What is the best age to be in 2012 financially?
Poll: What is the best age to be in 2012 financially?
Total Members Polled: 233
Discussion
Evening Chris,
The biggest decision you have to make is to look after yourself. Earning and retaining enough cash to build up any real equity in the UK for your generation is going to be very difficult for anyone under 30 in the UK over the next forty years.
I would suggest self employment must be your answer with a self administered pension scheme, properly formed with a trust deed approved by the IR and therefore untouchable by anyone including the government.
You will need to save about £500,000 or so to have an adequate annuity given that your life expectancy is likely to be 85++. Part of this could be in your house as equity but you will need significant savings because by the time you retire in all probability the State pension will be worth little.
I would suggest buying your first home ASAP and then setting up your own business and using a pension mortgage to provide commercial premises. This must be your best bet IMO.
I retired as a Chartered Accountant last year and I followed that profession over 40 years. Your difficulty will be the aging population in the UK and economic decline of the UK. But I do believe self starting hard workers will still be able to create enough wealth to retire in comfort but it will not be easy.
I started building Kit Cars fifty years ago and I have lost count of the builds. With your experience and knowledge I would seriously suggest looking for a job in Kit Cars IF THAT interests you as a career. There is money to be made although I have never wanted to: Accountancy was my meal ticket to life, and very well it did me.
My first build was either a Ford E93A based Falcon or a Lotus Super Seven Twin Cam 1600 I wish I had both. Ditto the three JAP Morgan Three wheelers I had in the 1960's. and the two BSA Scouts, I could retire again if I had those five now!
Good to see someone looking forward keep up the kit cars!
The biggest decision you have to make is to look after yourself. Earning and retaining enough cash to build up any real equity in the UK for your generation is going to be very difficult for anyone under 30 in the UK over the next forty years.
I would suggest self employment must be your answer with a self administered pension scheme, properly formed with a trust deed approved by the IR and therefore untouchable by anyone including the government.
You will need to save about £500,000 or so to have an adequate annuity given that your life expectancy is likely to be 85++. Part of this could be in your house as equity but you will need significant savings because by the time you retire in all probability the State pension will be worth little.
I would suggest buying your first home ASAP and then setting up your own business and using a pension mortgage to provide commercial premises. This must be your best bet IMO.
I retired as a Chartered Accountant last year and I followed that profession over 40 years. Your difficulty will be the aging population in the UK and economic decline of the UK. But I do believe self starting hard workers will still be able to create enough wealth to retire in comfort but it will not be easy.
I started building Kit Cars fifty years ago and I have lost count of the builds. With your experience and knowledge I would seriously suggest looking for a job in Kit Cars IF THAT interests you as a career. There is money to be made although I have never wanted to: Accountancy was my meal ticket to life, and very well it did me.
My first build was either a Ford E93A based Falcon or a Lotus Super Seven Twin Cam 1600 I wish I had both. Ditto the three JAP Morgan Three wheelers I had in the 1960's. and the two BSA Scouts, I could retire again if I had those five now!
Good to see someone looking forward keep up the kit cars!
I reckon late 50's to mid 60's .
Most people I know of that age are a lot better off (considering their profession / skills) than they would be if (say) 10-15 years younger.
Many of them are graduates who had decent professional/ managerial positions , but not senior mngt/ exec roles .
Typical set-up is a large detached house in prime South East UK and a final salary pension which generates very nearly the same earnings as when they were employed.
3 key differences from today:
1/ long careers with the same firm (accruing ) a good pension
2/ bought into property in the mid-late 70's and watch inflation erode the debt.
3/ had a final salary pension for all of their career (vs having it chopped at mid-career, or only a DC )
Most people I know of that age are a lot better off (considering their profession / skills) than they would be if (say) 10-15 years younger.
Many of them are graduates who had decent professional/ managerial positions , but not senior mngt/ exec roles .
Typical set-up is a large detached house in prime South East UK and a final salary pension which generates very nearly the same earnings as when they were employed.
3 key differences from today:
1/ long careers with the same firm (accruing ) a good pension
2/ bought into property in the mid-late 70's and watch inflation erode the debt.
3/ had a final salary pension for all of their career (vs having it chopped at mid-career, or only a DC )
@MG Chris,
personally I would suggest that putting a lot of savings into a pension or house at the moment may not necessarily be the best idea:
1/ pensions can be good if say you are putting in 4% and the employer puts in8%. if it's just your own scheme - you get tax relief but end up with mainly an annuity and little access to the capital ....not a great use of your money IMHO.
