Boomer Wealth

Naos

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

No they couldn't - I was an adult in the 80s and that wasn't possible, certainly not in Dublin. It wasn't a doom laden apocalypse but times were very hard. We lived frugally and were happy to do it in order to own our home so our children would have security growing up.

Part of it is absolutely a willingness to do without in order to buy a home, and my own kids did the same when they were saving their deposits.

Without sounding like I'm prying, just genuinely trying to understand:

What age were you when you bought your first house?
How much were you earning annually?
Did you buy with a partner and were they working full-time as well?

Yurt2

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

You must be from the Michael O’Leary ‘pull up your britches’ school of Irish diplomacy and debate.

Gnarly post dudebro. Don't forget to smash that FG retweet button today Flashmeister.

Dizzyblonde

Naos wrote: »

Without sounding like I'm prying, just genuinely trying to understand:

What age were you when you bought your first house?
How much were you earning annually?
Did you buy with a partner and were they working full-time as well?

I was 22, and a hairdresser so not earning a huge amount. Himself was 29 and had an "office job". Pretty average couple at the time. We saved and bought together, the house was £27,500. Not only was the mortgage interest rate through the roof, income tax rates were much higher then than they are now. So disposable income was proportionately lower.

Tony EH

My sister and her hubby, who was on a modest wage working in a warehouse, bought their home in Dublin, in their 20's and knocked out three kids. Only he had an income.

You couldn't even dream of that now.

CrankyHaus

Tony EH wrote: »

My sister and her hubby, who was on a modest wage working in a warehouse, bought their home in Dublin, in their 20's and knocked out three kids. Only he had an income.

You couldn't even dream of that now.

Yeah but people have mobiles with AMOLED screens now, so it all works out.

Naos

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

I was 22, and a hairdresser so not earning a huge amount. Himself was 29 and had an "office job". Pretty average couple at the time. We saved and bought together, the house was £27,500. Not only was the mortgage interest rate through the roof, income tax rates were much higher then than they are now. So disposable income was proportionately lower.

.. that kind of proves the point, right?

You were on a low income and your husband was on an average income (that's what I am inferring from the 'office job').

You were able to purchase at the age of 22, how many years savings did you have? The majority of 22 year olds now are only leaving college around the time you bought a house.

arccosh

Naos wrote: »

.. that kind of proves the point, right?

You were on a low income and your husband was on an average income (that's what I am inferring from the 'office job').

You were able to purchase at the age of 22, how many years savings did you have? The majority of 22 year olds now are only leaving college around the time you bought a house.

times were tough, only being able to afford a house during high interest rates at the age of 22

markodaly

Yurt! wrote: »

It's not really though is it?


Sowell is from the Bill Cosby 'pull up your breetches' wing of American race relations with a thin veneer of Ivy League patter. 2D, patronizing and utterly useful to the economic right in America to peddle out every now and then.

Well, if that was your attempt at a rebuttal that your comment was not racist, then you just doubled down on it and made it worse.

It seems you cannot argue the point apart from bringing their race into the equation.
Thomas Sowell, Bill Cosby, all in an effort to prove some point that I have no idea what it is?
Do you think all African-Americans are one homogenous group?

Yurt2

markodaly wrote: »

Well, if that was your attempt at a rebuttal that your comment was not racist, then you just doubled down on it and made it worse.

It seems you cannot argue the point apart from bringing their race into the equation.
Thomas Sowell, Bill Cosby, all in an effort to prove some point that I have no idea what it is?
Do you think all African-Americans are one homogenous group?

No.


And Sowell equated Obama policies to Hitler. He's a numpty as well as a useful idiot. He's not 'profound' he's the same partisan hack littered throughout America, just with an Ivy-League graduate degree, and yes, off-the-wall right-wing think tanks have him on speed-dial because he's conveniently African American.

Enjoy trying to paint me as racist, I've broken bread with all colours and creeds more than you've had hot dinners, it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

flynnlives

There needs to be a rapid redistribution of wealth in this country from the over 55's to the younger demographics.

There is vasts amounts of wealth in this country locked away in property and gold plated public service pensions. Majority held in the older demographic.

The economy is unsustainable for Housing to continue to be unaffordable for young people. Never mind it being immoral.

