Hello! We’ve put something together for you - a free guide for beginners that shows 80% of what you need to know about personal finance on 2 pages. You can get it here: makingmoney.email/80-guide-video
I don’t want “opportunities”, I don’t want holidays….i want a home. We live in a world where luxuries are cheap, but the essentials are out of reach. This can’t carry on. Yes, we are worse off than our parents.
‘We live in a world where luxuries are cheap, but the essentials are out of reach’ - this is without doubt the best summary in a sentence I’ve ever come across.
Aye that was well said. I've heard older people scoff at the younger generation with a subscription here and there, 'so much at our fingertips', yeah mate cancelling my disney plus subscription isn't going to get me a deposit for a house @@ItsMe-co4bj
I don’t fully agree with this. Without sounding like a philosopher, life is way more than just owning a house, think about all the memories and the experiences you would’ve had vs your parents/grandparents. For them, going on a holiday to Spain is something they would’ve saved months for, whereas we can book flights a day in advance. While that’s a simple example it shows how much more the world and travelling is. Nobody is on their death bed thinking about how they wish they bought a house and had a mortgage but they remember all the memories and experiences they hsd
@@s_don57683if you spoke to my dad in 1992 and asked him to swap his 3 bed detached for a 1 bed flat with an extra 10 years on the mortgage, I’m not sure cheaper holidays and an iPhone would be enough to sweeten the deal for him.
Genuinely loved this podcast! The best bit for me was thinking about what we have vs our parents. My parents barely went on a holiday until they were in their 40s (but had a house by 30) whereas I’m 30, still renting but I’ve lived and worked in 3 countries, travelled all around the world and got to meet people and experience cultures and foods that my parents didn’t do at my age. It’s given me a lot of perspective on what I do have and although I don’t have a house I feel very wealthy (with my travel experiences and index funds lol)
That’s why we need to do everything to “avoid” paying taxes. - I took a £4k pay cut and contributed to my work pension - I invest a minimum of £500 into a SIPP - I agree for £200 monthly to be paid as shares (minimum of 5 years so HMRC muppets can’t touch it when you sell). That’s £12,400 tax free a year that the government can’t touch.
We all need to do this. I'm not a higher rate tax payer, but student loans were costing me £200 a month, so I salary sacrifice into pension to reduce my tax burden including those discriminatory student loans
All Financial experts, IMO, say our UK tax system is too complicated, but I never hear them proposing any solution. Could it be simplified by having Income Tax, Profits Tax and Wealth Tax? Also, are there any countries that get it right and whose model we could follow? 🤔
The difference in what can be afforded is insane compared to what my parents could afford. They could afford a mortgage, 3 kids, and a yearly holiday on one wage that's less than half what I earn.
Don’t help the whole divide & conquer thing. I’m Gen X but my life has been exactly like a Millennial. Didn’t buy until I was 40 and it was still a flat and swallows all my money. Lentils and rice. Talk to each other, help each other, learn from each other.
I enjoyed this episode, it’s good to hear your views. I’m aware of the glaring lack of mention of privilege and wealth inequality. You guys spoke to Gary Stevenson the other day: Seems like there could have been a connection made between the two conversations? May have been illuminating. Thanks for your work. Will keep listening ❤
I don’t want my parents to leave me ANYTHING.. I want them to enjoy what they have worked for. I want my life to depend on my decisions, not live off my parents hard work
Context is key in these subjects. I am surprised that in the discussions about house prices and incomes, rarely are interest and inflation rates mentioned. Whilst interest rates in the noughties, until the financial crash, were similar to today (4-6%), for the previous 30 years they were around 8-12% (17% in 1979-80). What really matters is the effect of those interest rates on mortgage payments, rather than the value of the property, alongside income and inflation. Here are some answers to my own questions: As an example we'll take 2023 (as a recent year, so it's still current data, although it also represents a house price peak) and 1998, just because 25 years is roughly one generation, so a 55-60 year old parent today is likely to have 25-35 year old children. Interest rates: 5.25% (Aug 2023), 7.5% (June 1998) (BoE base rates, so mortgage rates are typically higher) interest only on £100k: £5,250 (2023), £7,500 (1998) UK average property prices: £283k (01/2023), £66k (02/1998) ~429% increase Inflation 03/1998 - 03/2023: 185.8% (average 2.5%pa) Average (median) income: £681.70 per week ~£35,450 pa (gross, 2023), £334.90 pw ~£17,415 pa (gross, 1998) ~203% increase In summary then, yes, house prices have quadrupled but average incomes also doubled and increased by 7% more than inflation, so people today are, on average, slightly better off than 25 years ago. Mortgage interest on £283k property in 2023 would be £14,860pa (or 41.9% of gross income and on a £66k property in 1998 would have been £4,950pa (or 28.4% of gross income), calculated using BoE base rates, so the real difference (13.5% of gross income), whilst substantial, is not as great as some would have us believe. In reality, of course, there are many other variables but they are too complex to consider here.
if you think that based even on your own data here, they are better off you are deluded...there were jobs for life, consistent steady salary rises on top and not a NHS bloated out of its ears. incomes doubled but house prices quadrupled then you say they are better off lol... house prices are a larger number than salaries by a long shot, so to prove that people are better off you would need a big reverse in the other direction on wages having gone up by a larger % than house prices... your interpretation of your own data you point out sucks
@@James_36 You need to re-read and understand what I have said and it's not "my" data, it is data from UK government statistics. I said that "on average people are better off", so if someone bought a property 25 years ago and didn't move, then their mortgage will only have changed if interest rates had increased, which they haven't, so their mortgage will have gradually declined as a proportion of their income. This happens naturally to each generation unless they constantly invest in higher-value properties. I also point out that in practice, interest rates have fallen, so for those people, they are, in fact, better off. I never intended to create the impression that people buying a property today are better off than someone in a similar situation 25 years ago, I agree that it is harder today but the differential is not as great as many would suggest. As I said right at the beginning, "context is everything" so if you have a different point of view, please share the details and give us the context. I have no doubt that anyone could pick and choose better, or worse, historical time periods but I didn't do that, I just took data from the most recent full year available (2023) and 25 years prior to that.
@@davem.4003 I clearly state the flaw in your argument, a value of an expensive item (house) quadrupling and wages only doubling... is a very simple and basic concept that they are significantly worse off. Not to mention nobody had steady stable employment these days..... lets just mention also their is now global competition for jobs not just regional and national... your way off on this
@@James_36 If you think I am way off, please work through what you consider to be a more accurate, or representative example and present it but please don't ignore the effect of interest rates in particular and consider that the cost of housing is just one element of household outgoings. Regarding the other factors you mention I'm not sure I understand how they influence mortgage outgoings? For example, jobs for life were long gone before 1998, when I was already in my fourth job, having a typical employment term of around five years, so I'm only referring to permanent career employment, not temporary, or part-time roles. I have also read that house prices have not increased in real terms in the past 20 years but I have not reviewed the supporting data.