2/ housing market is rather static now and the entry/ exit costs are significant - renting is more flexible and can be cheaper.
Think through whether more education would lead to better earning prospects in the long run. (maybe in a different field) Having a career in the same sector as your hobby can be fun , but not always lucrative.
(I work as a CFO : major game-changer was when I went back to Uni to move from Engineering (1st degree) into commerce/ Finance.)
personally I would suggest that putting a lot of savings into a pension or house at the moment may not necessarily be the best idea:
1/ pensions can be good if say you are putting in 4% and the employer puts in8%. if it's just your own scheme - you get tax relief but end up with mainly an annuity and little access to the capital ....not a great use of your money IMHO.
2/ housing market is rather static now and the entry/ exit costs are significant - renting is more flexible and can be cheaper.
Think through whether more education would lead to better earning prospects in the long run. (maybe in a different field) Having a career in the same sector as your hobby can be fun , but not always lucrative.
(I work as a CFO : major game-changer was when I went back to Uni to move from Engineering (1st degree) into commerce/ Finance.)
Financially now I'd guess late 30s early 40s. Interest rates and mortgage payments are relatively low, if you're a mid to senior level professional and you still have work. On the other hand the baby boomers, with no need to work, a healthy pension and a bit of money left over from selling their main house a few years ago and downsizing are still sitting pretty.
Probably a bad time to be a new graduate looking for a job or someone in their early 50s hoping to cling on to work for another 10 years and pay off their mortgage.
It's a strange question though. Equally it could be an awful time to be 40, with mounting debts, no pay rise in sight and house prices still out of reach. It could be an awful time to be a baby boomer, if your on a state pension with large outgoings and no prospect of increasing your income. It could be a great time to be a graduate, because if you cut your teeth professionally in a difficult market then you will be well placed to make hay when the sun starts shining again.
Probably a bad time to be a new graduate looking for a job or someone in their early 50s hoping to cling on to work for another 10 years and pay off their mortgage.
It's a strange question though. Equally it could be an awful time to be 40, with mounting debts, no pay rise in sight and house prices still out of reach. It could be an awful time to be a baby boomer, if your on a state pension with large outgoings and no prospect of increasing your income. It could be a great time to be a graduate, because if you cut your teeth professionally in a difficult market then you will be well placed to make hay when the sun starts shining again.
Anyone coming up to retirement in the next few years probably had the best time.
Possibly had a free education, was hired during a time when population demographics and changes in industry afforded good careers with rapid promotion, got the tidy pensions scheme, ran up government debt that will become inter-generational and purchased housing post war when prices had been effectively subsidised by the new towns.
As for worst I'd guess people graduating university in the next few years who will have the deck stacked against them in many respects.
Possibly had a free education, was hired during a time when population demographics and changes in industry afforded good careers with rapid promotion, got the tidy pensions scheme, ran up government debt that will become inter-generational and purchased housing post war when prices had been effectively subsidised by the new towns.
As for worst I'd guess people graduating university in the next few years who will have the deck stacked against them in many respects.
turbobloke said:
...70 according to the report at the link below. Which is news to me but then I'm not 70.
Worst age is 45, according to the author. Maybe 20-something grads with student loan repayments and house price woes would disagree.
http://www.babusinesslife.com/Tools/Features/Inter...
My parents are loaded, (it's all relative), in thier 70's, because Worst age is 45, according to the author. Maybe 20-something grads with student loan repayments and house price woes would disagree.
http://www.babusinesslife.com/Tools/Features/Inter...
1) NHS Mangers pension.
2) Teachers Pension
3) Paid off house in expensive Solihull, retired to CHEAP North Wales.
4) Inherited 1/3 of one house in cotswolds, 1/2 of a house in solihull, and 2/45ths of a house on south coast.
5) They live like peasant farmers.
I'm 45. I think I'm much better off than I've ever been.
I'm 65. I was at the start of the baby boom. I've had it easy it seems.
When I was in my teens I left school at 15 (despite doing well at grammar school) and then worked a 5 1/2 day week in a factory. I was an apprentice and so my pay was dreadful, but I was told that getting a trade behind me was important. I could have a job for life.
In my teens I could afford about four pints of beer a week together with 4 gallons of petrol. Girlfriends were taken to the pub, the cinema or for a walk. Most barbers would not sell me condoms because I was under 21. The pill had yet to come and so had I.