What gets me most is this im alright jack attitude from the 55+ generation. Oh we had it bad in the 80s etc.
Thing is despite the high interest rates and income tax back then they could still afford a house on one income. They fail to mention that part.
You would need to be earning in the 1% today to get a single income mortgage in a Irish city.

Dizzyblonde

Naos wrote: »

.. that kind of proves the point, right?

You were on a low income and your husband was on an average income (that's what I am inferring from the 'office job').

You were able to purchase at the age of 22, how many years savings did you have? The majority of 22 year olds now are only leaving college around the time you bought a house.

And so would I have been, if I'd been able to go to college. I'm not sure many 22 year old nowadays would want to settle down, it's a different world and there are so many opportunities to travel etc.

We had to have around £5,000 which was a huge amount back then. It took around three years. I've never implied that it's as easy or easier nowadays, but made the point that in order to save for a house, and to pay a mortgage, we had to do without a lot of luxuries and live very frugally.

I'm well aware of how hard it is nowadays, having seen my own children save and buy their houses. And some friends tell them how 'lucky they are' to have a house, when they could have theirs too if they'd been willing to save as hard and do without holidays etc for a year or two.

In the 80s we felt hard done by because houses were much cheaper in the 70s but so what? That's life, unfortunately.

WrenBoy

flynnlives wrote: »

There needs to be a rapid redistribution of wealth in this country from the over 55's to the younger demographics.

There is vasts amounts of wealth in this country locked away in property and gold plated public service pensions. Majority held in the older demographic.

The economy is unsustainable for Housing to continue to be unaffordable for young people. Never mind it being immoral.

What gets me most is this im alright jack attitude from the 55+ generation. Oh we had it bad in the 80s etc.
Thing is despite the high interest rates and income tax back then they could still afford a house on one income. They fail to mention that part.
You would need to be earning in the 1% today to get a single income mortgage in a Irish city.

What if people don't want to give away their earnings and savings ?

Dizzyblonde

flynnlives wrote: »

There needs to be a rapid redistribution of wealth in this country from the over 55's to the younger demographics.

There is vasts amounts of wealth in this country locked away in property and gold plated public service pensions. Majority held in the older demographic.

The economy is unsustainable for Housing to continue to be unaffordable for young people. Never mind it being immoral.

What gets me most is this im alright jack attitude from the 55+ generation. Oh we had it bad in the 80s etc.
Thing is despite the high interest rates and income tax back then they could still afford a house on one income. They fail to mention that part.
You would need to be earning in the 1% today to get a single income mortgage in a Irish city.

You're cracking me up :pac:

We had it hard, you have it hard - it's not a competition. We're not "all right Jack" we've only got what we worked hard for. I suggest you do the same, and see how you feel when you're 55+ and someone begrudges it to you. Some of us have more, some of us have less, we're not all the same now just as we weren't all the same back then.

Nobody is going to 'redistribute wealth', you're away with the fairies

Wanderer78

flynnlives wrote:

There needs to be a rapid redistribution of wealth in this country from the over 55's to the younger demographics.

We need to de-personalise these debates, its only causing bigger problems, even though there is an element of truth to your debate. the lack of wealth re-distribution is now extremely dangerous, we need action now, it will be difficult to do what you say, but this is a serious global problem, change has to occur, and we ve already begun

flynnlives

WrenBoy wrote: »

What if people don't want to give away their earnings and savings ?

Younger people are currently subsidizing the older generations healthcare.
A contributory healthcare tax on certain incomes over x is a good start.

An increase of Residential Charge on houses with x amount of rooms and only 2/3 occupants is another to encourage old people to downsize.

These proposals might seem harsh but the majority of younger people are now entering their 3rd recession. Something has to give.

flynnlives

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

You're cracking me up :pac:

We had it hard, you have it hard - it's not a competition. We're not "all right Jack" we've only got what we worked hard for. I suggest you do the same, and see how you feel when you're 55+ and someone begrudges it to you. Some of us have more, some of us have less, we're not all the same now just as we weren't all the same back then.

Nobody is going to 'redistribute wealth', you're away with the fairies

Just look at the distribution of wealth in Ireland. The majority of wealth is held by the older demographic.
Im simply pointing out the reality of the situation.

Wanderer78

Dizzyblonde wrote:

We had it hard, you have it hard - it's not a competition. We're not "all right Jack" we've only got what we worked hard for. I suggest you do the same, and see how you feel when you're 55+ and someone begrudges it to you. Some of us have more, some of us have less, we're not all the same now just as we weren't all the same back then.

There's no question older generations worked extremely hard for what they have, but conditions are radically different nowadays. generational differences are effectively incomparable, what worked for older generations, more than likely won't work for younger generations, the game has changed, radically, we re now at a point whereby, it's virtually impossible for younger generations to gain access to their most critical of needs, if things don't change soon, we all could fall

Dizzyblonde wrote:

Nobody is going to 'redistribute wealth', you're away with the fairies

Oh famous last words, it's coming, it won't be easy, and sadly, it may not be peaceful

Dizzyblonde

flynnlives wrote: »

Just look at the distribution of wealth in Ireland. The majority of wealth is held by the older demographic.
Im simply pointing out the reality of the situation.

Yes, because they've been working for longer. Who do you think paid for your schooling with their taxes? And your healthcare before you were earning - and your mother's children's allowance?

It works both ways, you see.

The trouble with Socialism is that at some point you run out of other people's money

Wanderer78

Dizzyblonde wrote:

Yes, because they've been working for longer. Who do you think paid for your schooling with their taxes? And your healthcare before you were earning - and your mother's children's allowance?

Again, what has worked for older generations, is now failing for younger generations, it's time for a new game, and urgently

Dizzyblonde wrote:

The trouble with Socialism is that at some point you run out of other people's money

We actually need a new form of capitalism, as our current one is slowly collapsing. we have figured out how to create effectively endless amounts of money, without any really serious problems(debatable), but..... so there's no need for other people's money, we can just more or less leave it where it is, and create more new money

Tony EH

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

The trouble with Socialism is that at some point you run out of other people's money

Dizzyblonde

Wanderer78 wrote: »

There's no question older generations worked extremely hard for what they have, but conditions are radically different nowadays. generational differences are effectively incomparable, what worked for older generations, more than likely won't work for younger generations, the game has changed, radically, we re now at a point whereby, it's virtually impossible for younger generations to gain access to their most critical of needs, if things don't change soon, we all could fall



Oh famous last words, it's coming, it won't be easy, and sadly, it may not be peaceful

Good luck with that :pac:

I agree that things are radically different nowadays, and that's a huge challenge for governments. Of course I want to see a better world for my children and grandchildren but nobody is going to tell us we haven't worked hard to have a roof over our heads and a pension. And nobody will be taking it away from us.

Dizzyblonde

@TonyEH - You do love your labels nowadays :pac: :pac: :pac:

Yurt2

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

Yes, because they've been working for longer. Who do you think paid for your schooling with their taxes? And your healthcare before you were earning - and your mother's children's allowance?

It works both ways, you see.

The trouble with Socialism is that at some point you run out of other people's money

On the contrary, 'boomer' (I hate that word) wealth is mostly in generous pension entitlements and housing. These are the precise things that younger generations are paying through the nose for (not to mention healthcare premiums). A lot of the wealth enjoyed by that demographic is in-fact cross-subsidized by the young. And a dignified afforable propery and a dignified pension are things that a hell of a lot of young people will never see through no fault of their own.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/07/generation-y-pay-price-baby-boomer-pensions

I agree that it is a contentious issue, but I don't think it's helpful for older generations to thumb their nose at those coming behind them telling them 'they earned everything they got.' The reality is a lot of the goodies you enjoy is the result of politicians buying your votes and sending the invoice to your children to a large extent.

flynnlives

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

Yes, because they've been working for longer. Who do you think paid for your schooling with their taxes? And your healthcare before you were earning - and your mother's children's allowance?

It works both ways, you see.

The trouble with Socialism is that at some point you run out of other people's money

have you seen the price of schooling? child care? etc.
Have you noticed many are having families later on in life, some even not bothering cause they cant afford it. Why is that?

They cant even afford a deposit for a house let alone childcare. This is on top of effectively paying the same rates of tax as our parents paid. Why? because salaries have not increased in line with inflation, yet dozens and dozens of stealth taxes have appeared.

Im afraid your not cognizant of the realities of Ireland today. And that reality is about to get significantly worse. This recession is only beginning.

im sorry but my generation is coming into power and we see were the wealth is. Its inevitable that older generations are going to need to contribute more.

And your point about socialism is funny. In the 60s,70s,80s the councils built massive amounts of social housing. That generation reaped that reward. Neo-liberalism stopped all that in the 90s.
That generation who got free housing voted to end it. And now look at the mess we are in. So im sorry, that generation, the older generation benefited quite nicely from socialism.


The truth is the older generation got their goodies on credit. Then pulled the ladder up. Now its the younger generation stuck with the tab.

Tony EH

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

@TonyEH - You do love your labels nowadays :pac: :pac: :pac:

I felt it was appropriate.

I might be getting a "cease and desist" letter from Gen Z HQ though. Gen X'ers aren't allowed to use Gen Z terms, or so I believe.

Smee_Again

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

And so would I have been, if I'd been able to go to college. I'm not sure many 22 year old nowadays would want to settle down, it's a different world and there are so many opportunities to travel etc.

We had to have around £5,000 which was a huge amount back then. It took around three years. I've never implied that it's as easy or easier nowadays, but made the point that in order to save for a house, and to pay a mortgage, we had to do without a lot of luxuries and live very frugally.

I'm well aware of how hard it is nowadays, having seen my own children save and buy their houses. And some friends tell them how 'lucky they are' to have a house, when they could have theirs too if they'd been willing to save as hard and do without holidays etc for a year or two.

In the 80s we felt hard done by because houses were much cheaper in the 70s but so what? That's life, unfortunately.

Between €15K-€18K in today's money if you calculate by inflation or bench mark against average industrial wage.

Tony EH

Smee_Again wrote: »

Between €15K-€18K in today's money if you calculate by inflation or bench mark against average industrial wage.

And it wouldn't even get you a sniff of a deposit for a house in Dublin.

recyclops

Tony EH wrote: »

And it wouldn't even get you a sniff of a deposit for a house in Dublin.

Which is a large part of the problem, a lot of people want to live in the same places. I grew up in Dublin and always thought I would live there. But soon realised that there was too many people wanting to do the same and this drove prices up.

Realistically I could have done if I saved more but i didn't, i decided the time was right to buy a house in north Wicklow, so I did and it was affordable, neither myself or my now wife earned more than 30000 at the time (which was in the last 4 years)

we can still get out to nights out in Dublin, still get night-links home still see our friends, still go to gigs and football matches etc.

But between 2013-2016 very little of those things happened except having friends over, we didn't stay overnight at friends weddings as that was 200 we could have saved, no holidays and lunches brought to work.

like I said if you want to live in Dublin you save just for a little longer, same reasons above is why I dont drive a Tesla regardless of how much I would want too.

Dizzyblonde

Listen lads - I'm not going to keep defending myself, and I'm not a spokeswoman for my age group. I'm not going to hang around where I'm being told that the tough years I lived through were actually a Utopian experience. I'm very in touch with the realities of life in these tough times, and I'm not wealthy. Don't forget that what my generation worked hard for was a better life for your generation growing up. So many of us had very little as kids ourselves. We weren't all just lining our pockets for the hell of it, and we're not all sitting on pots of cash.

I wish you all the best.

markodaly

Yurt! wrote: »

No.

OK, so African Americans can also be conservative and have different thoughts and politics than you or I or your run of the mill Democratic.

Therefore the rest of your argument is Null and void based on this very principal.

Enjoy trying to paint me as racist, I've broken bread with all colours and creeds more than you've had hot dinners, it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Would you have attacked his race if someone quoted a white-man instead of a black man?

Dizzyblonde

recyclops wrote: »

Which is a large part of the problem, a lot of people want to live in the same places. I grew up in Dublin and always thought I would live there. But soon realised that there was too many people wanting to do the same and this drove prices up.

Realistically I could have done if I saved more but i didn't, i decided the time was right to buy a house in north Wicklow, so I did and it was affordable, neither myself or my now wife earned more than 30000 at the time (which was in the last 4 years)

we can still get out to nights out in Dublin, still get night-links home still see our friends, still go to gigs and football matches etc.

But between 2013-2016 very little of those things happened except having friends over, we didn't stay overnight at friends weddings as that was 200 we could have saved, no holidays and lunches brought to work.

like I said if you want to live in Dublin you save just for a little longer, same reasons above is why I dont drive a Tesla regardless of how much I would want too.

You're living within your means - an alien concept for so many!

Smee_Again

Tony EH wrote: »

And it wouldn't even get you a sniff of a deposit for a house in Dublin.

Nope, and the house price scales up to about €80K-€90K. I've picked January 1983 as the base here for no other reason than it is the year I was born.

So working back from that house price and applying current rules of 10% deposit and 3.5 x salary a person/couple would need to be earning just over €23K to afford the house.

Mortgage payments on £22.5K @ 13% over 25 years would be €322 per month and the average nominal earnings were €815 per month, I'm not sure what take home would be on that though.

Compare that to 2015 when the average industrial wage was €2970.63 meaning an equivalent mortgage payment would be €1176.62 or €253500 @ 2.8% over 25 years.

Thats a decent sized mortgage, and bigger than mine, but you'd need a salary of €72500 to qualify. That salary is 3 times higher than the salary needed in 1983 to pay the same mortgage.

There's a lot that can be picked apart on this comment, but I'm just trying to show that for some there's no amount of living within their means that can change the fact that house prices have far outstripped wages over the last 40 odd years.

Wanderer78

Dizzyblonde wrote:

Good luck with that

It will happen, it has to happen, particularly for your kids and grandkids

Dizzyblonde wrote:

I agree that things are radically different nowadays, and that's a huge challenge for governments. Of course I want to see a better world for my children and grandchildren but nobody is going to tell us we haven't worked hard to have a roof over our heads and a pension. And nobody will be taking it away from us.

I've no doubt you and your partner have worked extremely hard for what you have, most people generally do, we have to stop these generational arguments, as this will require all generations, working together, to solve

PokeHerKing

Tony EH wrote: »

And it wouldn't even get you a sniff of a deposit for a house in Dublin.

Yeah but housing is now a 2 salary game and 40K would get you more than a sniff.

I'm 35 so I don't know what label I fall under and while I see arguments for certain problems I can't help but get the whiff of entitlement off a lot of the posts on this thread. Posters talking about young people have had several recessions at this stage, like age is somehow static..

We're all in the cycles together and believe it or not recessions tend to come round in some shape or form fairly regularly. Every generation sees their fair share of them.

Dizzyblonde

Wanderer78 wrote: »

It will happen, it has to happen, particularly for your kids and grandkids



I've no doubt you and your partner have worked extremely hard for what you have, most people generally do, we have to stop these generational arguments, as this will require all generations, working together, to solve

A lot of our generation are supporting our children with unpaid childcare and in every other way that we can. Not as a burden, we see it as a labour of love and a privilege. It's not the full solution, but it's a start.

Yurt2

markodaly wrote: »

OK, so African Americans can also be conservative and have different thoughts and politics than you or I or your run of the mill Democratic.

Therefore the rest of your argument is Null and void based on this very principal.



Would you have attacked his race if someone quoted a white-man instead of a black man?

Catch yourself on, I never attacked his race. Meh, on your first point.

markodaly

Yurt! wrote: »

Catch yourself on, I never attacked his race. Meh, on your first point.

You brought his race into the discussion and made it the central point of the argument against his views.

Again, would you have done the same if it were a white man who was quoted?

Yurt2

markodaly wrote: »

You brought his race into the discussion and made it the central point of the argument against his views.

Again, would you have done the same if it were a white man who was quoted?

If it was relevant to why he is a shoddy partisan (and it is very much the case with Sowell), then seven days a week I would. Satisfied? Probably not, but I don't care either way. We all know why the right wheels out Sowell, and we all know why he takes the appearance fees.

markodaly

Yurt! wrote: »

If it was relevant to why he is a shoddy partisan

So what does being African American have to do with his political and economic views?

BattleCorp

hotmail.com wrote: »

The 1980s were pretty bleak in Ireland with high unemployment and emigration.

But Jack Charlton 'God Bless His Soul' led us back into the light.

Wanderer78

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

A lot of our generation are supporting our children with unpaid childcare and in every other way that we can. Not as a burden, we see it as a labour of love and a privilege. It's not the full solution, but it's a start.

oh i know, i see it all the time around me, and you get to spend time with your grand kids and vice-versa, which is critical for everyone involved, but even offering encouragement to younger generations, to force some radical changes, might just help, we all need each other, for this to happen

Tony EH

Smee_Again wrote: »

There's a lot that can be picked apart on this comment, but I'm just trying to show that for some there's no amount of living within their means that can change the fact that house prices have far outstripped wages over the last 40 odd years.

I completely agree. The cost of houses have gone through the roof, which is the reason why so many young people are left out of the game. And will be left out of the game, probably for their entire lives, because their is no political inclination to do anything about it.

As I said before, it has bugger all to do with being "willing", or "college", or "emigration" either.

It's cost and opportunity.

Wanderer78

Tony EH wrote: »

I completely agree. The cost of houses have gone through the roof, which is the reason why so many young people are left out of the game. And will be left out of the game, probably for their entire lives, because their is no political inclination to do anything about it.

As I said before, it has bugger all to do with being "willing", or "college", or "emigration" either.

It's cost and opportunity.

credit, credit, credit, and even more credit!

Dizzyblonde

Wanderer78 wrote: »

oh i know, i see it all the time around me, and you get to spend time with your grand kids and vice-versa, which is critical for everyone involved, but even offering encouragement to younger generations, to force some radical changes, might just help, we all need each other, for this to happen

All very true - but who's going to break it to the "entitled ones" coming up behind you? That's a whole other story :pac:

Wanderer78

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

All very true - but who's going to break it to the "entitled ones" coming up behind you? That's a whole other story :pac:

well i guess it depends, who you mean by the entitled, we truly do need to de-personalise these debates, as our reality is in fact extremely complex, our wealth inequality issues are far more complex, that just wealthier individuals, theres an extremely strong potential for the whole ship to go down, and it wont matter how much wealth you have accumulated, if it does

Dizzyblonde

Wanderer78 wrote: »

well i guess it depends, who you mean by the entitled, we truly do need to de-personalise these debates, as our reality is in fact extremely complex, our wealth inequality issues are far more complex, that just wealthier individuals, theres an extremely strong potential for the whole ship to go down, and it wont matter how much wealth you have accumulated, if it does

The problem is, those with accumulated wealth never suffer the way the rest of us do. Do you think Bill Cullen, when he went bankrupt, was left homeless and renting a tiny flat? Not a chance.

You can't deny that there are a lot of 20-somethings who have been handed pretty much everything they wanted, and more, since birth, and it's going to be harder for them than for any generation before them to have to stand on their own feet. Not all of them, but a large enough portion. That's not personalising, that's fact.

Naos

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

All very true - but who's going to break it to the "entitled ones" coming up behind you? That's a whole other story :pac:

It really feels like you're not getting it, even after 'Smee Again' broke it down for you.

Also don't forget, the house you bought at 22 - new house or old house?

Heres Johnny

Bandana boy wrote: »

25K @20% over 20 years will cost you 100K not 30K

My god, the financial illiteracy of some people is shocking isn't it?
The interest in the first year is 5k alone.

Ush1

flynnlives wrote: »

have you seen the price of schooling? child care? etc.
Have you noticed many are having families later on in life, some even not bothering cause they cant afford it. Why is that?

They cant even afford a deposit for a house let alone childcare. This is on top of effectively paying the same rates of tax as our parents paid. Why? because salaries have not increased in line with inflation, yet dozens and dozens of stealth taxes have appeared.

Im afraid your not cognizant of the realities of Ireland today. And that reality is about to get significantly worse. This recession is only beginning.

im sorry but my generation is coming into power and we see were the wealth is. Its inevitable that older generations are going to need to contribute more.

And your point about socialism is funny. In the 60s,70s,80s the councils built massive amounts of social housing. That generation reaped that reward. Neo-liberalism stopped all that in the 90s.
That generation who got free housing voted to end it. And now look at the mess we are in. So im sorry, that generation, the older generation benefited quite nicely from socialism.


The truth is the older generation got their goodies on credit. Then pulled the ladder up. Now its the younger generation stuck with the tab.

There was never free housing, someone has to pay for everything.

The White Wolf

Edgware wrote: »

The 25 to 35 age bracket certainly have it difficult to purchase property. The reluctance of the older generation to downsize means that funds they could release to their children are being held back while often one elderly parent toddles around a large house complaing about the cost of heating. Smaller families now mean that when the parent dies the two or three children will get a cash injection. Even an average 3 bed in Dublin will be around the high 300 thousands. Inheritance figures allow up 360000 approx to be left to a child of the deceased tax free. That can be released earlier.
Greater availability of good quality retirement villages which offered services, social companionship etc should be developed where seniors could still have their freedom and own front door access. The present emphasis of putting Mammy into a nursing home and made sit down for the day listening to Fostrr and Allen hasnt proved to be a success particularly during Covid

Jesus, the bloody entitlement of this post. Shocking.