into their 30s?
4. Why kill yourself like that? Live in the real world please.
5. The previous generation bought lovely large homes for the same price as today's deposit.
1. No they don't, they choose to. I've had this conversation so many times with people at work. Moaning their rent is £1500 in somewhere like Battersea so means they can't save to buy a house. When I suggest they rent a room somewhere else, say Dartford for 3 years at £400 a month and save the best part of £10k a year after Travel expenses they aren't interested. That's a choice and many have moved out of their parents house in their early 20's where often they didn't even pay any rent!
2. LISA's you can use for a £75k property, £200k property etc, you are getting a 25% bonus on whatever you save (up to £4k savings a year) and if you invest it wisely much more, my daughters saved for the last 3 years the £4k so £12k in, government have topped that up to £15k and with growth it's almost £20k.
3. Not what I said,
4. It's what we did and almost everyone of my age that I know did the same to a greater or lesser degree, sometimes you have to make sacrifices for what you want, didn't have a car, worked 5/6 nights a week on top of the day job (the best part of the evening work was I also wasn't spending).
5. Depend's on when you are talking. I bought in about 91 and a family home was getting towards £100k and interest rates were well into double figures.
1. You literally said "no they dont" and then the very next sentence repeated what i said - move further out, spend an hour on an overcrowded train and spend the difference in travel expenses. You're then suggesting they get a second job on top of that? Get real.
2. Where on earth are you seeing £75k properties? In the south east?! Are you mental?
3. Yes it is. You said they should stay with their parents well into their 30s, as that's how long it would take to save a decent deposit. You're also suggesting they "didn't have to pay any rent" at their parents house. I'm literally arguing with a stereotypical middle class, middle aged man, aren't i?
4. Bullshit its what "everyone" "your age" did. Another caveat - the average wage at that time made affording a home achievable, it isnt now.
5. Complaining about interest rates is literally like complaining about a hike in fees for a private members club.
1. Exactly they don't have to rent a flat in Clapham/London etc, and no the saving wouldn't all go on travel as I highlighted unless train travel from Dartford to London is now £12k a year. As for getting real, 2nd jobs were common place when I bought otherwise I'd have struggled to buy.
2. Who said anything about the south east? But in the SE £130k would get you a 2 bed house/flat in a reasonable area.
3. No, I didn't say stay with parents into your 30's, get married, have kids etc whilst living there. To be clear a lot (but certainly not all) say 22-25 year olds don't need to move out of the parents home.
4. Dunno what the average wage was, from memory I was on about £10k so bought at circa 8-9x salary (not the best example as I worked for a bank and got a cheap 5% mortgage).
5. Wasn't complaining, merely stating a fact, a 70k mortgage in the early 90's at 10% rate has about the same monthly repayment as a £350k mortgage now at 2% (allowing for inflation).
I'm not saying buying a house is easy now, but i'm also saying for most it never was, whether you were my parents (bought in the late 60's) where they lived the first few years of their married lives renting a room from a family member and saving every penny for 5 years to get a deposit or me (early 90's) doing two jobs and living in effect in a bedsit in Bethnal Green whilst I saved.
It's about choices, what gets me is when some people moan they can't afford a house when they clearly can but they choose to not be able to afford to due to the choices they make. What they really mean is I still want to be able to rent my flat in a nice area, go out, have a nice car, not sacrifice much and still want to be able to save a deposit. If i'd have gone down that route i'd probably also still be renting (although hopefully not a bed sit in Bethnal Green despite it being a much improved area!).
I'd happily run through with anyone their finances and show you what can be done. Done it many times with younger staff, some have took it on board to a greater or lesser degree, some not.
1. how are you going to work a second job, when working late/staying on top of emails at home is a thing, and then have an hour long+ commute? Train travel is absurdly expensive, no doubt a flat in dartford that would be that cheap would be a bus ride/drive from the train station, that's added expenses.
2. BAHAHAHAHHAHAHA £130k?!? Dream on pal.
3. So, AGAIN, they're gonna be in their 30's when they can afford a deposit?
4. So you got a super cheap mortgage? This exchange gets better and better.
5. Then you should've done all of the above if it was that bad. Why didn't you?
I know I'm generalising a bit here but when you see some TV programmes and they are interviewing twenty somethings about struggling to get on the housing ladder they are invariably down the pub and playing with the latest iPhone. If you want something that badly you have to make sacrifices but nowadays people want everything and then bleat when they can't afford to buy a property. It's about priorities in a lot of instances.
Jeez, what should younger generations do, go to work, and have nothing else in their lives? How dare they might go for a drink, how dare they have something which allows them to function in a digital economy like the UKs. They should just do nothing, other then save so they buy a house/flat that is massively more expensive then the generation before had. Who could get a mortgage cheaper and easier on a property that was at worst 3 times their salary.
Must be a fucking breeze being a boomer, cheap property brought and sitting on massive profits, final salary pensions, massive sense of entitlement and a willingness to pull up the draw bridge on the ones coming behind, which they're parents would never have done.
yeah because we never had to save mate, never had to cope with interest rates of 15%, never had the issue of negative equity, never had to worry about being made redundant on the very day we completed on a house purchase. You are right, it was a breeze.
Wait til you hear that could all happen to people who are spending decades putting together a deposit for a flat. Womp womp womp, woe is you.
honestly wish we lived in a world where the majority of young people were able to live at their parents, rent free, seemingly having unlimited time energy to be able to hold down a commuting job into central london, keep on top of emails with international clients and work another job (who needs sleep? Bloody millenials). Also not having any semblance of a life, just so boomers can prop up their property portfolios, their excuse being they had to pay a few extra quid every month 25-30 years ago.
I guess I'm now looking forward to "have you tried not being poor?" bit of financial advice to some one on this thread, as that's literally the level of advice going on here.
I know I'm generalising a bit here but when you see some TV programmes and they are interviewing twenty somethings about struggling to get on the housing ladder they are invariably down the pub and playing with the latest iPhone. If you want something that badly you have to make sacrifices but nowadays people want everything and then bleat when they can't afford to buy a property. It's about priorities in a lot of instances.
Jeez, what should younger generations do, go to work, and have nothing else in their lives? How dare they might go for a drink, how dare they have something which allows them to function in a digital economy like the UKs. They should just do nothing, other then save so they buy a house/flat that is massively more expensive then the generation before had. Who could get a mortgage cheaper and easier on a property that was at worst 3 times their salary.
Must be a fucking breeze being a boomer, cheap property brought and sitting on massive profits, final salary pensions, massive sense of entitlement and a willingness to pull up the draw bridge on the ones coming behind, which they're parents would never have done.
yeah because we never had to save mate, never had to cope with interest rates of 15%, never had the issue of negative equity, never had to worry about being made redundant on the very day we completed on a house purchase. You are right, it was a breeze.