Then came the swinging 60s and things changed. It was acceptable to talk to girls. I was at art colelge for a time and things really took off for me. It was fun but money was even scarcer.
My father sold his motorcycle combination and bought a Morris Minor Traveller. He could afford to run it as he trained as a mechanic.
I had one suit, I had two pairs of shoes. I had three ties.
I then met my wife. We saved for two years (yes, two years) for a deposit on a house. The repayments were £36 pcm leaving us needing food parcels from parents to get by. But it was great.
Then I joined the police. Working 10-12 hrs a day, 25 days out of 28, and occasionally more. This was a cut in wages but inflation meant that the mortgage had dropped in value so we thought we could afford it. It meant getting rid of the car, the TV, the week holiday each year in Britain, all the luxury items. We have central heating but could only afford to put it on of a weekend. More food parcels.
Then came the pay increase and then the miners' strike. I got some money at last. Then there was the Thatcher recession. All my old mates who had, like me, got a trade behind them expecting this jobs for life that everyone talks about, lost their jobs. My brother lost his. I was cushioned to an extent. I had two suits. One for work - now CID - and one for posh. Still no money to lash out on luxuries but we had a holiday every year. Camping but we liked it.
Then the boom and bust years returned. Never ever settled. I went from loads of pay because of lots of overtime to a sudden drop in pay and more overtime. My brother started his own business, working all hours, even more than me at times, and I worked more than I felt was healthy.
My brother's business more or less went bust, without owing anyone money, due to yet another downturn in the economy.
I live next door to an electrician. He's had lots of times when unemployed. But he's been settled for the past few years.
Now that was my life in a nutshell. I see no reason for kids today to think it will be worse for them. Further, they can buy a reliable car, have computers, ipods, games machines, cheap holidays, long holidays. If you think you've got it hard today you have no idea what you are talking about.
My experience is that if you work hard and do a good job you get on.
People suggest that my generation had jobs for life. That would be car manfacturers, steel workers, miners, rail workers, that sort of thing would it? I changed carrers twice in my jobs for life time. When I was a printer I worked in ten or a dozen different firms. In the police I worked in two forces and three police areas with a two year stint in the Home Office. Where did this JFL myth start?
The difference nowadays is that people moan about how easy the previous generations had it. In my time that was a non starter because of the war and the years before. Even afterwards there were 10 years of austerity.
I've worked hard all my life for my three jobs for life. My brother worked harder still for his many JFLs as well. The electrician next door to me, despite haveing frequent time of unemployment, has bought an expensive house by working hard when he had a JFL. I had to crease checks because this meant it would not go through the automatic counter so delayed payment.
So next time you have to sell your cars, your electronic gear, don't have holidays, don't go clubbing, have to depend on parents for food despite working all but three days a month, then tell me how easy my generation had it. Even all the sex bit of the 60s has been exagerated. At least as far as I'm concerned. I had to work hard at that as well.
Some people might have had it easy. I know a solicitor who has spent all his working life in the same office, doing the same things. A job for life which, thankfully, I managed to avoid. For the majority it was difficult.
To use a phrase that my father's generation would have done: Get some in.
The best age to be in my mind was around 32 - 35. I felt I could do anything. I had a feeling of 'bring it on'. I beleied I could cope with anything. It has nothing to do with money.
When I was in my teens I left school at 15 (despite doing well at grammar school) and then worked a 5 1/2 day week in a factory. I was an apprentice and so my pay was dreadful, but I was told that getting a trade behind me was important. I could have a job for life.
In my teens I could afford about four pints of beer a week together with 4 gallons of petrol. Girlfriends were taken to the pub, the cinema or for a walk. Most barbers would not sell me condoms because I was under 21. The pill had yet to come and so had I.
Then came the swinging 60s and things changed. It was acceptable to talk to girls. I was at art colelge for a time and things really took off for me. It was fun but money was even scarcer.
My father sold his motorcycle combination and bought a Morris Minor Traveller. He could afford to run it as he trained as a mechanic.
I had one suit, I had two pairs of shoes. I had three ties.
I then met my wife. We saved for two years (yes, two years) for a deposit on a house. The repayments were £36 pcm leaving us needing food parcels from parents to get by. But it was great.
Then I joined the police. Working 10-12 hrs a day, 25 days out of 28, and occasionally more. This was a cut in wages but inflation meant that the mortgage had dropped in value so we thought we could afford it. It meant getting rid of the car, the TV, the week holiday each year in Britain, all the luxury items. We have central heating but could only afford to put it on of a weekend. More food parcels.
