Todays society - snowflakes

[Biscuit]

Living in Reading and complaining about house prices???!!!



Sorry, that's like living in Death Valley and complaining about the heat.... !!

Yeah the issue is rarely actually, "house prices are too expensive"

The issue is, "the house I want, in the area I want, is too expensive"

You can get a 3 bed house in the area I live in, which is a pretty nice town in N. Yorks for between £100-150k. It would need a bit of work (perhaps), but the areas in which these house's are, are not great... but a "not great" area round here is still a hell of a lot more pleasant (IMO) that most places 3 or 4 x that in London.

Personally, im looking at 4 beds and expecting to pay between 180-220K, and it will be a really nice friendly part of town.

If you really want to get on the property ladder as a youth, given that you can get 5% mortgages and the help to buy ISA... it really shouldn't be that hard to raise the cash if you have a reasonably desirable job. If you don't have a desirable job, then get off your arse and find one... they wont come to you.... snowflake...

Be warned of the help to buy schemes on new homes though. They seem appealing, but in my area they are valuing the houses for WAYYYYYY more than the houses will EVER be worth, so you drop your deposit and pay your mortgage but never ever see that money. The quality of materials used is disgraceful (im living in a rented one atm) with walls as thin as paper and just.... just blergh... dont do it.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Don't discount the London effect!

[Biscuit]

Don't discount the London effect!

Im immune

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Im immune

Good for you - Manchester,was piss cheap,and Wales even more so.

You don't seem to get that as London becomes more and more expensive,it has an effect that Londoners move to cheaper areas,outside,and it causes houses and rents to skyrocket,meaning people get displaced more and more out of areas they would have lived in. Local pay also does not reflect the new reality. Travel is also not also proportional to income. For me its fine,but I got to worry for people who are not earning huge amounts,or who have not got any investments going already.

I remember paying more for a few minutes bus ride round here,than in blasted London. It is more expensive than Bristol or Manchester too.

Plus friends who work in Cambridge and Oxford,some on decent salaries have no hope of actually living anywhere in the cities,unless you commute in or make mega sacrifices.

Also all those essential workers like policeman,nurses,etc they are utterly screwed. Unless you think the world will run without them.

The housing in this country is an artificially limited Ponzi scheme - its not about finding a place to live,but more about funding people's retirement plans.

Edit!!

That is the other thing - as more and more places become less and less car friendly,you need to rely on the utter POS and overpriced public transport system,who then hold everyone to ransom.

They make arbitary decisions on cost,so you can go one way it costs less,but go the other way it doubles in price,for no apparent reason. Having said that the train is usually cheaper than every using the bus round here.

[Biscuit]

Good for you - Manchester,was piss cheap,and Wales even more so.

You don't seem to get that as London becomes more and more expensive,it has an effect that Londoners move to cheaper areas,outside,and it causes houses and rents to skyrocket,meaning people get displaced more and more out of areas they would have lived in. Local pay also does not reflect the new reality. Travel is also not also proportional to income. For me its fine,but I got to worry for people who are not earning huge amounts.

I remember paying more for a few minutes bus ride round here,than in blasted London. It is more expensive than Bristol or Manchester too.

Plus friends who work in Cambridge and Oxford,some on decent salaries have no hope of actually living anywhere near there,unless you commute in or make mega sacrifices.

Also all those essential workers like policeman,nurses,etc they are utterly screwed. Unless you think the world will run without them.

The housing in this country is an artificially limited Ponzi scheme - its not about finding a place to live,but more about funding people's retirement plans.

Im not saying its easy, dont get me wrong, but what I am saying is that things are a lot easier if you actually try to do something about it rather than just complain about the fact it isnt easy or fair.

Im certainly not defending the state of rental properties in this country right now.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Im not saying its easy, dont get me wrong, but what I am saying is that things are a lot easier if you actually try to do something about it rather than just complain about the fact it isnt easy or fair.

Im certainly not defending the state of rental properties in this country right now.

That I can agree on - I think all the idiotic media pushes people to not use commonsense when renting or even purchasing a property,ie,have some financial lattitude and not max out what you can pay. As a result people just borrow way too much and the media also pushes too many to then take on second mortgages,ie,buy to let,which in one way is good since there is more places to rent,but also bad since it depletes available housing stock for first time buyers. However,one could also argue,maybe like in some countries,perhaps controlled longterm rents might be financially more sound for many people.

OTH,another side effect of people overborrowing it just feeds into the shark frenzy which is not great for the amount of longterm debt this country has,and governments instead of serving the public interest,have done eff all about this,ie,reclaim unused homes,build new homes in any quantity or even shock and horror,actually try and push for more of the wealth to go to places like Wales and the North of England,where there are enough vacant homes,and enough space in the first place. I was actually shocked when one of my mates from Brum said Londoners were buying up places in Birmingham and commuting down to London. That is just mental!

