Boomer Wealth

Yurt2

Geuze wrote: »

more pop growth now
low interest rates allow people to borrow more, adding to demand
higher disp incomes now add to demand
land costs are way too high now

Bingo, and bingo again. And in a low interest climate, those currently with property will outmuscle younger borrowers almost 100 percent of the time. Land costs are as you stated, far too high for the same reason. Policy makers asleep / plugging their ear will chant "build more houses!" as if it puts a dent in the spiralling costs.

Wanderer78

dubrov wrote: »

High interest rates were a huge factor in this.
If interest rates went to 15%, you can be fairly sure house prices would drop to low multiples of income.

would probably cause a catastrophic global collapse, doesnt look like interest rates are going anywhere soon, too much private debt about

Wanderer78

Yurt! wrote: »

Bingo, and bingo again. And in a low interest climate, those currently with property will outmuscle younger borrowers almost 100 percent of the time. Land costs are as you stated, far too high for the same reason. Policy makers asleep / plugging their ear will chant "build more houses!" as if it puts a dent in the spiralling costs.

land value tax, demand is dropping for credit, could be trouble for the financial sector, and us

Smee_Again

dubrov wrote: »

High interest rates were a huge factor in this.
If interest rates went to 15%, you can be fairly sure house prices would drop to low multiples of income.

I posted about this earlier in thread.

If you compare mortgage payments as a % of the Average Industrial Wage a £22.5K mortgage over 25 years @ 13% in 1983 is a similar % of Gross Wage as a €250K mortgage nowadays.

But the salary needed to get that mortgage has increased from low €20s (in today's money) to low €70s.

atticu

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Nope, I'm now in London and earning a good wage. Living alone in a small flat as I can no longer share due to chronic illness (tbh flat isn't loads more than a flatshare would be - I got a very good deal due to the pandemic). This is the best I've ever been financially and it's still a struggle to save.

I am sorry to hear about your illness.

You live in London - that is expensive.
You live alone - that is expensive.

Maybe for you this is beyond your control, but for most people it is well within their control.
So, yes, Netflix, Broadband, a new phone, takeaway food, etc. are expensive.

PokeHerKing

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Dude, don't waste your time.


You could spend a year writing a perfectly researched and peer-reviewed analysis of this issue and the same people would be coming back with lines about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps and avocado-toast.



People who benefit from an inequitable status-quo that's not remotely sustainable will turn reality upside down and logic inside-out to justify maintaining it.



Whatever they write, what they really mean is "I'm all right Jack, **** you".

Or maybe just maybe people's views are biased based on their own situations. If you've not a pot to piss in and are working like a dog 24/7 I've sympathy for you and you're probably entitled to pull a Frank Grimes and go off your head.

But it doesn't mean that someone who's managed to get by in life and build some stability for themselves has to agree that the system is rigged and they should be grateful for how easy they've had it. Especially when both sides of the argument are from the same generation.

lainey_d_123

atticu wrote: »

I am sorry to hear about your illness.

You live in London - that is expensive.
You live alone - that is expensive.

Maybe for you this is beyond your control, but for most people it is well within their control.
So, yes, Netflix, Broadband, a new phone, takeaway food, etc. are expensive.

I feel like just banging my head off the table.

What is it with you people and your obsession with the 'avocado toast' argument?

People move to London for job opportunities, because there are few or none where they come from. The average ROOM in a shared house in London, in an area which isn't horrendous, is now around the £750 mark, plus bills. Lots of people in their twenties are only bringing home between £1400 and £1800ish after tax. How are people supposed to start out in life and build wealth if they're shelling out up to half their post tax income to have a substandard quality of life?

I love how you think the problem is Netflix (£8.99, and who even pays for it alone anyway?) or broadband (about £10 a month for people sharing) or takeaways (£15 a week, at most - I certainly never got one that often) and not, you know, the £800 or so people are spending just to have somewhere to sleep. Yeah, it's definitely the Netflix, alright. That 9 quid a month really adds up.