Wait til you hear that could all happen to people who are spending decades putting together a deposit for a flat. Womp womp womp, woe is you.
nowhere have I said 'woe is me', I was replying to Rothko's post where he was saying how easy us 'boomers' had it and we now have a sense of entitlement. All what I said was true but we just had to suck it up and get on with it. If anything I think people nowadays have a sense of entitlement and are not prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.
honestly wish we lived in a world where the majority of young people were able to live at their parents, rent free, seemingly having unlimited time energy to be able to hold down a commuting job into central london, keep on top of emails with international clients and work another job (who needs sleep? Bloody millenials). Also not having any semblance of a life, just so boomers can prop up their property portfolios, their excuse being they had to pay a few extra quid every month 25-30 years ago.
I guess I'm now looking forward to "have you tried not being poor?" bit of financial advice to some one on this thread, as that's literally the level of advice going on here.
Womp womp womp, woe is you.
I'm going to keep off this thread for today because it's making me angry. Yes, I live in a 450k house mortgage free, yes I have a big pension pot, yes I'm going retire before I'm 60. But when I was twenty-two and had a large mortgage, a car loan, other debts I used to work 9am to 5pm, plus an hour commuting each way, come home and deliver Indian's for a local curry house three evenings a week. Then on Saturday and Sunday evenings I'd do the same whilst my mate's were down the pub. It's about priorities and because of those sacrifices nearly 40 years ago I'm now sitting fairly pretty. I don't call that a sense of entitlement I call it fucking working hard.
4. So you got a super cheap mortgage? This exchange gets better and better.
I’d add that such mortgages were invariably subject to a benefit in kind taxable charge and a salary that was not necessarily the best / able to be bettered with other employers i.e. a choice to be made.
In summary though I’d suggest that currently affordability in Greater London and surrounding areas is not typically manageable for a single person but as a couple can just about be made to work with the same sacrifices first time buyers have always needed to make on their social life and other luxury / discretionary spending.
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
Yeah those 4 bags really help get you over the line on a 300k gaff.
Here's a wild thought, going off piste a bit, maybe save for a few years?
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
As a boomer, and a landlord, I would like to say that I agree with your sentiments.
I still own the house I was able to buy back in 1985 (selling it in summer). A while ago, I did an estimate of what had happened to the value of the house, compared with what had happened to the salaries of the job I had at the ad agency in London before I left in 1993. Basically at the time (some 20 years later), the salary appeared to have improved by 80% but the house value by 500%.
The major caveat, of course, is that we are talking London. But that is still a hell of a long-term imbalance.
And what was the interest rate in 1985? 13-14%.
11.375 was the bank rate that year, as I iust looked up. However in those days 3x salary was the max allowed, and I had a flatmate, sometimes two, to offset my outgoings. And Surbiton was a desirable place to live, even if considered a bit off the radar in ad agency circles.
I’m surprised if you are seriously arguing that there isn’t a problem, and it’s all mainly a matter of attitude. That would be to ignore the unintended consequences of the buy-to-let legislation and the shameful encouragement of all kinds of hot and dirty money to buy up huge swathes of central London.
Like many other things, they are not having these issues in Germany and they have long thought our attitude to property ownership is barking.
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
1. But they literally have to, unless they want to live in squalid conditions, or much further away from their place of work, in which case the price of transport basically make up the difference anyway
2. Have you literally ever looked at any of the new builds that most of the new government initiatives like help to buy loan etc actually cover? Easily north of £450k
3. So people should live with, raise their families at their parents home into their 30s?
4. Why kill yourself like that? Live in the real world please.
5. The previous generation bought lovely large homes for the same price as today's deposit.
1. No they don't, they choose to. I've had this conversation so many times with people at work. Moaning their rent is £1500 in somewhere like Battersea so means they can't save to buy a house. When I suggest they rent a room somewhere else, say Dartford for 3 years at £400 a month and save the best part of £10k a year after Travel expenses they aren't interested. That's a choice and many have moved out of their parents house in their early 20's where often they didn't even pay any rent!
2. LISA's you can use for a £75k property, £200k property etc, you are getting a 25% bonus on whatever you save (up to £4k savings a year) and if you invest it wisely much more, my daughters saved for the last 3 years the £4k so £12k in, government have topped that up to £15k and with growth it's almost £20k.
3. Not what I said,
4. It's what we did and almost everyone of my age that I know did the same to a greater or lesser degree, sometimes you have to make sacrifices for what you want, didn't have a car, worked 5/6 nights a week on top of the day job (the best part of the evening work was I also wasn't spending).
5. Depend's on when you are talking. I bought in about 91 and a family home was getting towards £100k and interest rates were well into double figures.
1. You literally said "no they dont" and then the very next sentence repeated what i said - move further out, spend an hour on an overcrowded train and spend the difference in travel expenses. You're then suggesting they get a second job on top of that? Get real.
2. Where on earth are you seeing £75k properties? In the south east?! Are you mental?
3. Yes it is. You said they should stay with their parents well into their 30s, as that's how long it would take to save a decent deposit. You're also suggesting they "didn't have to pay any rent" at their parents house. I'm literally arguing with a stereotypical middle class, middle aged man, aren't i?
4. Bullshit its what "everyone" "your age" did. Another caveat - the average wage at that time made affording a home achievable, it isnt now.
5. Complaining about interest rates is literally like complaining about a hike in fees for a private members club.
1. Exactly they don't have to rent a flat in Clapham/London etc, and no the saving wouldn't all go on travel as I highlighted unless train travel from Dartford to London is now £12k a year. As for getting real, 2nd jobs were common place when I bought otherwise I'd have struggled to buy.
2. Who said anything about the south east? But in the SE £130k would get you a 2 bed house/flat in a reasonable area.
3. No, I didn't say stay with parents into your 30's, get married, have kids etc whilst living there. To be clear a lot (but certainly not all) say 22-25 year olds don't need to move out of the parents home.
4. Dunno what the average wage was, from memory I was on about £10k so bought at circa 8-9x salary (not the best example as I worked for a bank and got a cheap 5% mortgage).
5. Wasn't complaining, merely stating a fact, a 70k mortgage in the early 90's at 10% rate has about the same monthly repayment as a £350k mortgage now at 2% (allowing for inflation).
I'm not saying buying a house is easy now, but i'm also saying for most it never was, whether you were my parents (bought in the late 60's) where they lived the first few years of their married lives renting a room from a family member and saving every penny for 5 years to get a deposit or me (early 90's) doing two jobs and living in effect in a bedsit in Bethnal Green whilst I saved.
It's about choices, what gets me is when some people moan they can't afford a house when they clearly can but they choose to not be able to afford to due to the choices they make. What they really mean is I still want to be able to rent my flat in a nice area, go out, have a nice car, not sacrifice much and still want to be able to save a deposit. If i'd have gone down that route i'd probably also still be renting (although hopefully not a bed sit in Bethnal Green despite it being a much improved area!).
I'd happily run through with anyone their finances and show you what can be done. Done it many times with younger staff, some have took it on board to a greater or lesser degree, some not.
1. how are you going to work a second job, when working late/staying on top of emails at home is a thing, and then have an hour long+ commute? Train travel is absurdly expensive, no doubt a flat in dartford that would be that cheap would be a bus ride/drive from the train station, that's added expenses.