Disenfranchising the next generation and reducing their opportunities to become stakeholders in life is completely nuts. Gary Stevenson is eloquently across it too.
I really enjoyed this podcast. But I do have some reservations regarding some things mentioned. This rhetoric regarding house being unaffordable does seem to be very South East based. Or perhaps it's England based, I don't know. But here in the North East of Scotland I have recently been doing some research myself. Here, you can get a 1 bedroom flat for around £40k. Now that's going to be a ropey flat in an unattractive area. But none the less, it's only slightly more than the UK average salary. And isn't the length of 2 times a full time, minimum wage salary. A 2 or 3 bedroom flat / semi-detached property, in my closest city, can be had for £80-100k. So around 3 times average salary. When I bought my first property in around 2003, so 20 years ago, it was a 2 bedroom semi-detached, and was around £43k. Which was around 2 times the average salary at that time IIRC. But that was in a really undesirable area to be fair. My point is that actually, if you move out of the bigger cities, it isn't as expensive to buy property. Sure, it'd be tough to buy a house in London now on less than £100k or whatever. But equally, 20 years ago it would have been tough on half that too. Basically, it's always been tough in the likes of London, Edinburgh, Aberdeen etc... Now, while all the chat about "stop buying Starbucks everyday and buy a house" isn't exactly helpful. It's also not exactly incorrect. You know yourself the power of investing. And that £5 Starbucks everyday, if invested in a global tracker, making average returns, turns into ~£30k in 10 years. So from the ages of 18-28, stop daily Starbucks, have house deposit. If £30k isn't enough deposit, stop Tesco meal deal, make your own sandwiches, and double that return to £60k. My point really is that there are more pressures on our paycheck than there used to be. 20 years ago we didn't have Netflix, Disney+, Amazon Prime subscriptions, or £100+ Sky subscriptions. We (well I) didn't have daily take away coffees, or buying lunch every day. I wasn't wearing £150 trainers and £300 jackets, but I did save for a deposit for my first place. The point is, it may have seemed cheaper / more affordable 20-30 years ago. And maybe it was. But outside of these big cities, it was maybe only marginally different. Sacrifices were made then to afford to buy our houses. As they may be necessary now. It's always a tough time when you first enter the housing market, but as time marches on, and inflation happens, the cost of the mortgage usually gets cheaper in real terms. Not to mention, hopefully, career advances increasing incomes.
You can definitely find cheap housing, the issue tends to be it's in run down towns and cities with limited job opportunities and no social. Ex-mining towns for example. But there isn't the same job opportunities. The problem is you can grow up in Yorkshire, in a house that cost £50k 20 years ago, that same house is now "worth" £250k and wages haven't even doubles in that area. It forces the youth out of their hometown and their place of work
@@TheUnluckyGama You may be correct. The average wage in Yorkshire has gone from ~£20k to ~£33k in the last 20 years. Where the average house price has grown from ~£78k to £225k in roughly the same period. So 3.9 times average to 6.8 times average. I don't actually doubt it is harder in places. But I don't think it is quite as impossible as made out. If we step away from average prices, I've just been looking at 2 bedroom terraced houses in Scunthorpe, around £70k. So a little over 2x average Yorkshire salary, or 3 times minimum wage. Or one bedroom flats starting at ~£50k (just over 2 times minimum wage). As I said, it's not impossible. And with a lot more employment nowadays having the ability to WFH, or hybrid working, many people can afford to live a bit further from their work. Or completely remotely sometimes. I suppose I may see things differently as a result from growing up in a reasonably rural setting, and so there was an expectation of having to move away for a decent job. I certainly had zero desire to live on the same street all my life, marry the girl two doors down, and work in the same factory as my dad. (My dad didn't actually work in a factory).
Look, you are right on property prices. Just today I saw that the average property price in Aberdeen was £100,000, which is a quarter that of London. But! I disagree on all this Netflix nonsense. You're forgetting about landline phones that we don't have anymore and which used to be very expensive. I have Netflix (£5), Disney (£5), Amazon Prime (£8), mobile phone (£22), Internet (£30). However, I have no landline, no Sky TV, which in the 90s was quite expensive. Internet isn't new either, and a 56k dial up connection cost quite a lot for what it was.
@@pedazodetorpedo I'm surprised the average house price in Aberdeen would be so cheap. Aberdeen is an expensive city to live in. Or was when I was last looking to live there. We were priced right out the market back in 2007. At that time, it was almost comparable to Edinburgh and London. Landline phones weren't that expensive. Similarly priced to what they are now. Same with internet. I never had sky until pretty recently though. That's expensive though. I'm over £100 a month, but to be fair, that does include internet, phone, all the channels, Netflix and Paramount+. So a few different subscriptions rolled into one. The problem still is subscriptions I feel though. It's not just the TV ones (including the TV license), but everything else. Software subscriptions, fitness subscriptions, food subscriptions, phone subscriptions, insurances, car payments, its almost as if everything wants to turn into a subscription rather than just buying a product. But then the costs of eating out for lunch every work day (not at a restaurant, but work canteen even, local food truck, supermarket meal deal etc...). I don't see many people with their home made sandwich anymore. Add on the morning Costa or whatever, and you can easily be £50-£75 a week just for that. Some of that stuff you can't cut out, sure. But some of it you probably can to get on the housing ladder. Even if it takes a decade to save. We didn't buy our current house until we were 28, and that was a lot of sacrifices and saving to get there between the 2 of us. I am sure it is a bit harder today than it was 20 years ago. And probably almost impossible in London and the South East. And sure, that maybe is where the big paying jobs are. But that's the sacrifice you make for the job. There are good paying jobs outside of the South East. Maybe not as many, maybe not quite as well paid. But if your paid 20% less and housing is half the price, then you decide what sacrifice you want to make, and try to be good with that choice. I've had this choice to make a few times (not just the South East, but also like Holland or Norway) for working, where I might get paid a bit more, but ultimately have a reduced living standard, at least with respect to housing and transport). I personally chose the higher living standard over just the money. But not everyone is the same.
People are more switched on to finances because we have access to info. And that markets and banks have had to attract more people to profit. Born in the 70s and a teen in the 90s, i literally knew nothing about finance until 2010s....!
I’d chip in that some Gen X are also in a dicey situation as the generation that didn’t have as easy access to financial information and also have far less time to have auto enrolment pensions to do the work they need to.
@@TheUnluckyGama I never had access to any DB scheme, not everyone was that lucky, and we still had to pay our previous generation's state pension, I've been paying it for 40 years. We also never had access to the investment platforms and all the pension/financial education that your generation has at your fingertips for free.
