Won't somebody think of "young people"? (Edit: and No, older people aren't "to blame")

[Jacob]

When? Show me.

You could find out for yourself if you think it's worth effort. Personally I recall very high rates in the 70s but have no recollection of falling house prices. This could help your research; UK Interest Rate History / Graph

 

[Jacob]

By the 1970s the UK was known as the sick man of Europe. Inefficient businesses being destroyed by both employers and unions. Successive governments of both hues incapable of providing effective leadership.

Thatcher changed that.

She neutered the unions who believed the rights of workers trumped absolutely the rights of business owners.

She forced businesses that still believed "we won the war so we must be right" to recognise the world beyond the UK which was increasingly capable of producing much that the UK could at a lower cost.

Steel, coal, cars etc were mature technologies at which the UK would increasingly be uncompetitive. They declined leaving only the higher value added - special steels, design, precision manufacturing etc.

Introduction of container ships made global trade far easier. Some may remember the disruption during implementation of containerisation.

The only material area in which MT was deficient was in training and support for the development of new skills and businesses. She should not have assumed that entire communities would have the energy, skills and initiative to improve themselves, but needed constructive suppoort.

Without her leadership the UK may easily have declined into bankruptcy being passed rapidly by India, China over 30 years ago.

Now Johnson has finished the job she started and we are finally the sick man and laughing stock of Europe.

 

[doctor Bob]

Now Johnson has finished the job she started and we are finally the sick man and laughing stock of Europe.

every country in europe would love our GDP (germany excluded). I bet they would all like our vaccine roll out as well, Macron must be spitting feathers.
I hope they all improve, as it's a worldwide issue.
I do wonder if Jezza had won the last election if he would take his brothers advice...............

 

[Trainee neophyte]

@Jacob

Bear in mind correlation is not causation.

https://www.propertyinvestmentproje...nationwide-average-house-prices-vs-base-rate/
I bought a house for £42,000, with interest rates at 8% in 1989. 6 months later it was worth £60,000 (housing bubble courtesy of Bank of England). Rates then went to 15%, and the value of my house dropped to £30,000 over the next two years. I can't remember how many years it took to get back to positive territory again, but lesson learned.

I say again. When? Show me.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Now Johnson has finished the job she started and we are finally the sick man and laughing stock of Europe.

Glib but simplistic. I would not argue with your assessment of Boris (neither would I wholly agree) but it is worth noting the Labour lost 4 elections in a row, the last by a landslide.

They evidently lacked the leadership, competencies and policies to persuade any but died in the wool longstanding supporters.

 

[billw]

Well thinking of the younger people they should actually be unaffected by the lockdown and not notice much change because they don't have real freinds just virtual ones that follow them in the dark world of the "smart phone" and unsocial media.

You just described me and I’m 50 this year.

 

[billw]

@Jacob

Bear in mind correlation is not causation.

https://www.propertyinvestmentproje...nationwide-average-house-prices-vs-base-rate/
I bought a house for £42,000, with interest rates at 8% in 1989. 6 months later it was worth £60,000 (housing bubble courtesy of Bank of England). Rates then went to 15%, and the value of my house dropped to £30,000 over the next two years. I can't remember how many years it took to get back to positive territory again, but lesson learned.

I say again. When? Show me.

if you’re living in the place what does it matter what it’s worth? It’s a home notan investment.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

if you’re living in the place what does it matter what it’s worth? It’s a home notan investment.

Except when interest rates double, the recession bites, and you have to weigh up sending the keys back or selling your children for medical experiments.

It was a hard couple of years. I gave all my money to the bank. They didn't seem particularly grateful.

 

[doctor Bob]

or selling your children for medical experiments.

Is this possible, how much do you get ............................ errrmmm asking for a friend.

 

[RobinBHM]

As labour had bankrupted the country who was going to keep footing the bill?

A bit of an old trope, largely untrue.

Labour was doing quite well with debt until the global financial crisis....which was caused by banking deregulation.


Both parties actually have done about the same with the economy.....but the truth is it's hard to measure.

 

[Billy_wizz]

A bit of an old trope, largely untrue.

Labour was doing quite well with debt until the global financial crisis....which was caused by banking deregulation.


Both parties actually have done about the same with the economy.....but the truth is it's hard to measure.

I genuinely didn't know they deregulated the banks twice! I was referring the first time they where in! Although considering the global crash was being predicted for a few years before it happened why did they keep borrowing more and more when being solvent would have limited it's impact and there way of handling it was to just keep borrowing more!

 

[rafezetter]

At no point have I actually blamed the older generation.

[snip]

Yeah you pretty much did:

Jelly - "There are lots of things stacked in favour of the older generations"

Stacked = deliberate. Stacking something is a deliberate action, things DO NOT "stack" under naturally occuring random events.

Your line above sets the flavour for the rest of the post, and then becomes a /rant at how it sucks to be a young person and how you beleive a lot of it is because of the older generations.