2. BAHAHAHAHHAHAHA £130k?!? Dream on pal.
3. So, AGAIN, they're gonna be in their 30's when they can afford a deposit?
4. So you got a super cheap mortgage? This exchange gets better and better.
5. Then you should've done all of the above if it was that bad. Why didn't you?
1. I never said it was easy and you don't have to work week nights, i chose to go all out for a couple of years rather than say 4 years at more leisurely pace, I used to leave for work at 7am, back about 5:30. Off to the bar for 7 and home about 10:30. Fridays a bit later and Saturdays used to do weddings so about 12 hours, 12-12. So around an extra 3-35 hours a week, remember this was early 90's but netted about 4k a year but also was spending less (we got fed at the weddings!), towards the end I did get a car, £130 1974 mini that had more rust than the titanic! I could have just done weekends but would have took twice the time to save a deposit. 14 minute walk to Crayford Station from £400 a month https://www.spareroom.co.uk/flatshare/kent/crayford/15657673
2. There's literally loads; just one example of a two bed maisonette at 100k asking - https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/70427496#/ walking distance to the station needs a bit of work but nothing major. Save 10k deposit and it's yours (or one similar this one's sold), £325 a month over 2 years £225 over 3 years etc. Not everyone works in the city and needs a season ticket, but believe Gillingham is about £4,250 if you do need it.
3. Why? 3-5 years tops, see above.
4. Was cheap in those days, expensive compared to now (my mortgage was about £420 @ 5% compared to market rate of about £600) long time ago now but there might have been a tax charge as well as a BIK, but again it's about choices. I specifically went to work for a bank to take advantage of the cheaper mortgage, not sure it was the right decision actually as rates started to drop and i'd longer term probably have been better taking the higher paid job not at a bank.
5. Not sure of your question, but did most of the above.
It's not easy, never has been, but for a lot of people i've come across who say 'can't' it's more like 'don't want to' - i've lost track of the people whove said 'ok for you' then when I suggest maybe if they need a car buy an old run around for £1,000 rather than on PCP or maybe don't keep getting the latest iphone at £65 a month or maybe do a cheap holiday rather than £2k in Ibiza or why not open a LISA - it's like i'm from Mars, not have a really nice car, holiday, phone etc........
The lad I employed nearly 2 years ago (started on 24k), 19 lives at home with parents has managed to save around £20k so far (inc £4k thanks to the government), in another 12-18 months he'll be buying his first property.
Anyone leaving school/uni getting a reasonable bottom of the rung job in the city and living at home with parents should be able to buy a place well within 5 years and not live like a monk.
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
Yeah those 4 bags really help get you over the line on a 300k gaff.
Here's a wild thought, going off piste a bit, maybe save for a few years?
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
As a boomer, and a landlord, I would like to say that I agree with your sentiments.
I still own the house I was able to buy back in 1985 (selling it in summer). A while ago, I did an estimate of what had happened to the value of the house, compared with what had happened to the salaries of the job I had at the ad agency in London before I left in 1993. Basically at the time (some 20 years later), the salary appeared to have improved by 80% but the house value by 500%.
The major caveat, of course, is that we are talking London. But that is still a hell of a long-term imbalance.
And what was the interest rate in 1985? 13-14%.
11.375 was the bank rate that year, as I iust looked up. However in those days 3x salary was the max allowed, and I had a flatmate, sometimes two, to offset my outgoings. And Surbiton was a desirable place to live, even if considered a bit off the radar in ad agency circles.
I’m surprised if you are seriously arguing that there isn’t a problem, and it’s all mainly a matter of attitude. That would be to ignore the unintended consequences of the buy-to-let legislation and the shameful encouragement of all kinds of hot and dirty money to buy up huge swathes of central London.
Like many other things, they are not having these issues in Germany and they have long thought our attitude to property ownership is barking.
I think the 'problem' is grossly exaggerated - look what you just mentioned, flat mate, sometimes 2, if I mentioned that to the average 25 year old they'd think I was mad.
Central London is like a different country, and not sure the average person was ever buying in central London.
What ever happened to move out to where you can afford, again, most don't want to - that is very much attitude. Show me any 18-20 year old doing the level of job I did (very much office junior at an insurance company/bank) and i'll show them how it can be done with true life, up to date, figures well before they are 25. Even someone out in rental at say 25 with little spare cash due to rent payments it can be done. (I mentioned lease to buy at the start).
Germany is very much a rental country - but who owns the property that's rented?
I do think renting should be more regulated and i'd go as far as having maximum rents set up to a level, but that in itself can cause issues. I still have a couple of tenants (properties owned by friendly society not me) that are fair rent, not as cheap as you may imagine and of course the agreements are very different to a modern short hold as to who is responsible for maintaining what.
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
1. But they literally have to, unless they want to live in squalid conditions, or much further away from their place of work, in which case the price of transport basically make up the difference anyway
2. Have you literally ever looked at any of the new builds that most of the new government initiatives like help to buy loan etc actually cover? Easily north of £450k
3. So people should live with, raise their families at their parents home into their 30s?
4. Why kill yourself like that? Live in the real world please.
5. The previous generation bought lovely large homes for the same price as today's deposit.
1. No they don't, they choose to. I've had this conversation so many times with people at work. Moaning their rent is £1500 in somewhere like Battersea so means they can't save to buy a house. When I suggest they rent a room somewhere else, say Dartford for 3 years at £400 a month and save the best part of £10k a year after Travel expenses they aren't interested. That's a choice and many have moved out of their parents house in their early 20's where often they didn't even pay any rent!
2. LISA's you can use for a £75k property, £200k property etc, you are getting a 25% bonus on whatever you save (up to £4k savings a year) and if you invest it wisely much more, my daughters saved for the last 3 years the £4k so £12k in, government have topped that up to £15k and with growth it's almost £20k.
3. Not what I said,
4. It's what we did and almost everyone of my age that I know did the same to a greater or lesser degree, sometimes you have to make sacrifices for what you want, didn't have a car, worked 5/6 nights a week on top of the day job (the best part of the evening work was I also wasn't spending).
5. Depend's on when you are talking. I bought in about 91 and a family home was getting towards £100k and interest rates were well into double figures.
1. You literally said "no they dont" and then the very next sentence repeated what i said - move further out, spend an hour on an overcrowded train and spend the difference in travel expenses. You're then suggesting they get a second job on top of that? Get real.
2. Where on earth are you seeing £75k properties? In the south east?! Are you mental?
3. Yes it is. You said they should stay with their parents well into their 30s, as that's how long it would take to save a decent deposit. You're also suggesting they "didn't have to pay any rent" at their parents house. I'm literally arguing with a stereotypical middle class, middle aged man, aren't i?
4. Bullshit its what "everyone" "your age" did. Another caveat - the average wage at that time made affording a home achievable, it isnt now.
5. Complaining about interest rates is literally like complaining about a hike in fees for a private members club.
1. Exactly they don't have to rent a flat in Clapham/London etc, and no the saving wouldn't all go on travel as I highlighted unless train travel from Dartford to London is now £12k a year. As for getting real, 2nd jobs were common place when I bought otherwise I'd have struggled to buy.
2. Who said anything about the south east? But in the SE £130k would get you a 2 bed house/flat in a reasonable area.
3. No, I didn't say stay with parents into your 30's, get married, have kids etc whilst living there. To be clear a lot (but certainly not all) say 22-25 year olds don't need to move out of the parents home.