@@UKGeezer Here's a challenging suggestion: young people today resent paying for the pensions of their parents and grandparents. Furthermore, demographics show that the current state pension arrangement is unsustainable in the longer term. There is no way of quickly ending the issue, so how do we progressively change things? How about if inflationary (and triple-lock) increases for UK state pensions are abolished for future pensioners e.g. those currently below 50 years of age? Match a reduction in NI contributions for this group by mandatory increased personal/employer scheme pension contributions (so that no one is better, or worse-off but they are now genuinely saving for their own future pensions). It's not feasible to do this for over-50s because their state pension is already baked-in to their retirement financial plan and there is not sufficient time to address the deficit that would be created. As that future state pension declines in real-terms value, it will gradually become insignificant and the problem will be eliminated for the children of today's young adults. Be aware, I am not proposing the complete elimination of the state pension for under-50s, just a gradual reduction in its value (and associated costs) for tomorrow's employees, so the younger you are, the more time you have to plan and save for your retirement.
Assuming parents have money to pass on as a general norm is dangerous. Lots of people have been part of families that have no hand me downs. The way forward is to show a person how to build wealth from nothing. The older generation have gone without in the delayed gratification of living once retired. Now a lot of people facing retirement don’t have the funds to retire and need equity release to live not cruise. You make out all old people to be selfish. This is not the case. I appreciate the struggle facing the young but us aging people are not coasting either. Now the government are taking chunks of our pensions through clandestine policies. Age bias is getting worse.
I like her practical, pragmatic approach and the hope that gives. It contrasts greatly to those that see hope as being a result of (unlikely) major political system change. As Gen Z, getting going in life was far tougher than it was for my parents; harder still for millenials. But, we do have the advantage of having far more information than generations past. There is a Darwinian element of picking the right information to work off. Never the less, the information age has helped me to get a great job and have income to invest in sensible investments that mean I am far wealthier than my parents were in their 40's. Even though they worked hard and inherited property. It took time, but I don't think I would have been able to do it had I been born twenty years earlier.
@shellyperera2010 Have you ever considered that the message which is taught and probably never questioned is what keeps the vast majority of people as wage slaves their whole life? If people were taught to passively invest in their teens, they would be in a position to spend more time with family, make more life memories, be less stressed, be in a position to support other in need.. Doesn't sound like anything that should be frowned on - and it didn't require the making money life goal that you mentioned.
One thing that`s rarely mentioned is that the top 1% pay over 30% of ALL taxes paid. So when the ` poor ` say the rich should pay more tax , they need educating as to who`s paying their income benefits and family allowance.
Yep we had our struggles (im 61) , however nothing like the problems young people face today, my sons rent has gone up by 36% in the last 3 years & my daughter had to have a 10k deposit & moved 23 miles to be able to get on the property ladder
"Are we worse off than our parents?" Yes, in some ways, we are but overall we are much better off. Each generation faces new challenges but benefits considerably from the work put in by previous generations. I love reading the comments for these videos - this one has triggered particularly polarised opinions. Remember that you will reap what you sow - what you contribute to society will be repaid to you but probably not in cash!
Always always always use a credit card, it provides protection. Both my daughters have them but they are intelligent enough and had sufficient parental guidance about money that they've never had any credit card debts
It's so important to put money away into a lifetime isa, even if you can't afford to put in 4k a year, putting away what you can afford can make a difference to your wealth bcs you'll get it as a lump sum when ur 60 if u dont use it for a house, anyway ur not paying interest if ur putting money into a lifetime isa to use as a deposit for a mortgage
I understand that, even if you use 100% of your LISA for a house purchase, you can still keep it open and continue contributing for your retirement. That said, if you will have saved enough to retire early, you may (currently) be better off making some increased pension contributions, especially by salary sacrifice, which can save on some NI contributions. This is because your DC pension (or SIPP) could be accessed from an earlier age than your LISA. These eligibility dates could change in the future though. The best solution is probably to do both, if you can afford to do so.
Wages have actually outpaced UK ave property price in last 20 years. Biggest difference - leaving school at 16 Vs 21. 5 years of lost earnings plus ballooning student debt. Grad jobs often not paying much more. Makes a huge difference right at the start
Parents house in 1987 was 3x average salary, same house is now x12. Property prices are root of these issues. I hope labour make this their marquee issue for them then 2) transport.
The older generations lived in a far less regulated world that came with it's own risks in all facets of life from their banks, insurers, employment... but generally had the means to create experiences for the family. For example my parents, both workers when I was child, were able to do so many things for us that live with me forever. We now live in a hugely regulated world which makes it harder to access certain things and then on top that (whilst I don't think they are linked together) everything else has stagnated regarding wages, whilst the cost of everything around us has sky rocketed... so what Parents could do, I can't.
True, but you can't have 1980s house prices without 1980s living standards including unemployment, 10% interest rates, war and the threat of war with the Soviets, lack of high paying jobs, etc
The laffer curve relates to the most efficient way to tax a population, not 'getting spanked by the market'. Perhaps you're thinking of the dunning kruger effect?
American opening an ISA for their child is the worst decision they will ever make. Please get dual country tax advice if you are a dual national and do t listen to finance advisors who only know one system.
Generally the comparison has been, that every generation at the age of 30 has been wealthier than their parents. 2 decades ago at the very least? What are you talking about, those born in the 1970s have been on the whole financially better off than their parents.
There’s a problem in this country (and the west) where people are living longer which is fantastic for human kind but creates a huge economic problem, where the amount of retired pensioners are growing. This creates a cost of living crisis for the younger generation who are working to fund the growing pension costs, meaning higher taxes etc. Also less housing stock to choose from as a lot of the bigger houses are occupied by the elderly and we haven’t built on a large scale since the 80’s, lack of housing/affordability creates a decline in birth rate which cascades through generations, meaning less economically active citizens. Like most countries we rely on immigration to keep local economies running.
People don't understand that the prices of things are never going back down. This inflation is deeper than we think. Those buying groceries are well aware that the real inflation is much over 10%. The increments don't match our income, yet certain investors still earn over $365,000 in stocks and assets. Wish I could accomplish that.
I'm 59 and my mum certainly didn't have it easier than the youth of today, when I left school nothing was a free ride and the salary was a pittance, nowadays we employ 18 year old on the same salary as 50 year old, you say younger people are more aware of money but i dont see that, the younger ones I work with want to buy the most expensive house they can afford , and they have nothing in the bank. In my opinion people today are better off in general than before, with more options and more opportunities.
Some do, others dont. I know people that are well aware that they will inherit a few million worth (mainly in properties) so they cant help it but feel pretty laid back about the future. Ironically,their biggest problem is that they will struggle even with a modest inheritance tax bill because they simply couldnt hold onto enough cash to meet such an expense.
of course we are millenials/gen z are finding it more and more difficult to move out of there parents homes, i am nearly 35 and now considering being a property guardian because i canot afford huge amount in rent or 40k to put down on a mortgage
I don't people will inherit what they think they are going too. Demographic's means that people in their 40s will not be able to afford these large houses that people in their 70s are living in.