Then came the pay increase and then the miners' strike. I got some money at last. Then there was the Thatcher recession. All my old mates who had, like me, got a trade behind them expecting this jobs for life that everyone talks about, lost their jobs. My brother lost his. I was cushioned to an extent. I had two suits. One for work - now CID - and one for posh. Still no money to lash out on luxuries but we had a holiday every year. Camping but we liked it.
Then the boom and bust years returned. Never ever settled. I went from loads of pay because of lots of overtime to a sudden drop in pay and more overtime. My brother started his own business, working all hours, even more than me at times, and I worked more than I felt was healthy.
My brother's business more or less went bust, without owing anyone money, due to yet another downturn in the economy.
I live next door to an electrician. He's had lots of times when unemployed. But he's been settled for the past few years.
Now that was my life in a nutshell. I see no reason for kids today to think it will be worse for them. Further, they can buy a reliable car, have computers, ipods, games machines, cheap holidays, long holidays. If you think you've got it hard today you have no idea what you are talking about.
My experience is that if you work hard and do a good job you get on.
People suggest that my generation had jobs for life. That would be car manfacturers, steel workers, miners, rail workers, that sort of thing would it? I changed carrers twice in my jobs for life time. When I was a printer I worked in ten or a dozen different firms. In the police I worked in two forces and three police areas with a two year stint in the Home Office. Where did this JFL myth start?
The difference nowadays is that people moan about how easy the previous generations had it. In my time that was a non starter because of the war and the years before. Even afterwards there were 10 years of austerity.
I've worked hard all my life for my three jobs for life. My brother worked harder still for his many JFLs as well. The electrician next door to me, despite haveing frequent time of unemployment, has bought an expensive house by working hard when he had a JFL. I had to crease checks because this meant it would not go through the automatic counter so delayed payment.
So next time you have to sell your cars, your electronic gear, don't have holidays, don't go clubbing, have to depend on parents for food despite working all but three days a month, then tell me how easy my generation had it. Even all the sex bit of the 60s has been exagerated. At least as far as I'm concerned. I had to work hard at that as well.
Some people might have had it easy. I know a solicitor who has spent all his working life in the same office, doing the same things. A job for life which, thankfully, I managed to avoid. For the majority it was difficult.
To use a phrase that my father's generation would have done: Get some in.
The best age to be in my mind was around 32 - 35. I felt I could do anything. I had a feeling of 'bring it on'. I beleied I could cope with anything. It has nothing to do with money.
alfaman said:
@MG Chris,
2/ housing market is rather static now and the entry/ exit costs are significant - renting is more flexible and can be cheaper.
How do you reach that conclusion?2/ housing market is rather static now and the entry/ exit costs are significant - renting is more flexible and can be cheaper.
Let's assume (possibly a big assumption, granted) that he gets onto the property ladder by the time he's 25.
By the time he's 50, he's potentially done with paying housing costs beyond maintenance of the building for the rest of his life, and has an asset left to pass on to kids, or sell to use on coke and hookers for his last couple of years, as he sees fit.
If, on the other hand, he sticks to renting, he's going to reach 50 with the prospect of having to pay rent for another 30 or 40 years possibly, and still be left with nothing to show for it.
How is renting ever the better option?
Kermit power said:
How do you reach that conclusion?
Let's assume (possibly a big assumption, granted) that he gets onto the property ladder by the time he's 25.
By the time he's 50, he's potentially done with paying housing costs beyond maintenance of the building for the rest of his life, and has an asset left to pass on to kids, or sell to use on coke and hookers for his last couple of years, as he sees fit.
If, on the other hand, he sticks to renting, he's going to reach 50 with the prospect of having to pay rent for another 30 or 40 years possibly, and still be left with nothing to show for it.
How is renting ever the better option?
renting is a better option if you either need flexibility (of where you live) or when rental costs are less than cost of ownership ( after deducting capital appreciation )Let's assume (possibly a big assumption, granted) that he gets onto the property ladder by the time he's 25.
By the time he's 50, he's potentially done with paying housing costs beyond maintenance of the building for the rest of his life, and has an asset left to pass on to kids, or sell to use on coke and hookers for his last couple of years, as he sees fit.