[Biscuit]

That I can agree on - I think all the idiotic media pushes people to not use commonsense when renting or even purchasing a property,ie,have some financial lattitude and not max out what you can pay. As a result people just borrow way too much and the media also pushes too many to then take on second mortgages,ie,buy to let,which in one way is good since there is more places to rent,but also bad since it depletes available housing stock for first time buyers. However,one could also argue,maybe like in some countries,perhaps controlled longterm rents might be financially more sound for many people.

OTH,another side effect of people overborrowing it just feeds into the shark frenzy which is not great for the amount of longterm debt this country has,and governments instead of serving the public interest,have done eff all about this,ie,reclaim unused homes,build new homes in any quantity or even shock and horror,actually try and push for more of the wealth to to places like Wales and the North of England,where there are enough vacant homes,and enough space in the first place. I was actually shocked when one of my mates from Brum said Londoners were buying up places in Birmingham and commuting down to London. That is just mental!

Takes 2 hours and 45 minutes to get directly to KGX from my home town... some people genuinely do it. Not that much difference from a typical london commute if you work in that area. (cost aside of course.... but then you get that back in living costs so....)

[Saracen]

Hi I really appreciate the insight as it can be hard to get a balanced and fair opinion of their own situation. I would start by giving you a bit of background as to be fair, I am not the same as other 26 year olds. I don't drink, neither does my wife. We don't eat out as my wife can't (dietary wise) and also money wise. I may go out for a cheap lunch with colleagues every so often. We haven't been on holiday at all since we were together except two cases, one was paid for by my parents (and was in the UK), and second was for our honeymoon which was a honeymoon gift, we still had to pay for the transportation and spending money etc. The only luxuries we have are nice mobile phones and the cheapest virgin broadband, which is vital for my work. I do think maybe you've tarred all young people with the same brush and assume we are all wasting away the little money we earn.

I put myself through university and didn't get any support from my parents, this meant I have racked up debt on making ends meet as the government loan didn't cover the costs. Now I am only just in a job that pays well, I have considerable debts that I am clearing and will be cleared in a few years time, If I wasn't paying these (which are a good portion of my income) I would be able to save for a house at an alright rate.

The simple fact is that the costs of buying a house in the 1980s were a lot cheaper than they are now, a lot of young people don't save for a house because even with a deposit they couldn't pass the affordability calculator for a mortgage. Yes I can see you did struggle to make ends meet on your mortgage but being self employed is always a risk and I am sure it has paid off now that you've got through it.

The article below is a good example of how insurmountable the current housing market is, and its getting worse. Lots of people from a similar generation to you managed to get houses on tiny tiny deposits which are these days not possible.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/personal-...pared-to-2016/

But I will agree with you and I also admire your attitude and hardwork in respect saving and getting onto the property ladder, this is mine and my wife's primary goal. We do our finances weekly and account for all of our spending, we also have put a lot of time into getting our debts on the cheapest rates and they are always paid off in full every month.

It's interesting to get a perspective on where you're coming from.

I would point out, just for reference, I was careful to NOT suggest I was comparing myself to you, because I had no notion at all of your circumstances. Hence the comparison to "kids" of your age that are in my direct sphere.

Any comparison between now and 30 years ago or between 30 and 50/60 years ago, needs to bear in mind the world was very different back then. For instance, in my childhood, supermarkets, such as would be recognised today, didn't exist. Sainsbury was little more than a butchers shop, and Tesco flogged really cheap clothing and precious little else. Not eating out wasn't that hard, as there were precious few places to do it, and most of those didn't exist a few ywars earlier. Fast food shops hadn't been invented, at least in the UK, but we were lucky and sophisticated .... we had a chippie and a Chinese restaurant. Not takeaway, an honest-to-God restaurant. Oh, and a pub/steakhouse with dubioys standards. Put it this way, I'm much better at coooking steakz tgan the boot-soles they served up, and I rarely eat steak. Scampi in a basket was the height if sophistication .... if you could afford it.


Anyway, nostalgia over.


Compare uni education. You would be right in assuming I didn't have to pay fees. So, while uni was a struggle .... no debt.

But .... as I said, about 5% of school-leavers went to uni not 45%. Funding uni today the way it was funded in my day isn't on, so sure, "kids" graduating have debts (sort-of) but if you prefer the old system, you'd graduate without such debts, at the cost if an 8 in 9 chance of not graduating at all because you never got to go at all.

Here's the really hard bit, though. If you were one of the lucky 5%, and got a half-decent degree from a hakd-decent uni, you were VERY unlucky not to oretty much guarantee walking into a decent job opportunity. That's not to say well-paid .... initially. A high proportion of graduates then went into careers with professional training required, and several more years of rubbish pay. But, goid prospects.

Nowadays, from what I can make out, even a good degree doesn't anything like guarantee a graduate-grade job. Which suggests to me a problem wuth education policy .... why encourage so many youngsters to go to uni when we end uo with far more graduates than graduate jobs? It's .... a con. Either we ned fewer graduates each year, or more graduate jobs.

If I had school-age kids, I'd think very, VERY hard before advising yhem to go to uni, and it would depend what they wanted to do. In many areas of work, a better solution is starting career progressiob three years sooner, getting three ywars more experience and having three more years earnings go kick-start saving for a deposit .... and no student loan debt.

Of course, many 'professions' are still either strictly graduate-only, or very nearly so.


Anyways, in so many ways, from house-buying, to the uni decision, to shopping habits and eating out, the world is very different. And as for technology ... 50 - 60 years ago wasn't much more advanced than the middfle ages. Even TV was bkack and white.

[spacein_vader]

It's interesting to get a perspective on where you're coming from.

I would point out, just for reference, I was careful to NOT suggest I was comparing myself to you, because I had no notion at all of your circumstances. Hence the comparison to "kids" of your age that are in my direct sphere.

Any comparison between now and 30 years ago or between 30 and 50/60 years ago, needs to bear in mind the world was very different back then. For instance, in my childhood, supermarkets, such as would be recognised today, didn't exist. Sainsbury was little more than a butchers shop, and Tesco flogged really cheap clothing and precious little else. Not eating out wasn't that hard, as there were precious few places to do it, and most of those didn't exist a few ywars earlier. Fast food shops hadn't been invented, at least in the UK, but we were lucky and sophisticated .... we had a chippie and a Chinese restaurant. Not takeaway, an honest-to-God restaurant. Oh, and a pub/steakhouse with dubioys standards. Put it this way, I'm much better at coooking steakz tgan the boot-soles they served up, and I rarely eat steak. Scampi in a basket was the height if sophistication .... if you could afford it.


Anyway, nostalgia over.


Compare uni education. You would be right in assuming I didn't have to pay fees. So, while uni was a struggle .... no debt.

But .... as I said, about 5% of school-leavers went to uni not 45%. Funding uni today the way it was funded in my day isn't on, so sure, "kids" graduating have debts (sort-of) but if you prefer the old system, you'd graduate without such debts, at the cost if an 8 in 9 chance of not graduating at all because you never got to go at all.

Here's the really hard bit, though. If you were one of the lucky 5%, and got a half-decent degree from a hakd-decent uni, you were VERY unlucky not to oretty much guarantee walking into a decent job opportunity. That's not to say well-paid .... initially. A high proportion of graduates then went into careers with professional training required, and several more years of rubbish pay. But, goid prospects.

Nowadays, from what I can make out, even a good degree doesn't anything like guarantee a graduate-grade job. Which suggests to me a problem wuth education policy .... why encourage so many youngsters to go to uni when we end uo with far more graduates than graduate jobs? It's .... a con. Either we ned fewer graduates each year, or more graduate jobs.

If I had school-age kids, I'd think very, VERY hard before advising yhem to go to uni, and it would depend what they wanted to do. In many areas of work, a better solution is starting career progressiob three years sooner, getting three ywars more experience and having three more years earnings go kick-start saving for a deposit .... and no student loan debt.

Of course, many 'professions' are still either strictly graduate-only, or very nearly so.


Anyways, in so many ways, from house-buying, to the uni decision, to shopping habits and eating out, the world is very different. And as for technology ... 50 - 60 years ago wasn't much more advanced than the middfle ages. Even TV was bkack and white.

My eldest is about 9 years from having to make a decision on university but unless things change drastically in that time (both in terms of cost & job prospects,) I'm going to advise her against going unless she wants to do something specific (doctor, architect etc,) that absolutely requires one.

For me the value proposition just isn't there any more, you pay more than ever for less improvement in employment prospects than ever.

[DanceswithUnix]

For me the value proposition just isn't there any more, you pay more than ever for less improvement in employment prospects than ever.

I went to uni in the late 80's and I'm sure I would have been financially better off not going even then, but I am glad I did. I have to wonder if the modern large scale universities will give the same life experience as it did with only 5% of people going but all chucked together in halls so we mixed socially. I think I was 30 when I cleared my student debt.

I'm not convinced about lack of prospects though, if anything it seems worse. In my youth being part of the 95% of non graduates didn't seem to carry a stigma though a degree could open some doors. These days it feels like if you aren't in the 45% with degrees then what's wrong with you, and that isn't right.

