Westminster Politics

sun_tzu said:
Or most people used to have one wage winner now they have two so it used to be 3 and a bit times family income now its just under 4 times but interest rates have lowered meaning the net% of wages cost of a mortgage is still about the same
Click to expand...
That's a very simplistic way to look at it. Slightly out of touch with the reality for most people.

Now, people with children have to pay most of their wage on childcare for a few years and then find lower paid, more flexible work to manage time around children when children are older.

No way is a family earning on average 2x what they could before both parents were forced to work.

Many mothers have to leave work because they cannot afford the childcare on their wage, which for a time reduces family income even more.

How many young couples are settled enough to get a mortgage together who don't have kids? A tiny percentage, I'd wager.
 
sun_tzu said:
So average salary of couple = 62k... 4x salary (can get more but most main lenders use 4)= 248k
10% deposit = 27k

Total = 275k... should just about cover the stamp duty and conveyancing fees as well

Oh look that seems about right then
Click to expand...
Fancy taking all of that into account with the 1970s numbers? You know, before you get accused of moving goalposts and everything.

Unless this is your flirty way of trying to sell me a cardboard box, in which case my opening bid is £50,000.
 
I don't think it matters a toss what happened or didn't happen in generations gone by, economic policy should be dictated by where we are now, what is desirable, what is fair, and what is achievable without being counter-productive. For me that means currently assets are taxed too little in comparison to earned income, and that we need to continue with inheritance tax, which should provide more revenue as time goes on.
 
711 said:
I don't think it matters a toss what happened or didn't happen in generations gone by, economic policy should be dictated by where we are now, what is desirable, what is fair, and what is achievable without being counter-productive. For me that means currently assets are taxed too little in comparison to earned income, and that we need to continue with inheritance tax, which should provide more revenue as time goes on.
Click to expand...

You say that but there's a fair bit of damage done by this national tendency not to want to admit privileges and as such deny disadvantages of others. It ends up impacting elections and current policy itself and we've got an entire cultural war against wokeness which basically means just that.

I find it depressing even amongst those who spend time tracking politics and current events that the response to the topic is always narrow self-justification.

I've barely been impacted by the disadvantages of my generation or at least not to an extent I'd ever moan about, yet i feel no inclination to pretend all had it so easy to justify my successes.
 
711 said:
I don't think it matters a toss what happened or didn't happen in generations gone by, economic policy should be dictated by where we are now, what is desirable, what is fair, and what is achievable without being counter-productive. For me that means currently assets are taxed too little in comparison to earned income, and that we need to continue with inheritance tax, which should provide more revenue as time goes on.
Click to expand...

Well it might matter a little in a debate started by a post stating the boomers had knocked down ladders and had a much easier time of it. I'm not sure how you answer a point like that without considering what did or didn't happen in generations gone by.
 
Pexbo said:
Nah. The boomer generation had advantages and benefits that the generations below will never have access to, they’ve pulled the ladder up behind them and wealth and home ownership is now far more concentrated than ever before and it’s only getting worse.

As such, I really don’t think we are going to see the same economical conservatism from millennials and below. I’m terms of cultural conservatism, many things which boomers see as progressive, millennials and below think of as completely normal.
Click to expand...

This is the post which started the debate.

I'll make a couple of points here which show the bolded part is wrong.

If you pay for two years extra education completely free of charge for everyone, whereas only 30% of your generation got to stay on past 15 or 16 during your time in education then how exactly is that pulling up a ladder? 5 times more people staying in education and going to university. Definitely boomers pulling ladders that is.
 
Smores said:
You're a clued up guy I'm fairly sure you know the figures.

Adjusted wage growth has been on a decline since the 70s but it's the 2010 period that screwed a generation as the drop was substantial and has barely recovered.

Then the house price to wage ratio has risen dramatically since the mid 90s ruling out housing as feasible for many in the above generation that were also hit by recession induced wage stagflation. If they can they're stuck with a huge mortgage over longer periods than ever so more interest and a later retirement age.

I can never understand why boomers have to try and win some sort of competition on this. When we're talking societal level your own experiences don't really come in to it. It's not a personal slight that discredits any personal hardships of your own.
Click to expand...