Yeah, pisses me off, interviewing people about their books... they may refer to their book once at the beginning and once at the end. The constant referral to the book is very irritating
Stop all this victimhood ! We esrned £1.50 an hour in 80s so it’s all relevant. We made scarafices to get our homes we lived with out parents when we had small children. We couldn’t afford child care so grandparents took that role. We waited at bus stops to get to work by 9am and got told off if we min late! There was no home work. We did shopping in our time as everything was monitored. We all come into the world with our bodies and it’s up to pp what they make of it! So sick of it
The most hard done by generation. The most well travelled, best educated, nurtured, highest opportunities, freedom, information rich generation. Millenials are mainly the children of Gen X, who thought they would give their children all the things that they never had as children. Unfortunately the cuddles and the awards for just competing didn't work. All generations have different challenges and I do think millennials have their fair share of challenges, but they also have had more than their fair share of opportunities and support. These need to be grasped though, and having foreign holidays, the latest tech, cars on pcp, too many beer nights and endlessly playing the world's smallest violins are not grasping those opportunities. And no I am not a boomer.
It all adds up. Sacrifice and not having everything now never was a millennial strong point. Maybe returning and stopping the tiny violin payments would also help. Could put that cash into a LISA so they can get some more free cash. My example of a 250k vs 400k house obviously doesn't change the dial. Cry me a river on your yoga mat in Thailand finding yourself.
@@scareybailey mortgage free bud so doesn't bother me. I've sacrificed and worked hard. But at the same time also know that houses being 8-10x average wages isn't the norm and wasn't what those in the 1970s,80,90s 00s had to endure. Also in many of those decades the wage increases were of a much higher rate as well.
So let me get this straight. These people are university graduates and it took a global pandemic, two decades into the 21st C. to teach them that you can work from anywhere and have a decent work-life balance? Let's remind ourselves that the ARPA report about the future of the computer as a means of communication was in 1964, my first experience of online chat was in 1966, I first used a 'portable' computer to work from home in 1992, and I was picking up email at a phonebox in 1998. Try to keep up kids!
It would seem that you were truly "bleeding edge". Given that the "Internet" as we know it today was only invented in 1983 and took several years to become established and widely accessible, your "online chat" in 1966 cannot have been what people today would recognise as online chat - it must have been either messaging between mainframe computer clients, or maybe using another bespoke network. Portable computers were certainly a rarity in the early 90s, as were mobile phones (initially limited to cars because they were not really portable).
@@davem.4003 It's important to realise that connectivity and the internet are two slightly different things. An early connectivity event (like your internet being down) was the Carrington solar event in 1859 that disrupted telegraph services. By that time, the teleprinter was already in development. This meant that chatting to someone on the other side of the world using a keyboard was well on the way to becoming a reality. What the internet did was automate aspects of operation of the connectivity and cheapen use of the huge network of lines that already existed around the world. Academics, military, airlines and police were amongst the pioneering customers who pushed the boundaries of connectivity. In the 1960s or 70s you were usually in trouble if your boss caught you using a telex or broadcast-quality line for something frivolous. I remember a certain BBC new guy getting a strip torn off him by the station manager for not cancelling a broadcast quality line that they had hired from BT for a radio new item that was cancelled. Every business or institution now running its own internet server would have been a business with a telex or broacasting connection 60 years ago but the home version was only a telephone working on loop-disconnect and a mechanical exchange! Telephone ownership in 1960 was similar to home internet uptake around 2000.
It absolutely amazes me how some of the younger generation feels so hard done by… There are more opportunities for this generation than when I left school in the early 1983… The route to success is just different… Really I wish I had the situation the young people face now … I think the young people that have not made a success of themselves and blame the older generation should stop and take a good hard look at themselves… and take responsibility for their own actions and make decisions that take advantage of the reality of today rather than comparing to the past … often a past that did not exist for most people Also after working for 40 years I think people should be richer than some self pitying person that as had free education for most of their life.. then took a degree course in a nonsense course and worked for ten percentage of the time I have.. Maybe some of the younger people should be called generation self pity and self absorbed? Why do I think this? Well I have four grown up children and they have all took different routes in life.. no degrees.. all are a success ..
Hello! We’ve put something together for you - a free guide for beginners that shows 80% of what you need to know about personal finance on 2 pages.
You can get it here: makingmoney.email/80-guide-video
I don’t want “opportunities”, I don’t want holidays….i want a home. We live in a world where luxuries are cheap, but the essentials are out of reach. This can’t carry on.
Yes, we are worse off than our parents.
‘We live in a world where luxuries are cheap, but the essentials are out of reach’ - this is without doubt the best summary in a sentence I’ve ever come across.
Spot on, f**king joke isnt it i just want a roof over my head that isnt a complete rip off @ItsMe-co4bj
Aye that was well said. I've heard older people scoff at the younger generation with a subscription here and there, 'so much at our fingertips', yeah mate cancelling my disney plus subscription isn't going to get me a deposit for a house @@ItsMe-co4bj
I don’t fully agree with this. Without sounding like a philosopher, life is way more than just owning a house, think about all the memories and the experiences you would’ve had vs your parents/grandparents. For them, going on a holiday to Spain is something they would’ve saved months for, whereas we can book flights a day in advance. While that’s a simple example it shows how much more the world and travelling is. Nobody is on their death bed thinking about how they wish they bought a house and had a mortgage but they remember all the memories and experiences they hsd
@@s_don57683if you spoke to my dad in 1992 and asked him to swap his 3 bed detached for a 1 bed flat with an extra 10 years on the mortgage, I’m not sure cheaper holidays and an iPhone would be enough to sweeten the deal for him.
What a very smart and level headed guest she was. Some excellent points raised in this podcast, loved it.
Genuinely loved this podcast! The best bit for me was thinking about what we have vs our parents. My parents barely went on a holiday until they were in their 40s (but had a house by 30) whereas I’m 30, still renting but I’ve lived and worked in 3 countries, travelled all around the world and got to meet people and experience cultures and foods that my parents didn’t do at my age. It’s given me a lot of perspective on what I do have and although I don’t have a house I feel very wealthy (with my travel experiences and index funds lol)
You can measure wealth in many different ways
That’s why we need to do everything to “avoid” paying taxes.
- I took a £4k pay cut and contributed to my work pension
- I invest a minimum of £500 into a SIPP
- I agree for £200 monthly to be paid as shares (minimum of 5 years so HMRC muppets can’t touch it when you sell).
That’s £12,400 tax free a year that the government can’t touch.
We all need to do this. I'm not a higher rate tax payer, but student loans were costing me £200 a month, so I salary sacrifice into pension to reduce my tax burden including those discriminatory student loans
Great conversation. She is really sharp. Listening to you guys, I'm becoming sharper myself!