My post was to remind you that most of the BS the young are having to endure simply HAPPENED, and that the people who were alive then, are now older, but the two ARE NOT exclusively linked.

Is it unfair that you have to pay for university fees now - compared to older generations? Yes it is. Is it unfair and a little hypocritical that those who set that legislation very likely had FREE university education themselves, also YES.

However the real picture is that the cost to the UK taxpayer was UTTERLY UNSUSTAINABLE, and would have had only TWO outcomes.

1) many universities close as the state has to reduce numbers and move to a scholarship style system - which in and of itself is "unfair".
or
2) those that WANT the extra education, the diploma and all the benefits that come from that are asked to PAY FOR IT, and the financial burden is removed from "joe schmo the garbage lorry driver, and his wife Bettina the cleaner" whom DID NOT go to university.

Now try to tell me again how it's unfair you have to pay for university fees, that only YOU (and potential partner / children) get the financial benefit from - without sounding "entitled". Frankly you should be bloody thankful the taxpayer is still picking up the tab via Govt loans that you DON'T EVEN HAVE TO PAY BACK until you hit a specific earnings threshold.

Shall we talk next about how much of those Govt loans are currently outstanding? Google that, remembering it's TAXPAYERS MONEY then get back to me mmkay?

I'll tell you and the rest of the readers ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY BILLION POUNDS.

£140,000,000,000

another small fact - there are more people going to university now than at any other time in history.

Shall I continue to tear apart the rest of your post or shall we leave it there?

 

[Deadeye]

Edit:

​

My point in making this post was mainly to highlight the hypocrisy of many people advocating against the current lockdown because of the "Young People".​

​

As part of that, I have listed below the myriad complex reasons that for the first time in hundreds of years, people aged under 39 (which is hardly "young" by normal standards) will be significantly less well off that their parents; and pointed out that (as an overall group) older people have been net beneficiaries of many of those policies.​

​

Quite a few people have taken this as some kind of attack, or some kind attempt to blame older people for the current situation... It isn't intended as one that's just how things stand from a factual point of view​

​

I can full understand it might be arresting or uncomfortable to read, and it may be outright aggravating to be generalized about if you're an older person who hasn't in fact seen any of the benefit personally whilst being impacted by some of the negatives below... But please don't have a go, accusing me of blaming you when I have not done so.​

​

Forked from the How would you rate the UK's handling of this pandemic? thread as I think this is worthy of a seperate discussion.

On that aforementioned thread, the same talking point keeps coming up:



Now, speaking as a young person...

There are lots of things stacked in favour of the older generations and the impact of lockdown is miniscule compared to:

• The distortion of the housing market into an investment vehicle, effectively pulling up the ladder on young people's access to housing security.
• Maintaining the pension triple lock whilst systematically reducing real-terms financial support to working age people in poverty.
• Economic policy which prioritises the realisation of short term gains in the markets over the kind of long term organic growth which would support meaningful wage growth for adults of working age (and espwhich keeps pace with inflation.
• The consequent systematic restructuring the UK economy in such a way that access to well paying jobs with prospects of significant career development are increasingly out of reach for a majority of young people (at all levels of education but especially for those without a university degree).
• The impact of successive changes to the funding of higher education which have consistently reduced access and teaching quality, whilst increasing the financial stress and debt burden.
• Disproportionate infrastructure investment in the South East, where the population is disproportionately older and wealthier.
• Failure to make any meaningful attempt to address the impact of second homes on access to the housing market for young people in rural areas.
• Failure to control the impact of right to buy on social housing stocks, or prevent the transfer of social housing into the private rented sector at grossly inflated rents.
• Continued and increasingly dismissive and scornful treatment of young people who attempt to raise these issues, (or any other political issues which they feel deeply about) in the UK's (frankly abysmal) print media.

So I guess we're collectively innured to just getting screwed for the benefit of older people these days.

Which leads lots of young people to be very cynical...

Cynical enough in fact to question:

​

Why is it that so many of the very same people who seem unwilling to acknowledge, let alone address any of those difficult issues which are having a massive impact, who suddenly have our back over the impact of lockdown?​

​

Answers on a postcard, please.

You've changed your title to suggest older people aren't "to blame".

Yes, we are. Really.

Even if we forgive ignorance (and, by and large, we shouldn't; the law doesn't for example) people that are now in their 50s, 60s and 70s - which includes me - have:

1. built an economic model of debt-fuelled growth that is fundamentally unsustainable and unstable
2. ingrained a dogma that fulfilment and "success" are derived from material/wealth accumulation and actively diminished the value of community and contribution to community
3. continued to pursue greenhouse-gas rich interests waaaaaay after the incontrovertible science to the contrary
4. allowed, facilitated or supported a growth of inequality in everything - economic, educational, health, recourse to law, *everything* - that is utterly immoral

Most of this has happened through pursuit of self-interest by said 50s-60s-70s, but we should not lose sight of the important role of immediate self-gratification within that.

Am I guilty? Yes... and ashamed and angry. We've let our young people down.
And if the life purpose of one generation is not to make the world better for the next, what the hell is it?

 

[Terry - Somerset]

In the 1970s ~8% of school leavers went to universities, polytechnics also awarded degrees - total ~ 10%. Currently ~50% go to uni.

In the mid 1970s - free tuition and a grant. Totally different today!

Those who went to university were the cream of the intellectual crop (they may have/lack other qualities). Higher education at taxpayers expense removed barriers to individual achievement if you had the ability. It provided a talent pool for careers which justified a higher level education.

50% now going to university includes not only the potentially able, but also the very average. Their are insufficient jobs needing graduates, hence employment lower paid jobs, not the professions as may originally have been the case.

 

[RobinBHM]

every country in europe would love our GDP

I doubt it, like all things, nuance counts for a lot and GDP is a pretty poor metric.....maybe you might want to take your Brexit goggles off

Here's a bit of meat on the bone:

Household net adjusted annual disposable income of European countries 2019

UK is not exactly top:

Luxembourg
Switzerland
Germany
Norway
Austria
Finland
Sweden
Belgium
Netherlands
France
Denmark
UK

Life expectancy, UK is in 15th place
Poverty: UK is in 20th place
Healthcare: UK is 16th place

 

[RobinBHM]

I genuinely didn't know they deregulated the banks twice! I was referring the first time they where in! Although considering the global crash was being predicted for a few years before it happened why did they keep borrowing more and more when being solvent would have limited it's impact and there way of handling it was to just keep borrowing more!

Even in the 70s Labours economic record wasn't that bad.....have a look the info is out there.

I'm not sure your argument that Labour could've predicted the crash or even prevented its impact.

I'm no leftie I just don't like seeing these old tropes keep being repeated.

To be honest our tribal two party system is more to blame for poor economic performance more than any one party.

 

[Jelly]

Yeah you pretty much did:

Jelly - "There are lots of things stacked in favour of the older generations"

Stacked = deliberate. Stacking something is a deliberate action, things DO NOT "stack" under through naturally occuring random events.

That isn't the only way that can be interpreted, nor the spirit in which it was intended; stacked was chosen because there's a multitude of issues at play which add up to have an impact which is greater than the sum of their parts.

But if that's how you interpret it, I'm never going to change your mind; you're clearly sensitive about this, given you yourself have highlighted that you've had a raw deal from many of same issues, which is fair do's.

I can empathize with that, but let me be entirely clear though that empathy doesn't mean I think the aggressive tone you're taking is appropriate.

Now try to tell me again how it's unfair you have to pay for university fees, that only YOU get the financial benefit from - without sounding "entitled". Frankly you should be bloody thankful the taxpayer is still picking up the tab via Govt loans that you DONT EVEN HAVE TO PAY BACK until you hit a specific earnings threshold.

See there's the rub, I paid for my undergraduate out of pocket by working in a sawmill, because for personal reasons I needed to go part time and SLC wouldn't fund me...

I then did my my master's via distance learning, paying out of pocket again, because I needed the competitive edge to get out of the hole I found myself in after being made redundant repeatedly during a huge industry downturn.

So your assumptions are dead wrong, and your accusatory statements say more about your own emotional reaction to the issues I'm raising than it does about me, or the substance of my posts.

Shall I continue to tear apart the rest of your post or shall we leave it there?

Do whatever lets you sleep at night, but I stand by my analysis of the issues and the data I've linked backing that up.

 

[RobinBHM]

Glib but simplistic. I would not argue with your assessment of Boris (neither would I wholly agree) but it is worth noting the Labour lost 4 elections in a row, the last by a landslide.

They evidently lacked the leadership, competencies and policies to persuade any but died in the wool longstanding supporters.

Yes indeed.

Divided parties don't win elections.

Tories value power above all else and it keeps them united, at least as far as the public is concerned.

Labour are in a permanent state of tribal division. If we ever get PR, Labour would split instantly.

 

[Jelly]

To be honest our tribal two party system is more to blame for poor economic performance more than any one party.

I would hope that's a sentiment we can all get behind, regardless of other issues.

Certainly both labour and conservative governments contributed to the issues raised in my initial post.

 

[Billy_wizz]

Even in the 70s Labours economic record wasn't that bad.....have a look the info is out there.

I'm not sure your argument that Labour could've predicted the crash or even prevented its impact.

I'm no leftie I just don't like seeing these old tropes keep being repeated.

To be honest our tribal two party system is more to blame for poor economic performance more than any one party.

Me and friends where discussing several years before the crash when it would happen also several small businesses I dealt with where discussing what they where putting away ready for the crash so I seriously doubt the government and there advisers didn't know! Gordon brown had his chance to be a hero when he borrowed a load of money at the start of the crash had he told builders to keep building and the government would buy the houses at X% retail for housing schemes then jobs would of been kept and the economy would of kept on ticking that with a reduction of borrowing before the crash would of left the UK in a much better position