Then we get this gem.

The figures are disputed and in fact refuted with graphs and everything.

The conclusions drawn are biased through self selection of factors excluding actual hardship, which people who suffered that hardship are not even allowed to mention because they are just personal anecdotes.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Then we get this gem.

The figures are disputed and in fact refuted with graphs and everything.

The conclusions drawn are biased through self selection of factors excluding actual hardship, which people who suffered that hardship are not even allowed to mention because they are just personal anecdotes.
Click to expand...

Except they're not disputed at all, the graphs are not the same metric as discussed.

You're correct let's use anecdotes as a valid objective measure that makes wonderful sense because the argument was definitely every boomer ever born had wonderful hardship free lives.

Well done on proving the defensiveness though.
 
Smores said:
You say that but there's a fair bit of damage done by this national tendency not to want to admit privileges and as such deny disadvantages of others. It ends up impacting elections and current policy itself and we've got an entire cultural war against wokeness which basically means just that.

I find it depressing even amongst those who spend time tracking politics and current events that the response to the topic is always narrow self-justification.

I've barely been impacted by the disadvantages of my generation or at least not to an extent I'd ever moan about, yet i feel no inclination to pretend all had it so easy to justify my successes.
Click to expand...

And having had the undisputable figures challenged and pretty well explained we than get the reversion to a personal anecdote.
 
"The truth is poetry, most people hate poetry."

The complaint is that houses are unaffordable. Yes they are more expensive. Long term they almost always are. The counter graph shows affordability. Which seems to be a metric more suited to your point and disputes/refutes it.

More importantly the earlier analysis was that this is all the doing of the boomers. There is no support for that.

Its more likely to be increased competition from developing nations in an increasingly global market and the decreasing ability to compete by post boomer generations in western or developed nations.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
They say you get more right leaning as you get older. I've not, but maybe those not tuned into politics detail do.

So the millennials become boomers and the cycle continues...
Click to expand...
I disagree with this idea.,

If people cannot own homes and families they will never get more right leaning.

If you do not have a stake in the system that has constantly failed you, you would want to break the system.
 
Cooksen said:
I disagree with this idea.,

If people cannot own homes and families they will never get more right leaning.

If you do not have a stake in the system that has constantly failed you, you would want to break the system.
Click to expand...
Thats a very blunt metric to judge all politics by

https://www.statista.com/statistics/246355/home-ownership-rate-in-europe/

If it were true you would expect Swiitzerland to be super left wing... Uk and sweden to be about the same and Belgium to be much more right leaning than the UK
 
Cooksen said:
But from an English speaking world POV it can be quite true.

I have lived in the uk and the cost of living was pretty much the same as Australia in a lot of ways.
Click to expand...

Why would it possibly be different in an English speaking country?
 
Poor Boris.
Not only a compulsive liar. But incredibly forgetful.
He conviently forgot about messages he sent to Lord Brownlow, who at the time was funding the refurbishment of his flat. And of course did not declare these messages to the investigation which cleared Boris of wrong doing.
He is either extremely forgetful.
Or he knowingly did not declare these messages.
Take your pick..
 
Kentonio said:
Average yearly wage 1970: £1,664
Average house price 1970: £4,975

Average yearly wage 2010: £25,882
Average house price 2010: £167,469

Gosh yeah, I wonder why people complain about Boomer privilege..
Click to expand...

Does my fecking head in this argument.

Back then you had Right to Buy, mortgage tax relief, 100% mortgages (and more).

You try getting even a 90% LTV in 2022 and see what interest rate they offer...
 
sun_tzu said:
Thats a very blunt metric to judge all politics by

https://www.statista.com/statistics/246355/home-ownership-rate-in-europe/

If it were true you would expect Swiitzerland to be super left wing... Uk and sweden to be about the same and Belgium to be much more right leaning than the UK
Click to expand...

That misrepresents Switzerland quite heavily. Land stays within families, so whilst it's true a lot of people don't own their homes, one day they will when they inherit them. In the meantime they either live in family properties or rent in the big cities, but they have no concerns about access to housing.
 
Buster15 said:
Poor Boris.
Not only a compulsive liar. But incredibly forgetful.
He conviently forgot about messages he sent to Lord Brownlow, who at the time was funding the refurbishment of his flat. And of course did not declare these messages to the investigation which cleared Boris of wrong doing.
He is either extremely forgetful.
Or he knowingly did not declare these messages.
Take your pick..
Click to expand...

Yes, its strange isn't it, Boris is becoming a sort of 'upper-class Del-Boy'; people can see what he's up to but seem to accept he has a certain charm, he simply ruffles his own hair before appearing on camera, then comes out with his own versions of "lovely-jubbly' or describes opponents (usually Labour) as a 'load of plonkers' and other similar chat lines and everybody smiles and ignores the doggy-dealings!
 
11101 said:
Does my fecking head in this argument.

Back then you had Right to Buy, mortgage tax relief, 100% mortgages (and more).

You try getting even a 90% LTV in 2022 and see what interest rate they offer...
Click to expand...
So back in 1970 (the comparison figures shown in the post you quote) you would have needed probably more than 10% deposit and a higher interest rate also no 100% mortgages existed (and a lower earnings to loan ratio) and mortgage tax relief didnt exist as that wasnt introduced to 1983... right to buy also didnt exist till the 1980 housing act

so yeah points for consistency
 
Maticmaker said:
Yes, its strange isn't it, Boris is becoming a sort of 'upper-class Del-Boy'; people can see what he's up to but seem to accept he has a certain charm, he simply ruffles his own hair before appearing on camera, then comes out with his own versions of "lovely-jubbly' or describes opponents (usually Labour) as a 'load of plonkers' and other similar chat lines and everybody smiles and ignores the doggy-dealings!
Click to expand...

71% Say he’s doing “badly”
23% ”well”.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/boris-johnson-approval-rating

I think it’s fair to say that he’s no longer viewed as a Del-Boy loveable rogue and now more of a plain old rogue.
 
Cooksen said:
I disagree with this idea.,

If people cannot own homes and families they will never get more right leaning.

If you do not have a stake in the system that has constantly failed you, you would want to break the system.
Click to expand...
I hope you are right.

But maybe it is not strictly about homes, but about being slightly better off than when you are young. Time will tell.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
I hope you are right.

But maybe it is not strictly about homes, but about being slightly better off than when you are young. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
When I was in the Uk (aged 25-27) it felt that uk citizens were around my age hoping for a change and the current system was not working for them.

The cost of living has gone crazy at least as far as I could tell in the UK (and Australia) and people born around 87 to 95 have suffered the most from it.
 
sun_tzu said:
So back in 1970 (the comparison figures shown in the post you quote) you would have needed probably more than 10% deposit and a higher interest rate also no 100% mortgages existed (and a lower earnings to loan ratio) and mortgage tax relief didnt exist as that wasnt introduced to 1983... right to buy also didnt exist till the 1980 housing act

so yeah points for consistency
Click to expand...

The figures are between 1970 and 2010, so 1970 is only a small snapshot. ~1974, 1980 and 1989 all saw huge YoY increases of over 30%, along with the policies enacted to fuel it. Meanwhile wage inflation has been declining since the 1970s.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/house-price-index-yoy
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/kgq2/qna

The last time the price/salary multiple was this high was in the 1800s when land barons and slum lords ruled.
 
Cooksen said:
I disagree with this idea.,

If people cannot own homes and families they will never get more right leaning.

If you do not have a stake in the system that has constantly failed you, you would want to break the system.
Click to expand...

Never underestimate the strength of self-denial though! Everyone, no matter who they are, always believe that they're closer to success than abject failure. The idea that, as you get older, you get more Conservative is objectively visible in any series of voting stats you care to check, because homeowners, higher earners through annual pay rises tend to be older. But with younger / poorer (but not at the point of genuine poverty) there is always the belief that they are more likely to become a millionaire rather than homeless. The reality for these people is that if they fell in to unemployment or lost income for even a short period of time, the 'benefits' this gov't give wouldn't be enough for them to manage, millions of people are only a few bad turns away from abject destitution.

But people will always think, "That'll never happen to me" even if they don't own a home or are an especially high earner, and they often feel the most vitriolic to those that are destitute / in abject poverty.

Sorry for being quite so pessimistic about people.
 
11101 said:
The figures are between 1970 and 2010, so 1970 is only a small snapshot. ~1974, 1980 and 1989 all saw huge YoY increases of over 30%, along with the policies enacted to fuel it. Meanwhile wage inflation has been declining since the 1970s.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/house-price-index-yoy
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/kgq2/qna

The last time the price/salary multiple was this high was in the 1800s when land barons and slum lords ruled.
Click to expand...
the last time interest rates were this low was erm never

hence the graph yesterday showing that as a % of take home pay a mortgage today is afordable as it was for previous generations

The main difference bing that a family on average wage now can afford an average house with the miltiples that lenders will lend whilst in the 1970s they could not
 
Maticmaker said:
Yes, its strange isn't it, Boris is becoming a sort of 'upper-class Del-Boy'; people can see what he's up to but seem to accept he has a certain charm, he simply ruffles his own hair before appearing on camera, then comes out with his own versions of "lovely-jubbly' or describes opponents (usually Labour) as a 'load of plonkers' and other similar chat lines and everybody smiles and ignores the doggy-dealings!
Click to expand...

Excellent description.
If only he was as harmless as Del Boy.
But I do accept that some people see that he has a certain charm, even if I don't understand why.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
Yeah but it's much better now...

Average yearly wage 2021: £31,285
Average house price 2021: £269,945

...ah feck. Anyone got a box for sale?!
Click to expand...
Why dont we all band together, buy a field and a feck load of tents, and have a Utd/Redcafe commune? We will need more lasses though.
 
Pexbo said:
71% Say he’s doing “badly”
23% ”well”.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/boris-johnson-approval-rating

I think it’s fair to say that he’s no longer viewed as a Del-Boy loveable rogue and now more of a plain old rogue.
Click to expand...

Whatever the definition of approval/lovable means Boris keeps on going, possibly because for many people he comes across as someone who doesn't take himself too seriously, where as most politicians, by comparison, do. I suspect that even when as the graph indicates 70% think he's going badly, the reaction of many is, 'its just Boris'.

This apparent lack of gravitas does upset many who feel he is demeaning the office of PM. For many media interviewers trying to get a straight answer (let alone an honest answer) out of Boris becomes mission impossible.

Like all PM's he will run out of road, eventually, but the smart money is on the Tory party Grandee's arranging for Boris to 'spend more time with his family' well before then.

Buster15 said:
But I do accept that some people see that he has a certain charm, even if I don't understand why.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is what infuriates many people, my nephew goes mad whenever Boris appears on the news, even before Boris has said anything.... I cannot repeat what he shouts at the TV.... as his wife hurry's to remove their daughter from the room.
 
Maticmaker said:
Whatever the definition of approval/lovable means Boris keeps on going, possibly because for many people he comes across as someone who doesn't take himself too seriously, where as most politicians, by comparison, do. I suspect that even when as the graph indicates 70% think he's going badly, the reaction of many is, 'its just Boris'.

This apparent lack of gravitas does upset many who feel he is demeaning the office of PM. For many media interviewers trying to get a straight answer (let alone an honest answer) out of Boris becomes mission impossible.

Like all PM's he will run out of road, eventually, but the smart money is on the Tory party Grandee's arranging for Boris to 'spend more time with his family' well before then.



Yes, this is what infuriates many people, my nephew goes mad whenever Boris appears on the news, even before Boris has said anything.... I cannot repeat what he shouts at the TV.... as his wife hurry's to remove their daughter from the room.
Click to expand...

Same for one of my close family.
Initially thought that he was wonderful, especially based on his so called performance as Mayor of London.
But slowly, the reality of the true Boris has resulted in a very healthy hatred.
The biggest hate is the fact that he thinks that it is perfectly acceptable to lie and assume that the public as stupid enough to be taken in by him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.