If, on the other hand, he sticks to renting, he's going to reach 50 with the prospect of having to pay rent for another 30 or 40 years possibly, and still be left with nothing to show for it.
How is renting ever the better option?
My ex neighbors in the UK bought their first house in late 2007 - they could have rented it for less than the mortgage costs - and got into the market now for about 20% less purchase cost than in 2007 .
In the short to medium term renting can be better than buying.
Hence : it may be better for MG chris to wait a bit before buying a property.
to add: where I live now the entry and exit costs to buying equate to 5 years rent ...and property prices are forecast to decline. Only a lunatic would buy in those circumstances. ( rather than rent for a period)
Derek Smith said:
Personal stuff
To put into comparison, my father, who is 7 years older than you also left school at 15 and went to work in a factory as an apprentice. It has left him with quite severe tinnitus ever since, but also (rather surprisingly, given that he is colour blind) allowed him to become a qualified electrical and electronic engineer, and from there he made the jump into the IT industry, and settled into his "job for life" at the age of 28.He and my mother had to go through the same sort of scrimping and saving that you did to get their first house. When my mother fell pregnant with me, and it looked like that little house wasn't going to be big enough, my father applied for a different internal position, and moved from Cardiff to Worcester. The company paid the removal costs, legal fees, estate agents fees, gave them a minimum guaranteed sale price on their old house and took it off their hands etc, etc.... They made a stonking profit out of the actual cost of moving house.
In 1974, a couple of years after my sister came along, they did exactly the same thing, and made a stonking profit out of moving to Cheshire. Remember, this isn't just a profit out of the house appreciating, this is a profit on the actual act of relocation.
Again, in 1985, they made a big profit out of relocating to Buckinghamshire.
Finally, in 1992 (or 3, can't quite remember) at the age of 53, my father took early retirement from the company he'd been working for since 1967. They gave him a month in salary for every year of service as a tax free lump sum, he and my mother kept BUPA cover until he was 65, he had a final salary pension scheme of 40% of his salary, linked to 75% of the RPI, and just to cap it all off, he got to keep the company car for the remainder of the 2+ years left to run on the contract.
At this level, it's all about personal experience, and clearly my father's was very different to yours in many ways once you'd both finished your apprenticeships. However, by a twist of fate, I now work for the same company that my father did for all those years. Yes, it affords me much more of a job for life if I want it than the vast majority of other employers, especially in the IT sector, and granted the relocation packages have gone as much because there's less need to relocate anyway in the days of broadband, laptops and mobile phones, but at the same time, the generous redundancy settlements, the final salary pension schemes and a whole range of other, smaller benefits have also been whittled away too.
I'm not doing exactly the same role as my father was, but I know plenty of people who are. Someone doing that role now quite simply will not get the same standard of living (and most certainly won't get the same standard of retirement) as my father did. Also, my father now wouldn't have got the job in the first place, not having a degree.
Everyone's own personal experiences are of course different, but on a macro level, for all the crap your generation and my father's went through in the Seventies and Eighties to get to here, no other generation before has enjoyed the same standard of living in retirement so far down the social tree, and I don't believe any future generation will either.
No one is denying baby boomers worked hard. But you did have free university, free healthcare, no need to really save for a pension, grammar schools and probably most usefully of all house prices that have grown out of all proportion to anything else. Most of which I (at 33) can't count on.
It seems to me that currently we are seeing entry requirements for careers being raised and starting salaries lowered at the same time an average standard of living costs more, ok an average standard is higher now. I suspect it will be hard for an average person to do better than their parent's assuming their parents went into a profession.
now 32
financially fooked due to a business risk taken 6m before the credit crunch- not the best timing!
wife and i now on good combined income, but still paying off debt-0 with inflation high its probablyk to our advntage to be honest, although it doesn't really feel like it at the moment.
looking at my parents generation- (in their mid sixties) i would say they had a simpler, but much cheaper life. Mainly due to house prices- my in-laws live in a lovely village just outside the m25, their house is currently worth 10 times my (rather good) salary. It was 2.5 times my f-in-laws rather average slary when they bought when they were 30. To boot they had a job for 30 year with excellent pensions and totally free university education!
financially fooked due to a business risk taken 6m before the credit crunch- not the best timing!
wife and i now on good combined income, but still paying off debt-0 with inflation high its probablyk to our advntage to be honest, although it doesn't really feel like it at the moment.
looking at my parents generation- (in their mid sixties) i would say they had a simpler, but much cheaper life. Mainly due to house prices- my in-laws live in a lovely village just outside the m25, their house is currently worth 10 times my (rather good) salary. It was 2.5 times my f-in-laws rather average slary when they bought when they were 30. To boot they had a job for 30 year with excellent pensions and totally free university education!