4. Dunno what the average wage was, from memory I was on about £10k so bought at circa 8-9x salary (not the best example as I worked for a bank and got a cheap 5% mortgage).
5. Wasn't complaining, merely stating a fact, a 70k mortgage in the early 90's at 10% rate has about the same monthly repayment as a £350k mortgage now at 2% (allowing for inflation).
I'm not saying buying a house is easy now, but i'm also saying for most it never was, whether you were my parents (bought in the late 60's) where they lived the first few years of their married lives renting a room from a family member and saving every penny for 5 years to get a deposit or me (early 90's) doing two jobs and living in effect in a bedsit in Bethnal Green whilst I saved.
It's about choices, what gets me is when some people moan they can't afford a house when they clearly can but they choose to not be able to afford to due to the choices they make. What they really mean is I still want to be able to rent my flat in a nice area, go out, have a nice car, not sacrifice much and still want to be able to save a deposit. If i'd have gone down that route i'd probably also still be renting (although hopefully not a bed sit in Bethnal Green despite it being a much improved area!).
I'd happily run through with anyone their finances and show you what can be done. Done it many times with younger staff, some have took it on board to a greater or lesser degree, some not.
1. how are you going to work a second job, when working late/staying on top of emails at home is a thing, and then have an hour long+ commute? Train travel is absurdly expensive, no doubt a flat in dartford that would be that cheap would be a bus ride/drive from the train station, that's added expenses.
2. BAHAHAHAHHAHAHA £130k?!? Dream on pal.
3. So, AGAIN, they're gonna be in their 30's when they can afford a deposit?
4. So you got a super cheap mortgage? This exchange gets better and better.
5. Then you should've done all of the above if it was that bad. Why didn't you?
1. I never said it was easy and you don't have to work week nights, i chose to go all out for a couple of years rather than say 4 years at more leisurely pace, I used to leave for work at 7am, back about 5:30. Off to the bar for 7 and home about 10:30. Fridays a bit later and Saturdays used to do weddings so about 12 hours, 12-12. So around an extra 3-35 hours a week, remember this was early 90's but netted about 4k a year but also was spending less (we got fed at the weddings!), towards the end I did get a car, £130 1974 mini that had more rust than the titanic! I could have just done weekends but would have took twice the time to save a deposit. 14 minute walk to Crayford Station from £400 a month https://www.spareroom.co.uk/flatshare/kent/crayford/15657673
2. There's literally loads; just one example of a two bed maisonette at 100k asking - https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/70427496#/ walking distance to the station needs a bit of work but nothing major. Save 10k deposit and it's yours (or one similar this one's sold), £325 a month over 2 years £225 over 3 years etc. Not everyone works in the city and needs a season ticket, but believe Gillingham is about £4,250 if you do need it.
3. Why? 3-5 years tops, see above.
4. Was cheap in those days, expensive compared to now (my mortgage was about £420 @ 5% compared to market rate of about £600) long time ago now but there might have been a tax charge as well as a BIK, but again it's about choices. I specifically went to work for a bank to take advantage of the cheaper mortgage, not sure it was the right decision actually as rates started to drop and i'd longer term probably have been better taking the higher paid job not at a bank.
5. Not sure of your question, but did most of the above.
It's not easy, never has been, but for a lot of people i've come across who say 'can't' it's more like 'don't want to' - i've lost track of the people whove said 'ok for you' then when I suggest maybe if they need a car buy an old run around for £1,000 rather than on PCP or maybe don't keep getting the latest iphone at £65 a month or maybe do a cheap holiday rather than £2k in Ibiza or why not open a LISA - it's like i'm from Mars, not have a really nice car, holiday, phone etc........
The lad I employed nearly 2 years ago (started on 24k), 19 lives at home with parents has managed to save around £20k so far (inc £4k thanks to the government), in another 12-18 months he'll be buying his first property.
Anyone leaving school/uni getting a reasonable bottom of the rung job in the city and living at home with parents should be able to buy a place well within 5 years and not live like a monk.
1. But, again, you worked your typical 9-5, most "white collar" jobs are no longer like that.
2. Great, live in a dank shithole in a shit area so you can afford to buy in... a dank shithole in a shit area. Wouldn't let my friend's dog live in that.
3. Once again, for those at the back, not every young person can live with their parents, even more of those can't live there rent free. It's not realistic to expect most young people to do that, because they can't.
4. So you worked for a bank, are you advising all young people work for a bank?
Again, lets be realistic. There's about a thousand caveats for everything you're suggesting. Unrealistic, and, ultimately, terrible advice.
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
Yeah those 4 bags really help get you over the line on a 300k gaff.
Here's a wild thought, going off piste a bit, maybe save for a few years?
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
As a boomer, and a landlord, I would like to say that I agree with your sentiments.
I still own the house I was able to buy back in 1985 (selling it in summer). A while ago, I did an estimate of what had happened to the value of the house, compared with what had happened to the salaries of the job I had at the ad agency in London before I left in 1993. Basically at the time (some 20 years later), the salary appeared to have improved by 80% but the house value by 500%.
The major caveat, of course, is that we are talking London. But that is still a hell of a long-term imbalance.
And what was the interest rate in 1985? 13-14%.
11.375 was the bank rate that year, as I iust looked up. However in those days 3x salary was the max allowed, and I had a flatmate, sometimes two, to offset my outgoings. And Surbiton was a desirable place to live, even if considered a bit off the radar in ad agency circles.
I’m surprised if you are seriously arguing that there isn’t a problem, and it’s all mainly a matter of attitude. That would be to ignore the unintended consequences of the buy-to-let legislation and the shameful encouragement of all kinds of hot and dirty money to buy up huge swathes of central London.
Like many other things, they are not having these issues in Germany and they have long thought our attitude to property ownership is barking.
I think the 'problem' is grossly exaggerated - look what you just mentioned, flat mate, sometimes 2, if I mentioned that to the average 25 year old they'd think I was mad.
Central London is like a different country, and not sure the average person was ever buying in central London.
What ever happened to move out to where you can afford, again, most don't want to - that is very much attitude. Show me any 18-20 year old doing the level of job I did (very much office junior at an insurance company/bank) and i'll show them how it can be done with true life, up to date, figures well before they are 25. Even someone out in rental at say 25 with little spare cash due to rent payments it can be done. (I mentioned lease to buy at the start).
Germany is very much a rental country - but who owns the property that's rented?
I do think renting should be more regulated and i'd go as far as having maximum rents set up to a level, but that in itself can cause issues. I still have a couple of tenants (properties owned by friendly society not me) that are fair rent, not as cheap as you may imagine and of course the agreements are very different to a modern short hold as to who is responsible for maintaining what.
middle class white man in "I think i know better than those people actually in the situation" shock.
I think it really is important to get on the property market ASAP in life if you are renting, even if it is in the dankest, darkest shithole. At least then you are paying (partially, especially at first, I know) towards equity rather than giving it to someone else.
honestly wish we lived in a world where the majority of young people were able to live at their parents, rent free, seemingly having unlimited time energy to be able to hold down a commuting job into central london, keep on top of emails with international clients and work another job (who needs sleep? Bloody millenials). Also not having any semblance of a life, just so boomers can prop up their property portfolios, their excuse being they had to pay a few extra quid every month 25-30 years ago.