All Financial experts, IMO, say our UK tax system is too complicated, but I never hear them proposing any solution. Could it be simplified by having Income Tax, Profits Tax and Wealth Tax? Also, are there any countries that get it right and whose model we could follow? 🤔
Bulgaria
Brilliant guest, and great intervoew as always.
The difference in what can be afforded is insane compared to what my parents could afford. They could afford a mortgage, 3 kids, and a yearly holiday on one wage that's less than half what I earn.
Don’t help the whole divide & conquer thing. I’m Gen X but my life has been exactly like a Millennial. Didn’t buy until I was 40 and it was still a flat and swallows all my money. Lentils and rice.
Talk to each other, help each other, learn from each other.
I enjoyed this episode, it’s good to hear your views. I’m aware of the glaring lack of mention of privilege and wealth inequality. You guys spoke to Gary Stevenson the other day: Seems like there could have been a connection made between the two conversations? May have been illuminating. Thanks for your work. Will keep listening ❤
I don’t want my parents to leave me ANYTHING.. I want them to enjoy what they have worked for.
I want my life to depend on my decisions, not live off my parents hard work
Another excellent & informative video with a knowledgeable guest interviewee. This channel just gets better & better.
Context is key in these subjects. I am surprised that in the discussions about house prices and incomes, rarely are interest and inflation rates mentioned. Whilst interest rates in the noughties, until the financial crash, were similar to today (4-6%), for the previous 30 years they were around 8-12% (17% in 1979-80). What really matters is the effect of those interest rates on mortgage payments, rather than the value of the property, alongside income and inflation. Here are some answers to my own questions: As an example we'll take 2023 (as a recent year, so it's still current data, although it also represents a house price peak) and 1998, just because 25 years is roughly one generation, so a 55-60 year old parent today is likely to have 25-35 year old children.
Interest rates: 5.25% (Aug 2023), 7.5% (June 1998) (BoE base rates, so mortgage rates are typically higher) interest only on £100k: £5,250 (2023), £7,500 (1998)
UK average property prices: £283k (01/2023), £66k (02/1998) ~429% increase
Inflation 03/1998 - 03/2023: 185.8% (average 2.5%pa)
Average (median) income: £681.70 per week ~£35,450 pa (gross, 2023), £334.90 pw ~£17,415 pa (gross, 1998) ~203% increase
In summary then, yes, house prices have quadrupled but average incomes also doubled and increased by 7% more than inflation, so people today are, on average, slightly better off than 25 years ago. Mortgage interest on £283k property in 2023 would be £14,860pa (or 41.9% of gross income and on a £66k property in 1998 would have been £4,950pa (or 28.4% of gross income), calculated using BoE base rates, so the real difference (13.5% of gross income), whilst substantial, is not as great as some would have us believe. In reality, of course, there are many other variables but they are too complex to consider here.
if you think that based even on your own data here, they are better off you are deluded...there were jobs for life, consistent steady salary rises on top and not a NHS bloated out of its ears. incomes doubled but house prices quadrupled then you say they are better off lol... house prices are a larger number than salaries by a long shot, so to prove that people are better off you would need a big reverse in the other direction on wages having gone up by a larger % than house prices... your interpretation of your own data you point out sucks
@@James_36 You need to re-read and understand what I have said and it's not "my" data, it is data from UK government statistics. I said that "on average people are better off", so if someone bought a property 25 years ago and didn't move, then their mortgage will only have changed if interest rates had increased, which they haven't, so their mortgage will have gradually declined as a proportion of their income. This happens naturally to each generation unless they constantly invest in higher-value properties. I also point out that in practice, interest rates have fallen, so for those people, they are, in fact, better off. I never intended to create the impression that people buying a property today are better off than someone in a similar situation 25 years ago, I agree that it is harder today but the differential is not as great as many would suggest.
As I said right at the beginning, "context is everything" so if you have a different point of view, please share the details and give us the context. I have no doubt that anyone could pick and choose better, or worse, historical time periods but I didn't do that, I just took data from the most recent full year available (2023) and 25 years prior to that.
@@davem.4003 I clearly state the flaw in your argument, a value of an expensive item (house) quadrupling and wages only doubling... is a very simple and basic concept that they are significantly worse off. Not to mention nobody had steady stable employment these days..... lets just mention also their is now global competition for jobs not just regional and national... your way off on this
@@James_36 If you think I am way off, please work through what you consider to be a more accurate, or representative example and present it but please don't ignore the effect of interest rates in particular and consider that the cost of housing is just one element of household outgoings. Regarding the other factors you mention I'm not sure I understand how they influence mortgage outgoings? For example, jobs for life were long gone before 1998, when I was already in my fourth job, having a typical employment term of around five years, so I'm only referring to permanent career employment, not temporary, or part-time roles.
I have also read that house prices have not increased in real terms in the past 20 years but I have not reviewed the supporting data.
@@davem.4003 you must be a boomer, completely dumb deaf and blind but loaded
"Have helps and have no helps" is spot on!
Damn my Grandparents and their perfect health haha
aye, mine are all alive in their 90s and Im not rulling it out somehow outliving me. :D
Who are you to q their lives they worked hard and good hope they make it over 100! How very dare you hope nothing left to you vulchers
Disenfranchising the next generation and reducing their opportunities to become stakeholders in life is completely nuts. Gary Stevenson is eloquently across it too.
@@infour44 Gary is spot on.
I bought my flat in London in 2002. It felt like the very last chance to get me own place as prices surged every month. Will never move
I really enjoyed this podcast. But I do have some reservations regarding some things mentioned.
This rhetoric regarding house being unaffordable does seem to be very South East based. Or perhaps it's England based, I don't know. But here in the North East of Scotland I have recently been doing some research myself.
Here, you can get a 1 bedroom flat for around £40k. Now that's going to be a ropey flat in an unattractive area. But none the less, it's only slightly more than the UK average salary. And isn't the length of 2 times a full time, minimum wage salary. A 2 or 3 bedroom flat / semi-detached property, in my closest city, can be had for £80-100k. So around 3 times average salary. When I bought my first property in around 2003, so 20 years ago, it was a 2 bedroom semi-detached, and was around £43k. Which was around 2 times the average salary at that time IIRC. But that was in a really undesirable area to be fair.
My point is that actually, if you move out of the bigger cities, it isn't as expensive to buy property. Sure, it'd be tough to buy a house in London now on less than £100k or whatever. But equally, 20 years ago it would have been tough on half that too. Basically, it's always been tough in the likes of London, Edinburgh, Aberdeen etc...