[Hoonigan]

The quality of materials used is disgraceful (im living in a rented one atm) with walls as thin as paper and just.... just blergh... dont do it.

I lived in a "new build" about 4 years ago. You could spit through the walls without issue and hear the neighbour 3 doors down having a piss in the night. Terrible build quality these days, just so they can sell them dirt cheap.

[spacein_vader]

I went to uni in the late 80's and I'm sure I would have been financially better off not going even then, but I am glad I did. I have to wonder if the modern large scale universities will give the same life experience as it did with only 5% of people going but all chucked together in halls so we mixed socially. I think I was 30 when I cleared my student debt.

I'm not convinced about lack of prospects though, if anything it seems worse. In my youth being part of the 95% of non graduates didn't seem to carry a stigma though a degree could open some doors. These days it feels like if you aren't in the 45% with degrees then what's wrong with you, and that isn't right.

I haven't seen that stigma, admittedly I might be just old enough to have missed it (Started working in 2002,) so it could be there. I've been hired into roles that claim a degree is essential but it turns out it's just another checkpoint on a list. I've also done my fair share of hiring and have tried hard to ensure a degree is only on a job spec if it really is REQUIRED. So far I've only had to do that once. I found that once you had 4-5 years experience in a field (and I'm aware getting in to build that experience while being paid a pittance is the challenge,) nobody cares about educational experience and that's in public, private and 3rd sector roles.

Note though, all the above assumes not working in a protected trade that needs degrees as a condition of entry like doctors. I have found though that this applies to less professions than you'd think. For example when I was trying to hire an accountant, they needed certain industry qualifications and many of those had been achieved via a degree but there were candidates who'd gone in on the ground floor through entry level qualifications like AAT.

I lived in a "new build" about 4 years ago. You could spit through the walls without issue and hear the neighbour 3 doors down having a piss in the night. Terrible build quality these days, just so they can sell them dirt cheap.

They may build them dirt cheap, I see no evidence (around here anyway,) of them selling them any cheaper than the older housing stock.

[Hoonigan]

They may build them dirt cheap, I see no evidence (around here anyway,) of them selling them any cheaper than the older housing stock.

In my experience, the vast portion of the "value" of a property isn't the property itself, but the location in which it was built. Much like what Biscuit said.

[Biscuit]

They may build them dirt cheap, I see no evidence (around here anyway,) of them selling them any cheaper than the older housing stock.

Nope, and this is where the con is with HTB new builds with equity loan.

They sell 3-4 bed houses for 220-280k and you only put 5% cash down which all sounds very appealing to someone struggling to save up a bit of cash (young couples with a new family being the prime target), but the actual value if you want to sell that house 5 years down the line is closer to 180-240K if you're lucky.

I have sat and watched all the new builds round me plummet in value as people would much rather move into cheaper, older homes with walls made of materials thicker than grandma's knickers and a bit more garden.

I think people are blinded by their desire to pay a mortgage rather than a rent, and dont realise how bad the deals really are in the long term. In most cases, you're better off paying rent, economising and saving as much cash as you can to get a 5 or 10% mortgage on a different house.

[peterb]

<moderator's_hat>

Guys, I know this is an emotive subject, but the normal rules about language/swear filter etc still apply!

There have been one or two lapses in the thread</moderator's_hat>

[Ttaskmaster]

If words are harmless and a hundred years of negative meaning can be overridden if you just declare it so, then what's this PC bull doing here?

What a wonderfully succinct and undefeatable argument... Bit of a shame you throw it against almost no point that I actually raised, though.

To answer your question, I understood the word rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish was both clamped down on by forum censor-sensors and by forum policy, so I'm prevented from using it regardless.
Edit - Yep, see above 'rubbish-rubbish'.

But nonetheless, people can and do turn the meanings and acceptance of words, in both directions. The F-Word (also rubbished) was once a perfectly acceptable term in polite dinner company, for example.
The other one in question is under revision and once enough people adopt the change, it will be overridden.

“Reappropriation of ethnic and sexual slurs starts as an act of bravado by a few of the oppressed, then may become an empowering mechanism for a much wider community. It’s pleasingly ironic that those discriminated against have learned the Orwellian trick employed by the state and the establishment of hijacking everyday language (as in ‘doublespeak’) for their own nefarious purposes. Alternative discourse ousts and replaces the discourses of power”
Tony Thorne, Kings College London.
In this instance Thorne was speaking specifically about the word bitch an the variant biatch as a form of reappropriation, but included certain other words already mentioned, in the course of his discourse.

Don't discount the London effect!

That's entirely what Reading is built upon, these days!