I guess I'm now looking forward to "have you tried not being poor?" bit of financial advice to some one on this thread, as that's literally the level of advice going on here.
Womp womp womp, woe is you.
I'm going to keep off this thread for today because it's making me angry. Yes, I live in a 450k house mortgage free, yes I have a big pension pot, yes I'm going retire before I'm 60. But when I was twenty-two and had a large mortgage, a car loan, other debts I used to work 9am to 5pm, plus an hour commuting each way, come home and deliver Indian's for a local curry house three evenings a week. Then on Saturday and Sunday evenings I'd do the same whilst my mate's were down the pub. It's about priorities and because of those sacrifices nearly 40 years ago I'm now sitting fairly pretty. I don't call that a sense of entitlement I call it fucking working hard.
You do realise that even if some one does those things, its basically impossible to do the same as you did now (buy a nice house without any help) - do a "normal" job commuting in to central london and being expected to reply to emails etc after hours? The property market has accelerated away from young people. None of whom can do the same as you without significant help from their parents (i mean some one else who agrees with your sentiment says you should live with your parents well into your 30's).
If you responded with sympathy rather than the "I'm alright jack" I doubt you'd get so many thorny responses. If the property market crashes and the bubble pops, you only have yourselves to blame, yet you'll be on here complaining that you worked hard only to have significant hit to your property portfolio so you cant retire early.
... its basically impossible to do the same as you did now (buy a nice house without any help) - do a "normal" job commuting in to central london and being expected to reply to emails etc after hours? The property market has accelerated away from young people. None of whom can do the same as you without significant help from their parents (i mean some one else who agrees with your sentiment says you should live with your parents well into your 30's).
The issue is we haven't as a country built enough houses for year's, and does she have the means beyond paying rent and bills to save for a deposit, especially as rates for both have been abysmal for years
100% - the social housing sold off by Thatcher has not been replaced and the buy to let market has filled the gap.
There should be a) much much more social housing built and b) there should be a Fair Rent act to control ever increasing private rents.
But I repeat, it is not a right to own a home.
I agree, but there’s a whole generation that it basically was, and they then post snotty remarks on message boards claiming there’s no reason why a renter can’t save £50k to buy a home, whilst paying £1400pcm in rent, paying bills and food and travel to work and only earning ~£30k a year.
If someone's earning /£30k a year they shouldn't be renting a flat/house at £1400 a month which is over 2/3rds of their take home pay, i'd agree in those instances they wouldn't ever save the deposit (but why £50k? 10% should be enough and they won't be buying a £500k property as their first home on £30k!).
Maybe they could do what the previous generation did when it was just so easy to buy your first house...... stay at home with parents if possible, if not, then like me rent a small room in a crappy area rather than a whole property in a preferred area, take a second job, go without and save that way.
Even for those that started this post (the twitter link) who may find it very difficult to save more than a little amount each month there is a way,
EDIT; the previous generation also didn't have help with things like LISA's or Help to Buy.
1. But they literally have to, unless they want to live in squalid conditions, or much further away from their place of work, in which case the price of transport basically make up the difference anyway
2. Have you literally ever looked at any of the new builds that most of the new government initiatives like help to buy loan etc actually cover? Easily north of £450k
3. So people should live with, raise their families at their parents home into their 30s?
4. Why kill yourself like that? Live in the real world please.
5. The previous generation bought lovely large homes for the same price as today's deposit.
1. No they don't, they choose to. I've had this conversation so many times with people at work. Moaning their rent is £1500 in somewhere like Battersea so means they can't save to buy a house. When I suggest they rent a room somewhere else, say Dartford for 3 years at £400 a month and save the best part of £10k a year after Travel expenses they aren't interested. That's a choice and many have moved out of their parents house in their early 20's where often they didn't even pay any rent!
2. LISA's you can use for a £75k property, £200k property etc, you are getting a 25% bonus on whatever you save (up to £4k savings a year) and if you invest it wisely much more, my daughters saved for the last 3 years the £4k so £12k in, government have topped that up to £15k and with growth it's almost £20k.
3. Not what I said,
4. It's what we did and almost everyone of my age that I know did the same to a greater or lesser degree, sometimes you have to make sacrifices for what you want, didn't have a car, worked 5/6 nights a week on top of the day job (the best part of the evening work was I also wasn't spending).
5. Depend's on when you are talking. I bought in about 91 and a family home was getting towards £100k and interest rates were well into double figures.
1. You literally said "no they dont" and then the very next sentence repeated what i said - move further out, spend an hour on an overcrowded train and spend the difference in travel expenses. You're then suggesting they get a second job on top of that? Get real.
2. Where on earth are you seeing £75k properties? In the south east?! Are you mental?
3. Yes it is. You said they should stay with their parents well into their 30s, as that's how long it would take to save a decent deposit. You're also suggesting they "didn't have to pay any rent" at their parents house. I'm literally arguing with a stereotypical middle class, middle aged man, aren't i?
4. Bullshit its what "everyone" "your age" did. Another caveat - the average wage at that time made affording a home achievable, it isnt now.
5. Complaining about interest rates is literally like complaining about a hike in fees for a private members club.
1. Exactly they don't have to rent a flat in Clapham/London etc, and no the saving wouldn't all go on travel as I highlighted unless train travel from Dartford to London is now £12k a year. As for getting real, 2nd jobs were common place when I bought otherwise I'd have struggled to buy.
2. Who said anything about the south east? But in the SE £130k would get you a 2 bed house/flat in a reasonable area.
3. No, I didn't say stay with parents into your 30's, get married, have kids etc whilst living there. To be clear a lot (but certainly not all) say 22-25 year olds don't need to move out of the parents home.
4. Dunno what the average wage was, from memory I was on about £10k so bought at circa 8-9x salary (not the best example as I worked for a bank and got a cheap 5% mortgage).
5. Wasn't complaining, merely stating a fact, a 70k mortgage in the early 90's at 10% rate has about the same monthly repayment as a £350k mortgage now at 2% (allowing for inflation).
I'm not saying buying a house is easy now, but i'm also saying for most it never was, whether you were my parents (bought in the late 60's) where they lived the first few years of their married lives renting a room from a family member and saving every penny for 5 years to get a deposit or me (early 90's) doing two jobs and living in effect in a bedsit in Bethnal Green whilst I saved.
It's about choices, what gets me is when some people moan they can't afford a house when they clearly can but they choose to not be able to afford to due to the choices they make. What they really mean is I still want to be able to rent my flat in a nice area, go out, have a nice car, not sacrifice much and still want to be able to save a deposit. If i'd have gone down that route i'd probably also still be renting (although hopefully not a bed sit in Bethnal Green despite it being a much improved area!).
I'd happily run through with anyone their finances and show you what can be done. Done it many times with younger staff, some have took it on board to a greater or lesser degree, some not.
1. how are you going to work a second job, when working late/staying on top of emails at home is a thing, and then have an hour long+ commute? Train travel is absurdly expensive, no doubt a flat in dartford that would be that cheap would be a bus ride/drive from the train station, that's added expenses.
2. BAHAHAHAHHAHAHA £130k?!? Dream on pal.
3. So, AGAIN, they're gonna be in their 30's when they can afford a deposit?
4. So you got a super cheap mortgage? This exchange gets better and better.
5. Then you should've done all of the above if it was that bad. Why didn't you?
1. I never said it was easy and you don't have to work week nights, i chose to go all out for a couple of years rather than say 4 years at more leisurely pace, I used to leave for work at 7am, back about 5:30. Off to the bar for 7 and home about 10:30. Fridays a bit later and Saturdays used to do weddings so about 12 hours, 12-12. So around an extra 3-35 hours a week, remember this was early 90's but netted about 4k a year but also was spending less (we got fed at the weddings!), towards the end I did get a car, £130 1974 mini that had more rust than the titanic! I could have just done weekends but would have took twice the time to save a deposit. 14 minute walk to Crayford Station from £400 a month https://www.spareroom.co.uk/flatshare/kent/crayford/15657673
2. There's literally loads; just one example of a two bed maisonette at 100k asking - https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/70427496#/ walking distance to the station needs a bit of work but nothing major. Save 10k deposit and it's yours (or one similar this one's sold), £325 a month over 2 years £225 over 3 years etc. Not everyone works in the city and needs a season ticket, but believe Gillingham is about £4,250 if you do need it.
3. Why? 3-5 years tops, see above.
4. Was cheap in those days, expensive compared to now (my mortgage was about £420 @ 5% compared to market rate of about £600) long time ago now but there might have been a tax charge as well as a BIK, but again it's about choices. I specifically went to work for a bank to take advantage of the cheaper mortgage, not sure it was the right decision actually as rates started to drop and i'd longer term probably have been better taking the higher paid job not at a bank.
5. Not sure of your question, but did most of the above.
It's not easy, never has been, but for a lot of people i've come across who say 'can't' it's more like 'don't want to' - i've lost track of the people whove said 'ok for you' then when I suggest maybe if they need a car buy an old run around for £1,000 rather than on PCP or maybe don't keep getting the latest iphone at £65 a month or maybe do a cheap holiday rather than £2k in Ibiza or why not open a LISA - it's like i'm from Mars, not have a really nice car, holiday, phone etc........
The lad I employed nearly 2 years ago (started on 24k), 19 lives at home with parents has managed to save around £20k so far (inc £4k thanks to the government), in another 12-18 months he'll be buying his first property.
Anyone leaving school/uni getting a reasonable bottom of the rung job in the city and living at home with parents should be able to buy a place well within 5 years and not live like a monk.
1. But, again, you worked your typical 9-5, most "white collar" jobs are no longer like that.
2. Great, live in a dank shithole in a shit area so you can afford to buy in... a dank shithole in a shit area. Wouldn't let my friend's dog live in that.
3. Once again, for those at the back, not every young person can live with their parents, even more of those can't live there rent free. It's not realistic to expect most young people to do that, because they can't.
4. So you worked for a bank, are you advising all young people work for a bank?
Again, lets be realistic. There's about a thousand caveats for everything you're suggesting. Unrealistic, and, ultimately, terrible advice.
1. No - was in by 7:30. But as I say, you don't have to work every night, that was my choice, there's always say a Friday night or weekend. I honestly don't know any of my friends from around that time who didn't have a second job of some description/degree. 2. Charming, sums it up really. 3. I know, I left home at 16. Even those that can't live with their parents like me, there are still ways to get on the ladder, not easy, and bliming hard work, but it is possible. 4. Nope, the reason I did is not needed anymore, I doubt banks give a staff mortgage at 5% as a benefit these days.
I've heard lots of, can't do that, wouldn't live there. It's a choice, not everyone will have that choice, but it is absolutely about the choices we have and we make. It's fine if people don't want to do something, but don't bleet that you can't when you can, you choose not to in most instances.
Like your answer to 2. To suggest a perfectly good 2 bed property in Gillingham (you know, the one's you said didn't exist - "BAHAHAHAHHAHAHA £130k?!? Dream on pal."), near the station is a dank shithole that you wouldn't let your best friends dog live in is snobbery to the extreme. My parents grew up in Eltham, despite saving for years they could only afford a place in Rainham, Kent (you know, another one of those places you wouldn't let your mates dog live in) - but that got them on the ladder and eventually they got back into Eltham some years later - although it cost my mum pawning her engagement ring to do so.
There's a common theme of us older, lucky generations, having had second jobs 'back in the day'........ my dads was a Chauffeur, mine was bars, large's was delivering rubies!
I'm going to wade in with a few of my observations...........
Firstly blame the Labour party for their "Education, Education, Education" mantra from the 1990's. Most of the 40's & 50's somethings posting on here I expect left school at 16 & got a job - thus being able to save from an early start. Nowdays you can't leave school/college until you are 18 and then you are "guided" into going to University. Come out 3/4 years later (depending on if you took a gap year) and so by 22 you haven't even started work yet. Then there is the student loan to pay back.
I bought my first property (a studio flat an Dartford) at 21 with a mortgage 4xsalary at an interest rate of 11%. 10% deposit and monthly repayments are about the same as I'm paying now for a mortgage 4 times that figure.
The only difficulty today that any under 25's face getting onto the property ladder is the size of the deposit - but you can do Help to Buy if cant afford a 10% deposit on a £130k Studio flat in Dartford
Hilarious, don't go to uni kids, cause you can be like golfie and live with mum till you're 21, instead of expanding your life experience and critical thinking till your 21 instead
Hilarious, don't go to uni kids, cause you can be like golfie and live with mum till you're 21, instead of expanding your life experience and critical thinking till your 21 instead
I was going to stay well out of this until you posted this nonsense.
So many people go to university these days because they can't think what else to do. And schools push people into applying for university even if it is to study some third rate degree that will provide little real career benefit.
My son is a classic example. Got 3 A levels I suspect without really trying but decided he didn't want to go to university but wanted to do a carpentry apprenticeship instead. His school practically ostracised him for saying he didn't want to go to university.
For 3 years while his mates were "expanding their life experience and critical thinking" (Ie getting pissed and running up £40k of debt) he got up at 6.00am and worked his bollocks off on cold building sites. But he got a super training and qualified as a carpenter.
Now he's laughing. No debt and very decent earnings. In fact, far in excess of most of his his mates who went to university .
You really don't have to go to university to succeed in life.
Hilarious, don't go to uni kids, cause you can be like golfie and live with mum till you're 21, instead of expanding your life experience and critical thinking till your 21 instead
I was going to stay well out of this until you posted this nonsense.
So many people go to university these days because they can't think what else to do. And schools push people into applying for university even if it is to study some third rate degree that will provide little real career benefit.
My son is a classic example. Got 3 A levels I suspect without really trying but decided he didn't want to go to university but wanted to do a carpentry apprenticeship instead. His school practically ostracised him for saying he didn't want to go to university.
For 3 years while his mates were "expanding their life experience and critical thinking" (Ie getting pissed and running up £40k of debt) he got up at 6.00am and worked his bollocks off on cold building sites. But he got a super training and qualified as a carpenter.
Now he's laughing. No debt and very decent earnings. In fact, far in excess of most of his his mates who went to university .
You really don't have to go to university to succeed in life.
I was taking the piss out of old cheery chops, but good for your son, university isn't for all, but for many it's a great life experience that we really shouldn’t be lumbering people with massive debt for (not free higher education, but not at the cost it’s currently at)
I remember back in the days of Blair when he wanted something like 60% of school leavers to go to university. Why I asked myself would you want that amount. I have no idea of the percentage of jobs that require a degree but I reckon it is far less than 60 %. Instead of sending that amount of school leavers to university we should have invested heavily in apprenticeship schemes. The skills shortage we have in many industries is not helped by sending so many kids to university doing second rate degrees and saddling themselves with huge depts that will take years to pay off.
I know I'm generalising a bit here but when you see some TV programmes and they are interviewing twenty somethings about struggling to get on the housing ladder they are invariably down the pub and playing with the latest iPhone. If you want something that badly you have to make sacrifices but nowadays people want everything and then bleat when they can't afford to buy a property. It's about priorities in a lot of instances.
Jeez, what should younger generations do, go to work, and have nothing else in their lives? How dare they might go for a drink, how dare they have something which allows them to function in a digital economy like the UKs. They should just do nothing, other then save so they buy a house/flat that is massively more expensive then the generation before had. Who could get a mortgage cheaper and easier on a property that was at worst 3 times their salary.
Must be a fucking breeze being a boomer, cheap property brought and sitting on massive profits, final salary pensions, massive sense of entitlement and a willingness to pull up the draw bridge on the ones coming behind, which they're parents would never have done.
yeah because we never had to save mate, never had to cope with interest rates of 15%, never had the issue of negative equity, never had to worry about being made redundant on the very day we completed on a house purchase. You are right, it was a breeze.
Wait til you hear that could all happen to people who are spending decades putting together a deposit for a flat. Womp womp womp, woe is you.
nowhere have I said 'woe is me', I was replying to Rothko's post where he was saying how easy us 'boomers' had it and we now have a sense of entitlement. All what I said was true but we just had to suck it up and get on with it. If anything I think people nowadays have a sense of entitlement and are not prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.
honestly wish we lived in a world where the majority of young people were able to live at their parents, rent free, seemingly having unlimited time energy to be able to hold down a commuting job into central london, keep on top of emails with international clients and work another job (who needs sleep? Bloody millenials). Also not having any semblance of a life, just so boomers can prop up their property portfolios, their excuse being they had to pay a few extra quid every month 25-30 years ago.
I guess I'm now looking forward to "have you tried not being poor?" bit of financial advice to some one on this thread, as that's literally the level of advice going on here.
Womp womp womp, woe is you.
I'm going to keep off this thread for today because it's making me angry. Yes, I live in a 450k house mortgage free, yes I have a big pension pot, yes I'm going retire before I'm 60. But when I was twenty-two and had a large mortgage, a car loan, other debts I used to work 9am to 5pm, plus an hour commuting each way, come home and deliver Indian's for a local curry house three evenings a week. Then on Saturday and Sunday evenings I'd do the same whilst my mate's were down the pub. It's about priorities and because of those sacrifices nearly 40 years ago I'm now sitting fairly pretty. I don't call that a sense of entitlement I call it fucking working hard.
They want it given to them on a plate mate...save for a deposit that means no his and hers BMW cars, no foreign holidays every year, no buying the latest gadgets, no night clubbing every weekend, no Saturday shopping for clothes when the wardrobes are full, I can see them giving that up...
Like you mate I had no help getting started, we had to stay in and save for a deposit, run an old banger, buy second half stuff for the house...this lot wont do that and they don't want a flat or a little terraced house to get started, they want detached properties and all the mod cons....didn't know I was so lucky...
When I bought my first house my senior foreman called me in the office to discuss my salary as he got a letter from the building society verifying my salary to see if I could get a mortgage...
The house was 22k a 2 bed semi....my basic salary was just under 6k a year, I needed 7.334k to make it. Luckily he added s bit of OT and allowances so I could reach that figure...
Now fill in a form an hour or two later its approved.
Comments
A lot of negative equity scenarios arose in the nineties too - too simplistic to say it was easier back then than now.
London prices are the extreme examples to use.
Going forward the work from home options may help adjust prices a little and make some people realise they can be in Zone 4 and much further out where gradually affordability improves.
I didn't get this reference however to 'hoops' to prove you can afford the mortgage. Not sure that's much more than a monthly budget with all costs considered. That is not really unreasonable or new I don't think; and, is actually a good discipline.
Must be a fucking breeze being a boomer, cheap property brought and sitting on massive profits, final salary pensions, massive sense of entitlement and a willingness to pull up the draw bridge on the ones coming behind, which they're parents would never have done.
2. Who said anything about the south east? But in the SE £130k would get you a 2 bed house/flat in a reasonable area.
3. No, I didn't say stay with parents into your 30's, get married, have kids etc whilst living there. To be clear a lot (but certainly not all) say 22-25 year olds don't need to move out of the parents home.
4. Dunno what the average wage was, from memory I was on about £10k so bought at circa 8-9x salary (not the best example as I worked for a bank and got a cheap 5% mortgage).
5. Wasn't complaining, merely stating a fact, a 70k mortgage in the early 90's at 10% rate has about the same monthly repayment as a £350k mortgage now at 2% (allowing for inflation).
I'm not saying buying a house is easy now, but i'm also saying for most it never was, whether you were my parents (bought in the late 60's) where they lived the first few years of their married lives renting a room from a family member and saving every penny for 5 years to get a deposit or me (early 90's) doing two jobs and living in effect in a bedsit in Bethnal Green whilst I saved.
It's about choices, what gets me is when some people moan they can't afford a house when they clearly can but they choose to not be able to afford to due to the choices they make. What they really mean is I still want to be able to rent my flat in a nice area, go out, have a nice car, not sacrifice much and still want to be able to save a deposit. If i'd have gone down that route i'd probably also still be renting (although hopefully not a bed sit in Bethnal Green despite it being a much improved area!).
I'd happily run through with anyone their finances and show you what can be done. Done it many times with younger staff, some have took it on board to a greater or lesser degree, some not.
yeah because we never had to save mate, never had to cope with interest rates of 15%, never had the issue of negative equity, never had to worry about being made redundant on the very day we completed on a house purchase. You are right, it was a breeze.
2. BAHAHAHAHHAHAHA £130k?!? Dream on pal.
3. So, AGAIN, they're gonna be in their 30's when they can afford a deposit?
4. So you got a super cheap mortgage? This exchange gets better and better.
5. Then you should've done all of the above if it was that bad. Why didn't you?
I guess I'm now looking forward to "have you tried not being poor?" bit of financial advice to some one on this thread, as that's literally the level of advice going on here.
Womp womp womp, woe is you.