Now, while all the chat about "stop buying Starbucks everyday and buy a house" isn't exactly helpful. It's also not exactly incorrect. You know yourself the power of investing. And that £5 Starbucks everyday, if invested in a global tracker, making average returns, turns into ~£30k in 10 years. So from the ages of 18-28, stop daily Starbucks, have house deposit. If £30k isn't enough deposit, stop Tesco meal deal, make your own sandwiches, and double that return to £60k.
My point really is that there are more pressures on our paycheck than there used to be. 20 years ago we didn't have Netflix, Disney+, Amazon Prime subscriptions, or £100+ Sky subscriptions. We (well I) didn't have daily take away coffees, or buying lunch every day. I wasn't wearing £150 trainers and £300 jackets, but I did save for a deposit for my first place.
The point is, it may have seemed cheaper / more affordable 20-30 years ago. And maybe it was. But outside of these big cities, it was maybe only marginally different. Sacrifices were made then to afford to buy our houses. As they may be necessary now. It's always a tough time when you first enter the housing market, but as time marches on, and inflation happens, the cost of the mortgage usually gets cheaper in real terms. Not to mention, hopefully, career advances increasing incomes.
You can definitely find cheap housing, the issue tends to be it's in run down towns and cities with limited job opportunities and no social. Ex-mining towns for example. But there isn't the same job opportunities.
The problem is you can grow up in Yorkshire, in a house that cost £50k 20 years ago, that same house is now "worth" £250k and wages haven't even doubles in that area. It forces the youth out of their hometown and their place of work
@@TheUnluckyGama You may be correct. The average wage in Yorkshire has gone from ~£20k to ~£33k in the last 20 years. Where the average house price has grown from ~£78k to £225k in roughly the same period.
So 3.9 times average to 6.8 times average. I don't actually doubt it is harder in places. But I don't think it is quite as impossible as made out.
If we step away from average prices, I've just been looking at 2 bedroom terraced houses in Scunthorpe, around £70k. So a little over 2x average Yorkshire salary, or 3 times minimum wage. Or one bedroom flats starting at ~£50k (just over 2 times minimum wage).
As I said, it's not impossible. And with a lot more employment nowadays having the ability to WFH, or hybrid working, many people can afford to live a bit further from their work. Or completely remotely sometimes.
I suppose I may see things differently as a result from growing up in a reasonably rural setting, and so there was an expectation of having to move away for a decent job. I certainly had zero desire to live on the same street all my life, marry the girl two doors down, and work in the same factory as my dad. (My dad didn't actually work in a factory).
Look, you are right on property prices. Just today I saw that the average property price in Aberdeen was £100,000, which is a quarter that of London. But! I disagree on all this Netflix nonsense. You're forgetting about landline phones that we don't have anymore and which used to be very expensive. I have Netflix (£5), Disney (£5), Amazon Prime (£8), mobile phone (£22), Internet (£30). However, I have no landline, no Sky TV, which in the 90s was quite expensive. Internet isn't new either, and a 56k dial up connection cost quite a lot for what it was.
@@pedazodetorpedo I'm surprised the average house price in Aberdeen would be so cheap. Aberdeen is an expensive city to live in. Or was when I was last looking to live there. We were priced right out the market back in 2007. At that time, it was almost comparable to Edinburgh and London.
Landline phones weren't that expensive. Similarly priced to what they are now. Same with internet. I never had sky until pretty recently though. That's expensive though. I'm over £100 a month, but to be fair, that does include internet, phone, all the channels, Netflix and Paramount+. So a few different subscriptions rolled into one.
The problem still is subscriptions I feel though. It's not just the TV ones (including the TV license), but everything else. Software subscriptions, fitness subscriptions, food subscriptions, phone subscriptions, insurances, car payments, its almost as if everything wants to turn into a subscription rather than just buying a product. But then the costs of eating out for lunch every work day (not at a restaurant, but work canteen even, local food truck, supermarket meal deal etc...). I don't see many people with their home made sandwich anymore. Add on the morning Costa or whatever, and you can easily be £50-£75 a week just for that.
Some of that stuff you can't cut out, sure. But some of it you probably can to get on the housing ladder. Even if it takes a decade to save. We didn't buy our current house until we were 28, and that was a lot of sacrifices and saving to get there between the 2 of us.
I am sure it is a bit harder today than it was 20 years ago. And probably almost impossible in London and the South East. And sure, that maybe is where the big paying jobs are. But that's the sacrifice you make for the job. There are good paying jobs outside of the South East. Maybe not as many, maybe not quite as well paid. But if your paid 20% less and housing is half the price, then you decide what sacrifice you want to make, and try to be good with that choice. I've had this choice to make a few times (not just the South East, but also like Holland or Norway) for working, where I might get paid a bit more, but ultimately have a reduced living standard, at least with respect to housing and transport). I personally chose the higher living standard over just the money. But not everyone is the same.
I can get a cheap house in the valleys too, but there aren't any jobs there and only one pub for entertainment.
People are more switched on to finances because we have access to info. And that markets and banks have had to attract more people to profit.
Born in the 70s and a teen in the 90s, i literally knew nothing about finance until 2010s....!
I’d chip in that some Gen X are also in a dicey situation as the generation that didn’t have as easy access to financial information and also have far less time to have auto enrolment pensions to do the work they need to.
Stole the words right out of my mouth.
But they also had DB pension schemes available to them. A choice not to save for their future should be their problem not ours
@@TheUnluckyGama I never had access to any DB scheme, not everyone was that lucky, and we still had to pay our previous generation's state pension, I've been paying it for 40 years. We also never had access to the investment platforms and all the pension/financial education that your generation has at your fingertips for free.
Gen x are more than fine lol
@@UKGeezer Here's a challenging suggestion: young people today resent paying for the pensions of their parents and grandparents. Furthermore, demographics show that the current state pension arrangement is unsustainable in the longer term. There is no way of quickly ending the issue, so how do we progressively change things? How about if inflationary (and triple-lock) increases for UK state pensions are abolished for future pensioners e.g. those currently below 50 years of age? Match a reduction in NI contributions for this group by mandatory increased personal/employer scheme pension contributions (so that no one is better, or worse-off but they are now genuinely saving for their own future pensions). It's not feasible to do this for over-50s because their state pension is already baked-in to their retirement financial plan and there is not sufficient time to address the deficit that would be created. As that future state pension declines in real-terms value, it will gradually become insignificant and the problem will be eliminated for the children of today's young adults. Be aware, I am not proposing the complete elimination of the state pension for under-50s, just a gradual reduction in its value (and associated costs) for tomorrow's employees, so the younger you are, the more time you have to plan and save for your retirement.
Love the podcast guys! Not sure who would plan their future on inheritance
"My plan is I want to be on this boat" - You guys are speaking my language a lot today! 🤣
Hi Emma, just recognised your user name from project 24. Are you still in that?
@@Flat-Five Hey hey! Nope left a couple years ago. Are you? 😀❤️
Nice channel! Subscribed 👍
Good mix of banter and crucial information. Thanks!
What's with the dislikes? Iona had a lot of good points during the podcast.
Also I like this Lady she seems really smart, pleasant and interesting
I'm here purely for her insights, but yes, she's wife material.
Another cracking video 🤩👌
Assuming parents have money to pass on as a general norm is dangerous. Lots of people have been part of families that have no hand me downs. The way forward is to show a person how to build wealth from nothing. The older generation have gone without in the delayed gratification of living once retired. Now a lot of people facing retirement don’t have the funds to retire and need equity release to live not cruise. You make out all old people to be selfish. This is not the case. I appreciate the struggle facing the young but us aging people are not coasting either. Now the government are taking chunks of our pensions through clandestine policies. Age bias is getting worse.
I am being educated by you guys and I feel really inspired by your ideas and actions
All the cruises and the strawberry daiquiris?! I'm in 😂😂
Really enjoyed this conversation, again, thanks!
I like her practical, pragmatic approach and the hope that gives. It contrasts greatly to those that see hope as being a result of (unlikely) major political system change. As Gen Z, getting going in life was far tougher than it was for my parents; harder still for millenials. But, we do have the advantage of having far more information than generations past. There is a Darwinian element of picking the right information to work off. Never the less, the information age has helped me to get a great job and have income to invest in sensible investments that mean I am far wealthier than my parents were in their 40's. Even though they worked hard and inherited property. It took time, but I don't think I would have been able to do it had I been born twenty years earlier.
In the UK we don't like wealthy people or those interested simply in making money as a goal in life. Very different to the USA.
Exactly. We seem to be a very envious and embittered nation, but our economy has not performed anywhere near as well as America's.
@shellyperera2010 Have you ever considered that the message which is taught and probably never questioned is what keeps the vast majority of people as wage slaves their whole life? If people were taught to passively invest in their teens, they would be in a position to spend more time with family, make more life memories, be less stressed, be in a position to support other in need.. Doesn't sound like anything that should be frowned on - and it didn't require the making money life goal that you mentioned.
Unrelated but she has the most stunning hair.
One thing that`s rarely mentioned is that the top 1% pay over 30% of ALL taxes paid. So when the ` poor ` say the rich should pay more tax , they need educating as to who`s paying their income benefits and family allowance.
Not true. Income tax only. That doesn't include national insurance, inheritance, capital gains, vat, fuel duty, I could continue?
@gwynsea8162 Please don't, you'll embarrass yourself. The top 10% pay 60%.
@@johnristheanswer poor people dont pay tax also
Yep we had our struggles (im 61) , however nothing like the problems young people face today, my sons rent has gone up by 36% in the last 3 years & my daughter had to have a 10k deposit & moved 23 miles to be able to get on the property ladder
"Are we worse off than our parents?" Yes, in some ways, we are but overall we are much better off. Each generation faces new challenges but benefits considerably from the work put in by previous generations.
I love reading the comments for these videos - this one has triggered particularly polarised opinions. Remember that you will reap what you sow - what you contribute to society will be repaid to you but probably not in cash!
overall better off? go on please sell that one
Always always always use a credit card, it provides protection. Both my daughters have them but they are intelligent enough and had sufficient parental guidance about money that they've never had any credit card debts
Great episode and good interview!
Brilliant episode. The realistic but positive antidote to the doom monger/ blame everyone else but myself nonsense spouted by Gary Stevenson.
It's so important to put money away into a lifetime isa, even if you can't afford to put in 4k a year, putting away what you can afford can make a difference to your wealth bcs you'll get it as a lump sum when ur 60 if u dont use it for a house, anyway ur not paying interest if ur putting money into a lifetime isa to use as a deposit for a mortgage
I understand that, even if you use 100% of your LISA for a house purchase, you can still keep it open and continue contributing for your retirement. That said, if you will have saved enough to retire early, you may (currently) be better off making some increased pension contributions, especially by salary sacrifice, which can save on some NI contributions. This is because your DC pension (or SIPP) could be accessed from an earlier age than your LISA. These eligibility dates could change in the future though. The best solution is probably to do both, if you can afford to do so.
Wages have actually outpaced UK ave property price in last 20 years. Biggest difference - leaving school at 16 Vs 21. 5 years of lost earnings plus ballooning student debt. Grad jobs often not paying much more. Makes a huge difference right at the start
I think you have your data wrong.
I can find no evidence of this relationship between earnings and property prices 😢
Parents house in 1987 was 3x average salary, same house is now x12. Property prices are root of these issues. I hope labour make this their marquee issue for them then 2) transport.
labour? LMAO
The older generations lived in a far less regulated world that came with it's own risks in all facets of life from their banks, insurers, employment... but generally had the means to create experiences for the family. For example my parents, both workers when I was child, were able to do so many things for us that live with me forever.
We now live in a hugely regulated world which makes it harder to access certain things and then on top that (whilst I don't think they are linked together) everything else has stagnated regarding wages, whilst the cost of everything around us has sky rocketed... so what Parents could do, I can't.
True, but you can't have 1980s house prices without 1980s living standards including unemployment, 10% interest rates, war and the threat of war with the Soviets, lack of high paying jobs, etc
The laffer curve relates to the most efficient way to tax a population, not 'getting spanked by the market'. Perhaps you're thinking of the dunning kruger effect?
American opening an ISA for their child is the worst decision they will ever make. Please get dual country tax advice if you are a dual national and do t listen to finance advisors who only know one system.
Todays generation feels too sorry for itself.. Work hard, work smart, sacrifice and you’ll be alright
Where have you been? It's been believed we are worse off than our parents for the last two decades at the very least.
Sure, hardly a hot take anymore. I suppose its more about the details on how it happened and how do we adapt to it.
Generally the comparison has been, that every generation at the age of 30 has been wealthier than their parents. 2 decades ago at the very least? What are you talking about, those born in the 1970s have been on the whole financially better off than their parents.
There’s a problem in this country (and the west) where people are living longer which is fantastic for human kind but creates a huge economic problem, where the amount of retired pensioners are growing. This creates a cost of living crisis for the younger generation who are working to fund the growing pension costs, meaning higher taxes etc. Also less housing stock to choose from as a lot of the bigger houses are occupied by the elderly and we haven’t built on a large scale since the 80’s, lack of housing/affordability creates a decline in birth rate which cascades through generations, meaning less economically active citizens. Like most countries we rely on immigration to keep local economies running.
People don't understand that the prices of things are never going back down. This inflation is deeper than we think. Those buying groceries are well aware that the real inflation is much over 10%. The increments don't match our income, yet certain investors still earn over $365,000 in stocks and assets. Wish I could accomplish that.
I'm 59 and my mum certainly didn't have it easier than the youth of today, when I left school nothing was a free ride and the salary was a pittance, nowadays we employ 18 year old on the same salary as 50 year old, you say younger people are more aware of money but i dont see that, the younger ones I work with want to buy the most expensive house they can afford , and they have nothing in the bank. In my opinion people today are better off in general than before, with more options and more opportunities.
The money exists ! but where is it all going ? thats the question.
I don't think young people shouldn't count on getting a large inheritance, much of it may be used in care home costs by their parents etc.
Some do, others dont. I know people that are well aware that they will inherit a few million worth (mainly in properties) so they cant help it but feel pretty laid back about the future. Ironically,their biggest problem is that they will struggle even with a modest inheritance tax bill because they simply couldnt hold onto enough cash to meet such an expense.
@@Kaizen917how does the inheritance tax work? Cant they just sell one of the properties to pay it off?
@@lostinwonderland9927 yes,thats an option afaik. The challenge is trying to keep the estate intact i.e. not to part with some of it out of necessity.
Plan two here 7.8% 😭🚫
If you spend enough time at sea do they wipe it?
@@DamienTalksMoney I am putting all my effort into this plan 🤣
Couldn’t you have just cash flowed university?
@@GeorgeAusters@GeorgeAusters How would I, at 18, find a spare 30k? I worked in Asda for £6 an hour. 🤣
@@EmmaCruises You paid £30k a year for Uni?
Did you consider saving for a few years before going to Uni?
of course we are millenials/gen z are finding it more and more difficult to move out of there parents homes, i am nearly 35 and now considering being a property guardian because i canot afford huge amount in rent or 40k to put down on a mortgage
I don't people will inherit what they think they are going too. Demographic's means that people in their 40s will not be able to afford these large houses that people in their 70s are living in.
New drinking game. Whenever she says the words my book you take a shot.
Yeah, pisses me off, interviewing people about their books... they may refer to their book once at the beginning and once at the end. The constant referral to the book is very irritating
Stop all this victimhood ! We esrned £1.50 an hour in 80s so it’s all relevant. We made scarafices to get our homes we lived with out parents when we had small children. We couldn’t afford child care so grandparents took that role. We waited at bus stops to get to work by 9am and got told off if we min late! There was no home work. We did shopping in our time as everything was monitored. We all come into the world with our bodies and it’s up to pp what they make of it! So sick of it
In my experience older people are more prone to falling in scams / make silly investments
One downside to these podcasts is the Overmentioning of their book!
The most hard done by generation. The most well travelled, best educated, nurtured, highest opportunities, freedom, information rich generation. Millenials are mainly the children of Gen X, who thought they would give their children all the things that they never had as children. Unfortunately the cuddles and the awards for just competing didn't work. All generations have different challenges and I do think millennials have their fair share of challenges, but they also have had more than their fair share of opportunities and support. These need to be grasped though, and having foreign holidays, the latest tech, cars on pcp, too many beer nights and endlessly playing the world's smallest violins are not grasping those opportunities. And no I am not a boomer.
Yep you're right 🙄 lay off the lattes, avocado toast and ditch that netflix subscription and they'd easily afford that 400K house 🙄
@@BaileyMxX Maybe buy a smaller cheaper house around £250k instead, and yes plenty of those exist. Along with a cheaper car, etc.
@@scareybailey didn't think of that...cancelling the netflix will sure help make that achievable 😂
It all adds up. Sacrifice and not having everything now never was a millennial strong point. Maybe returning and stopping the tiny violin payments would also help. Could put that cash into a LISA so they can get some more free cash. My example of a 250k vs 400k house obviously doesn't change the dial. Cry me a river on your yoga mat in Thailand finding yourself.
@@scareybailey mortgage free bud so doesn't bother me. I've sacrificed and worked hard. But at the same time also know that houses being 8-10x average wages isn't the norm and wasn't what those in the 1970s,80,90s 00s had to endure. Also in many of those decades the wage increases were of a much higher rate as well.
So let me get this straight. These people are university graduates and it took a global pandemic, two decades into the 21st C. to teach them that you can work from anywhere and have a decent work-life balance? Let's remind ourselves that the ARPA report about the future of the computer as a means of communication was in 1964, my first experience of online chat was in 1966, I first used a 'portable' computer to work from home in 1992, and I was picking up email at a phonebox in 1998. Try to keep up kids!
Not only that now we're all having to fight not being sent back to offices 😂
It would seem that you were truly "bleeding edge". Given that the "Internet" as we know it today was only invented in 1983 and took several years to become established and widely accessible, your "online chat" in 1966 cannot have been what people today would recognise as online chat - it must have been either messaging between mainframe computer clients, or maybe using another bespoke network. Portable computers were certainly a rarity in the early 90s, as were mobile phones (initially limited to cars because they were not really portable).
@@davem.4003 It's important to realise that connectivity and the internet are two slightly different things. An early connectivity event (like your internet being down) was the Carrington solar event in 1859 that disrupted telegraph services. By that time, the teleprinter was already in development. This meant that chatting to someone on the other side of the world using a keyboard was well on the way to becoming a reality. What the internet did was automate aspects of operation of the connectivity and cheapen use of the huge network of lines that already existed around the world. Academics, military, airlines and police were amongst the pioneering customers who pushed the boundaries of connectivity. In the 1960s or 70s you were usually in trouble if your boss caught you using a telex or broadcast-quality line for something frivolous. I remember a certain BBC new guy getting a strip torn off him by the station manager for not cancelling a broadcast quality line that they had hired from BT for a radio new item that was cancelled. Every business or institution now running its own internet server would have been a business with a telex or broacasting connection 60 years ago but the home version was only a telephone working on loop-disconnect and a mechanical exchange! Telephone ownership in 1960 was similar to home internet uptake around 2000.
Seems like it took you 40 years to deploy the tech.
And by you I mean the Americans.
Iona for chancellor
Lack of money and opportunity is always someone else's fault.
It absolutely amazes me how some of the younger generation feels so hard done by…
There are more opportunities for this generation than when I left school in the early 1983…
The route to success is just different…
Really I wish I had the situation the young people face now …
I think the young people that have not made a success of themselves and blame the older generation should stop and take a good hard look at themselves… and take responsibility for their own actions and make decisions that take advantage of the reality of today rather than comparing to the past … often a past that did not exist for most people
Also after working for 40 years I think people should be richer than some self pitying person that as had free education for most of their life.. then took a degree course in a nonsense course and worked for ten percentage of the time I have..
Maybe some of the younger people should be called generation self pity and self absorbed?
Why do I think this? Well I have four grown up children and they have all took different routes in life.. no degrees.. all are a success ..
It’s not just in uk houses prices it’s all over world uk is small island so if you can’t afford so live further out ! Make sacrifices ! We did
So negative this woman bashed landlords so much go donate thing no one stopping you
I bought my flat in London in 2002. It felt like the very last chance to get me own place as prices surged every month. Will never move