Ush1

dubrov wrote: »

High interest rates were a huge factor in this.
If interest rates went to 15%, you can be fairly sure house prices would drop to low multiples of income.

Don't forget those pesky wives going out and getting jobs as well!

CrankyHaus

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Or maybe just maybe people's views are biased based on their own situations. If you've not a pot to piss in and are working like a dog 24/7 I've sympathy for you and you're probably entitled to pull a Frank Grimes and go off your head.

But it doesn't mean that someone who's managed to get by in life and build some stability for themselves has to agree that the system is rigged and they should be grateful for how easy they've had it. Especially when both sides of the argument are from the same generation.

I'm doing pretty well in life, along with most of my family and friends.
I can still acknowledge that the status-quo is unjust and unsustainable. In the long run this isn't good for any of us, so to me it's obvious enlightened self-interest to change it.



I don't have much respect for people who can only see the world from their own perspective. I didn't say anyone had to be grateful. But as citizens they do have a responsibility to be realistic and not butter themselves up with fairy-tales.

HerrKuehn

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I feel like just banging my head off the table.

What is it with you people and your obsession with the 'avocado toast' argument?

People move to London for job opportunities, because there are few or none where they come from. The average ROOM in a shared house in London, in an area which isn't horrendous, is now around the £750 mark, plus bills. Lots of people in their twenties are only bringing home between £1400 and £1800ish after tax. How are people supposed to start out in life and build wealth if they're shelling out up to half their post tax income to have a substandard quality of life?

I love how you think the problem is Netflix (£8.99, and who even pays for it alone anyway?) or broadband (about £10 a month for people sharing) or takeaways (£15 a week, at most - I certainly never got one that often) and not, you know, the £800 or so people are spending just to have somewhere to sleep. Yeah, it's definitely the Netflix, alright. That 9 quid a month really adds up.

Surely £1800 after tax is quite a low salary in London?

PokeHerKing

CrankyHaus wrote: »

I'm doing pretty well in life, along with most of my family and friends.
I can still acknowledge that the status-quo is unjust and unsustainable. In the long run this isn't good for any of us, so to me it's obvious enlightened self-interest to change it.



I don't have much respect for people who can only see the world from their own perspective. I didn't say anyone had to be grateful. But as citizens they do have a responsibility to be realistic and not butter themselves up with fairy-tales.

I've similar amounts of respect for champagne socialists.

You can be somewhere in the middle and acknowledge that there are absolutely leg ups for certain demographics in society and plenty $hit hands dealt out in life, while also taking some responsibility for your own situation.

HerrKuehn

CrankyHaus wrote: »

I'm doing pretty well in life, along with most of my family and friends.
I can still acknowledge that the status-quo is unjust and unsustainable. In the long run this isn't good for any of us, so to me it's obvious enlightened self-interest to change it.



I don't have much respect for people who can only see the world from their own perspective. I didn't say anyone had to be grateful. But as citizens they do have a responsibility to be realistic and not butter themselves up with fairy-tales.

What do you think should be done? It seems to me that most people here would rather not pay any extra tax for better services etc. The water charges issue was certainly very informative for me as to where we stand as a society.

lainey_d_123

HerrKuehn wrote: »

Surely £1800 after tax is quite a low salary in London?

Not particularly for a graduate in their twenties, no. That's about what £30K is after tax, deductions, pension and student loan repayments. I'd say quite a typical kind of salary for anyone in their twenties not working in tech, finance or other high earning professions. Certainly not terrible.

And if anyone wants to be as obtuse as to ask why they live in London, not everyone can be a developer or an accountant. Making 30K in London in something like PR or journalism and having future prospects is a hell of a lot better than rotting away in Hull with no opportunities and no way to network.

Ush1

HerrKuehn wrote: »

What do you think should be done? It seems to me that most people here would rather not pay any extra tax for better services etc. The water charges issue was certainly very informative for me as to where we stand as a society.

Not abolishing the Seanad was an interesting one for all the moaning about politicians that happens!

HerrKuehn

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Not particularly for a graduate in their twenties, no. That's about what £30K is after tax, deductions, pension and student loan repayments. I'd say quite a typical kind of salary for anyone in their twenties not working in tech, finance or other high earning professions. Certainly not terrible.

And if anyone wants to be as obtuse as to ask why they live in London, not everyone can be a developer or an accountant. Making 30K in London in something like PR or journalism and having future prospects is a hell of a lot better than rotting away in Hull with no opportunities and no way to network.

£1800 would be about £27k and that would be ~£9k below the average London salary. So from that point of view it would be low.

IAmTheReign

HerrKuehn wrote: »

Surely £1800 after tax is quite a low salary in London?

Not at all. Median salary in London is only 2,900 a month, entry level salaries are actually quite low in London. 28k a year wouldn't be unusual for a recent college graduate which is only about 1,900 a month.

lainey_d_123

HerrKuehn wrote: »

£1800 would be about £27k and that would be ~£9k below the average London salary. So from that point of view it would be low.

Most British people have student loan repayments and some sort of pension contribution, so actually take home of £1800 a month is much closer to £30K pre-tax.

Most young people make less than the average salary...that's kind of the point? You work your way up, you don't start out on great money. It's always been that way. The problem is that the rent costs are now so high that people can't save what they do earn or create any wealth, so they're going into their thirties with no assets and no savings. Then by the time they are earning enough to actually start saving properly and then to have bought a property, it's getting very late to start a family and whatnot.

lainey_d_123

IAmTheReign wrote: »

Not at all. Median salary in London is only 2,900 a month, entry level salaries are actually quite low in London. 28k a year wouldn't be unusual for a recent college graduate which is only about 1,900 a month.

It's actually fairly good for a recent graduate in many industries. A lot of people are starting out on more like £24K or even less. And remember that student loan deductions get taken out too, and almost everyone with a graduate job pays those.

The J Stands for Jay

Wanderer78 wrote: »

doesnt look like inflation, as we commonly know it, may not be a concern for some time, deflation could be the problem now, which brings its own set of problems

We had deflation, around 2008 I think. It wasn't great, but there was enough other crap going on that we didn't really notice

Tony EH

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I'm really tired of Boomers acting as if millennials are just too lazy or too incompetent to buy houses

In fairness, I'd say that most don't Lainey. They understand very well the difficulties that the younger generation have when its comes to property.

You'll get the odd clown that will spout cliches like "avocado toast", "lattes" and other crap. But they're the type that have been moaning about every generation that came after them, be it Gen X, millennials and now Gen Z. So, it's par the course.

Then you'll get the type that are on Boards, who'll be more about posting from a political point of view, than an honest one.

Geuze

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

People move to London for job opportunities, because there are few or none where they come from. The average ROOM in a shared house in London, in an area which isn't horrendous, is now around the £750 mark, plus bills. Lots of people in their twenties are only bringing home between £1400 and £1800ish after tax. How are people supposed to start out in life and build wealth if they're shelling out up to half their post tax income to have a substandard quality of life?

I love how you think the problem is Netflix (£8.99, and who even pays for it alone anyway?) or broadband (about £10 a month for people sharing) or takeaways (£15 a week, at most - I certainly never got one that often) and not, you know, the £800 or so people are spending just to have somewhere to sleep. Yeah, it's definitely the Netflix, alright. That 9 quid a month really adds up.

100%, there is no argument, there is no debate.

We all know and agree that except for rural locations, rents and house prices are way too high, and are a barrier preventing people in their 20s and 30s from participating fully in society / family life.

ancapailldorcha

Tony EH wrote: »

In fairness, I'd say that most don't Lainey. They understand very well the difficulties that the younger generation have when its comes to property.

You'll get the odd clown that will spout cliches like "avocado toast", "lattes" and other crap. But they're the type that have been moaning about every generation that came after them, be it Gen X, millennials and now Gen Z. So, it's par the course.

Then you'll get the type that are on Boards, who'll be more about posting from a political point of view, than an honest one.

It's quite common for me that Lainey is right more often than not but there are confounding factors. The most vitriolic of the boomers and older folk tend to be avid readers of the Sun, the Mail or the Express IME.

Where I do get some sympathy or empathy among older generations tends to be from the middle aged people I know and the older folk who'd be into travelling and would be fairly well educated or would have had to interact with various demographics quite a bit.

The tabloid readers tend to select for like-minded IME and they tend to get quite upset when presented with alternating viewpoints which is a bit ironic given that students are supposed to be the snowflakes.

Tony EH

Yurt! wrote: »

Grew up in 70s and wasn't well off. My father drove a clapped out potato to work and we lived in a treehouse in Glasnevin Cemetery. Our first holiday wasn't until I was 15 to Dublin zoo and all they had was horses painted as zebras. I was in 6th year before I saw my first film on VCR: Rocky IV. The lads in the CBS slagged me off because we couldn't afford a map at home and I thought Ivan Drago was from Cork.

My first job was as a chimney sweep. Not as the guy that does the sweeping, I was literally the sweep. I saved up enough bubblegum stickers of Liverpool players over 5 years to afford my first house. Never looked back. All this while payin 81 percent tax and interest rates were 245 percent. I'm now a full-time patroniser with 5 apprentice patronisers under me.

The current generation are all about the Snoopy Dog Dog and flying to Ibiza to get off their face on flavoured ice cream and heroin. A bit of work ethic is what's required and there's nothing for nothing in this world.

The J Stands for Jay

Leilani Fast Windbreak wrote: »

There would be no tax on this arrangement.

Hmm, https://www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/valuation-date-and-the-value-of-certain-benefits/free-use-of-property-and-interest-free-loans.aspx

The J Stands for Jay

beauf wrote: »

Well you actually need a smart device to watch it and a BB connection. Then somewhere to watch it. I'm going to assume most people don't just have Netflix. Because I did only have Netflix for about a year and that gets old real fast.

The whole Netflix thing though is missing the point. The inequality of wealth distribution is widening. Society is becoming less equal. People will be less well off then previous generations.

Netflix is the only subscription I have. TV is Freesat and saorview, so no recurring costs. YouTube, 4od, etc are free.

Tony EH

Yurt! wrote: »

There will be day of reckoning with housing in this country, I'm fairly certain of it.

Well, SOMETHING has to change, that's for sure. Because we simply cannot keep going on like this.

And not only that, but there is a ticking timebomb regarding mortgages that's going to happen too. There's going to be a lot of people who'll find that that half million house the bought in the middle of nowhere is impossible to pay for when the jobs run dry...again.

The J Stands for Jay

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I love that you think most 30 somethings stay at home to save up and then are gifted a nice chunk of money by the parents. I'm sure that's lovely for those who have that option, but many of us don't.

No living at home and no chunk of change from the parents for me. I rented hovels in Dublin and got lucky at managing to get a mortgage while prices were going down.

The J Stands for Jay

HerrKuehn wrote: »

I was just wondering what was meant by younger generation. I am only 5 years older and I graduated during the tech bubble crash. So, I also emigrated for a while.

The oldest millennials are 39 now. Not sure what ages the youngest are.

The J Stands for Jay

Yurt! wrote: »

The dot-com crash barely registered in Ireland and was highly industry specific where it did. Comparing the dot com bubble to the GFC is like comparing carpet burn to having your leg amputated.

It was still tough to get a decent job. It was more like losing a few toes to frostbite compared to leg amputation. And since the older generation weren't as badly impacted (less likely to work in affected industries and we're still obsessed with investing their pensions on property and banks), it didn't get the same media hype as the GFC.

Ush1

It's a kind of extension of identity politics at this stage and critical theory.

Baring in mind there's plenty of "boomers" who haven't a pot to p*ss in.