I'm going to keep off this thread for today because it's making me angry. Yes, I live in a 450k house mortgage free, yes I have a big pension pot, yes I'm going retire before I'm 60. But when I was twenty-two and had a large mortgage, a car loan, other debts I used to work 9am to 5pm, plus an hour commuting each way, come home and deliver Indian's for a local curry house three evenings a week. Then on Saturday and Sunday evenings I'd do the same whilst my mate's were down the pub. It's about priorities and because of those sacrifices nearly 40 years ago I'm now sitting fairly pretty. I don't call that a sense of entitlement I call it fucking working hard.
Like many other things, they are not having these issues in Germany and they have long thought our attitude to property ownership is barking.
2. There's literally loads; just one example of a two bed maisonette at 100k asking - https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/70427496#/ walking distance to the station needs a bit of work but nothing major. Save 10k deposit and it's yours (or one similar this one's sold), £325 a month over 2 years £225 over 3 years etc. Not everyone works in the city and needs a season ticket, but believe Gillingham is about £4,250 if you do need it.
3. Why? 3-5 years tops, see above.
4. Was cheap in those days, expensive compared to now (my mortgage was about £420 @ 5% compared to market rate of about £600) long time ago now but there might have been a tax charge as well as a BIK, but again it's about choices. I specifically went to work for a bank to take advantage of the cheaper mortgage, not sure it was the right decision actually as rates started to drop and i'd longer term probably have been better taking the higher paid job not at a bank.
5. Not sure of your question, but did most of the above.
It's not easy, never has been, but for a lot of people i've come across who say 'can't' it's more like 'don't want to' - i've lost track of the people whove said 'ok for you' then when I suggest maybe if they need a car buy an old run around for £1,000 rather than on PCP or maybe don't keep getting the latest iphone at £65 a month or maybe do a cheap holiday rather than £2k in Ibiza or why not open a LISA - it's like i'm from Mars, not have a really nice car, holiday, phone etc........
The lad I employed nearly 2 years ago (started on 24k), 19 lives at home with parents has managed to save around £20k so far (inc £4k thanks to the government), in another 12-18 months he'll be buying his first property.
Anyone leaving school/uni getting a reasonable bottom of the rung job in the city and living at home with parents should be able to buy a place well within 5 years and not live like a monk.
Central London is like a different country, and not sure the average person was ever buying in central London.
What ever happened to move out to where you can afford, again, most don't want to - that is very much attitude. Show me any 18-20 year old doing the level of job I did (very much office junior at an insurance company/bank) and i'll show them how it can be done with true life, up to date, figures well before they are 25. Even someone out in rental at say 25 with little spare cash due to rent payments it can be done. (I mentioned lease to buy at the start).
Germany is very much a rental country - but who owns the property that's rented?
I do think renting should be more regulated and i'd go as far as having maximum rents set up to a level, but that in itself can cause issues. I still have a couple of tenants (properties owned by friendly society not me) that are fair rent, not as cheap as you may imagine and of course the agreements are very different to a modern short hold as to who is responsible for maintaining what.
2. Great, live in a dank shithole in a shit area so you can afford to buy in... a dank shithole in a shit area. Wouldn't let my friend's dog live in that.
3. Once again, for those at the back, not every young person can live with their parents, even more of those can't live there rent free. It's not realistic to expect most young people to do that, because they can't.
4. So you worked for a bank, are you advising all young people work for a bank?
Again, lets be realistic. There's about a thousand caveats for everything you're suggesting. Unrealistic, and, ultimately, terrible advice.
If you responded with sympathy rather than the "I'm alright jack" I doubt you'd get so many thorny responses. If the property market crashes and the bubble pops, you only have yourselves to blame, yet you'll be on here complaining that you worked hard only to have significant hit to your property portfolio so you cant retire early.
The gap between average income and average house prices has changed between 1985 and 2015 from twice an average salary to up to six times average income. Median house prices in London the median house now cost up to 12 times the median London salary.
2. Charming, sums it up really.
3. I know, I left home at 16. Even those that can't live with their parents like me, there are still ways to get on the ladder, not easy, and bliming hard work, but it is possible.
4. Nope, the reason I did is not needed anymore, I doubt banks give a staff mortgage at 5% as a benefit these days.
I've heard lots of, can't do that, wouldn't live there. It's a choice, not everyone will have that choice, but it is absolutely about the choices we have and we make. It's fine if people don't want to do something, but don't bleet that you can't when you can, you choose not to in most instances.
Like your answer to 2. To suggest a perfectly good 2 bed property in Gillingham (you know, the one's you said didn't exist - "BAHAHAHAHHAHAHA £130k?!? Dream on pal."), near the station is a dank shithole that you wouldn't let your best friends dog live in is snobbery to the extreme. My parents grew up in Eltham, despite saving for years they could only afford a place in Rainham, Kent (you know, another one of those places you wouldn't let your mates dog live in) - but that got them on the ladder and eventually they got back into Eltham some years later - although it cost my mum pawning her engagement ring to do so.
There's a common theme of us older, lucky generations, having had second jobs 'back in the day'........ my dads was a Chauffeur, mine was bars, large's was delivering rubies!
Firstly blame the Labour party for their "Education, Education, Education" mantra from the 1990's. Most of the 40's & 50's somethings posting on here I expect left school at 16 & got a job - thus being able to save from an early start. Nowdays you can't leave school/college until you are 18 and then you are "guided" into going to University. Come out 3/4 years later (depending on if you took a gap year) and so by 22 you haven't even started work yet. Then there is the student loan to pay back.
I bought my first property (a studio flat an Dartford) at 21 with a mortgage 4xsalary at an interest rate of 11%. 10% deposit and monthly repayments are about the same as I'm paying now for a mortgage 4 times that figure.
The only difficulty today that any under 25's face getting onto the property ladder is the size of the deposit - but you can do Help to Buy if cant afford a 10% deposit on a £130k Studio flat in Dartford
So many people go to university these days because they can't think what else to do. And schools push people into applying for university even if it is to study some third rate degree that will provide little real career benefit.
My son is a classic example. Got 3 A levels I suspect without really trying but decided he didn't want to go to university but wanted to do a carpentry apprenticeship instead. His school practically ostracised him for saying he didn't want to go to university.
For 3 years while his mates were "expanding their life experience and critical thinking" (Ie getting pissed and running up £40k of debt) he got up at 6.00am and worked his bollocks off on cold building sites. But he got a super training and qualified as a carpenter.
Now he's laughing. No debt and very decent earnings. In fact, far in excess of most of his his mates who went to university .
You really don't have to go to university to succeed in life.
Why I asked myself would you want that amount.
I have no idea of the percentage of jobs that require a degree but I reckon it is far less than 60 %.
Instead of sending that amount of school leavers to university we should have invested heavily in apprenticeship schemes.
The skills shortage we have in many industries is not helped by sending so many kids to university doing second rate degrees and saddling themselves with huge depts that will take years to pay off.
Like you mate I had no help getting started, we had to stay in and save for a deposit, run an old banger, buy second half stuff for the house...this lot wont do that and they don't want a flat or a little terraced house to get started, they want detached properties and all the mod cons....didn't know I was so lucky...
The house was 22k a 2 bed semi....my basic salary was just under 6k a year, I needed 7.334k to make it. Luckily he added s bit of OT and allowances so I could reach that figure...
Now fill in a form an hour or two later its approved.