Over 50s hold all the wealth
Author
Discussion

groucho

Original Poster:

12,134 posts

276 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
All over the news today, some Tory has brought out a book stating that the over 50s are responsible for CC, and have all the wealth and benefitted from cheap houses. His answer? Give it back to the young people.
Did it not occur to him that older people have had longer to save?

Puggit

49,810 posts

278 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
Older people bought houses years ago for the same price as we buy 2nd cars for now. They are sitting on massive paper wealth in terms of their property values now.

I'd agree with the statement broadly!

Eric Mc

125,708 posts

295 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
I don't think the "Over 50s" have done as well as the over 60s and 70s. That burst of high inflation in the 70s (when the over 50s were still at school) did wonders for mortgage repayments.

groucho

Original Poster:

12,134 posts

276 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
I'm not far off 50 and didn't have my own house until I was late 30s. Should they give money back?

Fittster

20,120 posts

243 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
By give it back, do you mean spend it to fund your old age?

groucho

Original Poster:

12,134 posts

276 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
Not mine, I'm nearly there.

BJWoods

5,018 posts

314 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
nothing to do with 30 years plus, being at work? wink

Dr.Doofenshmirtz

16,952 posts

230 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
bks.
My Dad worked damn hard to pay off his £3'500 mortgage (only breadwinner back then of course)...lot of money in those days.
Why the fk should my parents help todays idiots who wanted it all but coulden't afford it?

Marquis_Rex

7,377 posts

269 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
groucho said:
All over the news today, some Tory has brought out a book stating that the over 50s are responsible for CC, and have all the wealth and benefitted from cheap houses. His answer? Give it back to the young people.
Did it not occur to him that older people have had longer to save?
ahhh lovely, the redistribution of wealth chestnut rolleyes

Engineer1

10,486 posts

239 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
The guy probably has a point, jobs where more secure and house prices lower. My Parents moved to a nice house in a commuter village (30 years ago) at the same age I am now, ok my dad was a chartered accountant but on one wage provided a very good standard of living, to get the same standard of living and a similar house I would have to earn probably 1.5 to twice his wage. My wife's parents are similar in having bought a very nice house etc.

Tangent Police

3,097 posts

206 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
So, what does this Tory propose? A new death tax?

If he's into a meritocracy, perhaps he would be better suited to the Lib Dems, who seem to be the closest thing to having a combination of "state interference" (death tax) and liberal "rise to the top".

Labour'll have your money and try and stop you getting to the top!

Doesn't sound very Tory to me.

Hedders

24,460 posts

277 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
Dr.Doofenshmirtz said:
bks.
My Dad worked damn hard to pay off his £3'500 mortgage (only breadwinner back then of course)...lot of money in those days.
Why the fk should my parents help todays idiots who wanted it all but coulden't afford it?
Do you happen to know what your fathers avergae income was when he was paying back his £3,500 mortgage? I know that interest rates made a huge difference, but i tstill think it must have been easier to pay off a mortgage forty years ago, than it is today.

Both my parents (divorced in the 70's) benefitted from very cheap houses. One bought a council house for peanuts (a tenth of it's value) and the other one bought the house their parents had rented for years, and got that for about a 15th of it's value!

They were both mortgage free in their 50's and both have very good pensions.

bds hehe






fido

18,915 posts

285 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
A bit of inflation should erode away their assets - also most Pension Schemes are only index-linked up to a limit e.g. 5%. So a bout of hyperflation would transfer wealth to workers and the indebted - but is that fair?

BiggusLaddus

821 posts

261 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
Dr.Doofenshmirtz said:
bks.
My Dad worked damn hard to pay off his £3'500 mortgage (only breadwinner back then of course)...lot of money in those days.
Why the fk should my parents help todays idiots who wanted it all but coulden't afford it?
My dad did the same, paid it off early as the only real wage earner (as a drayman), while mum did some part time work in between raising four kids. They bought a three bed semi in the early 70's for £7k, extended it to four beds and paid off the mortgage within 15yrs.

Fast forward to 2005, they sell the house to me and my now wife for £120k (£40k below market value), and although we are both working full time in reasonable jobs (her paramedic, me struct engineer) we had to take out a 30yr mortgage and are only just starting to be able to think about overpaying on it. Thats without any kids yet.

I'm not saying life was easy for my parents, but money certainly went a lot further back then. We don't splash the cash on crap we can't afford because we don't have much left over to splash with.

Hedders

24,460 posts

277 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
I guess it has a lot to do with lifestyle to be fair.

Back then we didn't need microwaves that matched our designer kitchens etc etc.



Tangent Police

3,097 posts

206 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
There speaketh a man who has nothing to inherit.

My folks worked fking hard for their large nice house, they used to drive st cars and scraped and scratched, grew their own food, didn't have the latest stuff and now they've finally got there and have some money to spare following getting taxed all along the way, they have some socialist prick suggesting that the state has it to redistribute. (Which I imagine would be his conclusion).

When are they going to learn that this is the consequence of overpopulation and mechanisation?

What a knob!

grumbledoak

32,571 posts

263 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
Having not read the book I don't know which points he raises, or what he is suggesting as a cure.

But, the Welfare State's unfunded pensions was a big "fk You" from the post war generation to their own grandchildren. And we used to have a tax situation that favoured stable families that we now cannot afford. Not that the socialists would want them. So, he is right to some degree.

Eric Mc

125,708 posts

295 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
Tangent Police said:
There speaketh a man who has nothing to inherit.

My folks worked fking hard for their large nice house, they used to drive st cars and scraped and scratched, grew their own food, didn't have the latest stuff and now they've finally got there and have some money to spare following getting taxed all along the way, they have some socialist prick suggesting that the state has it to redistribute. (Which I imagine would be his conclusion).

When are they going to learn that this is the consequence of overpopulation and mechanisation?

What a knob!
Blimey, I didn't know that Tom and Barbara Good had any kids!

Jasandjules

72,607 posts

259 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
groucho said:
All over the news today, some Tory has brought out a book stating that the over 50s are responsible for CC, and have all the wealth and benefitted from cheap houses. His answer? Give it back to the young people.
Did it not occur to him that older people have had longer to save?
Sure he's a Tory?

Ten Ninety

244 posts

206 months

Tuesday 16th February 2010
quotequote all
I think there's a reasonable argument that the 'baby boomer' generation have had an easier life overall than any previous or subsequent generation has yet managed. And having established themselves in positions of power, it can certainly seem at times like some of this generation have acted to preserve their own good fortune at the expense of those younger than themselves. So I'll be honest and say that yes, it does make me sick when the likes of Lord Browne start lecturing young people about 'not worrying' about all the debt they are accruing from university tuition when he sailed through the whole system for gratis.

And whilst I know that there are plenty of people in that generation who have worked hard, behaved responsibly and built up their wealth by making sacrifices early on that today's youngsters wouldn't countenance, it still rankles a bit when they refuse to recognise at least some of their good fortune. Does it rankle enough to make me support some kind of wealth-redistribution nonsense? Probably not. Especially as it would undoubtedly go straight to the feckless youth and miss out all us Gen-Xers who are the ones doing all the real work in this country. biggrin

It's probably best to ignore me anyway. I'm just riding the generational-angst wave as a result of working with a bunch of lazy, incompetent, selfish 50-somethings who all seem to be happily winding down to retirement at 60 on a generous pension and letting everyone else take up the slack, whilst I'm simultaneous expected to educate a generation of utterly aspirationless, ill-disciplined, workshy monkeys whose future impact on our society fills me with dread horror. Ah, sod it. I'm off for a nice cup of tea and a Douglas Coupland book.