Kermit power said:
Derek Smith said:
Personal stuff
Personal stuffI have to say that I would not have wanted a job for life. What made me leave printing was looking at the blokes who had been dong the same job for 30 years as I had been doing. They were old in their mind. When I was in the police I changed post every two years or so. One of my better decisions after advice from my dad. He reckoned that if you can't crack a post in 6 months then you weren't the right choice but that the important thing was to not get too comfortable.
The only thing is, of course, that it costs companies to keep training people to do different jobs.
I put 12%+ of my gross income away for 30 years and despite retiring 7 years ago I still work so it isn't as if I've not made any sacrifices. However, I chose to have four kids. Well chose three. I didn't realise what babyoil did to latex. That is what has made me less than rich. Not ignorance of baby oil, but my kids.
One thing though. Many people my age, and perhaps a little older, were subject to atrocious conditions at work and many have health problems in their old age with little chance of compensation. I injured my back, fractured to vertebrae, and I've just found out that the back pain I've having is probably progressive. Can't claim comp as I've left it too late. Yet I am one of the lucky ones. One print firm had a foundry when workers had a life expectancy of 45 or so. A cousin of the same age as me apart from two days died of asbestosis about five years ago.
I used to work a 'shaker'. This cleaned cases, as in upper case and lower case, which held lead alloy type. So lead dust was shaken into the air around face level. No one gave it a thought at the time.
That said, I don't want to moan. I've had a great life. I'm more comfortable than I've ever been (as long as I sit in a decent chair) although I've occasionally struggled (look at my car history) but the money goes on kids and grand kids. If I had my life again I'd make one or two changes but not that many.
I didn't go to uni, a big regret, but in those days it wasn't done for the likes of me. Get a trade was the mantra.
One thing which I do envy the current generation for is the relationship between the sexes. Also there are opportunities available to them which were closed to me.
House prices is a problem. Of that there is no doubt. My two eldest have bought their own homes but the younger two have accepted that they might never given their jobs.
Derek Smith said:
I have to say that I would not have wanted a job for life. What made me leave printing was looking at the blokes who had been dong the same job for 30 years as I had been doing.
I think there's a difference between "job for life" and "role for life". My father would've gone nuts doing the same role for life, but was able to change every couple of years whilst still working for the same company. I'll probably be able to do the same for the same company, but I'm very much a rarity these days.Just to add, the other thing which I'm lucky to have now but which most people no longer have is a job for life in the sense that so long as I'm performing to an acceptable level, my job is secure. I'm not at constant risk of finding my job has been outsourced to Vietnam or somewhere regardless of how good I am at it.
Derek Smith said:
One thing which I do envy the current generation for is the relationship between the sexes. Also there are opportunities available to them which were closed to me.
House prices is a problem. Of that there is no doubt. My two eldest have bought their own homes but the younger two have accepted that they might never given their jobs.
I actually think your first paragraph is a big reason for the second.House prices is a problem. Of that there is no doubt. My two eldest have bought their own homes but the younger two have accepted that they might never given their jobs.
When I was small in the Seventies, I can't remember any of my friends' mothers working. Now, I am supposedly in the top 1% of earners, but it's a real stretch to have a wife, three kids and a modest (3 bed semi with loft conversion & extension paid for out of an inheritance) house in the South East, and I can only think of one other non-working mother amongst my kids' schoolmates' families.
For my mother's generation, no doubt it was a real liberation to be able to have a career as well as a family and all that sort of thing, but move forward to their daughters' generation, and in most cases they've lost the option not to have a career, as all those double-income households have put the prices of property through the roof.
Edited by Kermit power on Saturday 28th April 10:25
Kermit power said:
For my mother's generation, no doubt it was a real liberation to be able to have a career as well as a family and all that sort of thing, but move forward to their daughters' generation, and in most cases they've lost the option not to have a career, as all those double-income households have put the prices of property through the roof.
so wonderuflly correct- my wife HATES the fact that she is required to work and not to oversee bringin our kids up- but we can't live otherwise- we would genuinely starve. but if you choose not to work, you can breed as many sprogs as you want, and someone else will pay for your life. It does strike me that the rise of the welfare state has not been a godo thing!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff