Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ied-homes.html

Please do feel free to actually read the story without commenting, in a complete contrast to many of those who commented. The comments on the Fail you'd think they were on about frog marching people at gun point from their homes.

My thoughts - good idea, some will want to downsize and would rather save utility payments, etc, but the tax system prevents it. The supply will ease pressure at the higher end of the owner-occupier market thus easing it further down the chain.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Seems a good idea to me.

btw, loved the photo*




*posed by models.....

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Looks like a Saga advert.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Pie in the sky bovine excrement.

Please do tell where all these affordable 4+ bedroom houses beiong hogged by pensioners are?

If they did down size, I doubt whether these properties would be "affordable" in the modern sense of the word.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

There needs to be a rethink on how we approach property in this country. I am far from well-educated on the matter but it seems to much emphasis is placed on it being an investment and there are too many people seeking to profit from it.

I would want to own a home because then a major expense of living is removed. When I want to move I can sell up and have a significant stake in the new house. When I retire I'll have some place to live without worrying about rent.

Peoples need for homes is greater than the need for buy-to-let landlords to make a profit or people to collect homes as an 'investment'. There should be a limit to the amount of properties you can purchase for your own use, and tighter regulations on landlords who would be exempt the limit as a result but must meet certain standards including the adoption of European style rent controls.

While we're at it, what's with the middle-classes obsession with national house prices? People expecting their house to go up in price as if this makes them richer. Surely, unless there is something unique to your area, these tend to trend the same across the country. If you sold your house your possible alternative homes will also have gone up, leaving you no better off. The only difference is if you lived in the south-east and moved north.

Should only worry about ending up in negative equity.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Not at all, these vacated would lead to those lower in the ladder moving up the chain, in turn leading to those below them moving up. One major thing keeping these larger properties unaffordable is their scarcity, this would improve their supply and reduce prices.

It improves supply and lowers prices throughout the chain by reducing the amount of property wasted thus reducing demand on stock - 3,000 people can go into 1,000 fully occupied 3-bed homes fine, with 2 unoccupied bedrooms in each home you now require 3,000 of them. Simple.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

The way house prices are these days, we'll all end up with 3 or more generations stuck in one home unable to afford to move. So the rooms will be needed!

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

You, sir, win this thread.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I don't see how it will lower prices. What it will do is reduce the number of people living in cramped conditions. Which can only be a good thing.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Which is the way it was when I was born in the 50's (mind you, that was working-class Glasgow).

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

We could also do with more rights for tenants. Last time I rented, the landlord would only sign 6 months leases, so you always had the risk of being booted out at a few months notice. Which we were (while in the process of buying something actually). Tense times they were.

Oh, and not being able to do any decorating sucks big time as well.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I'm not sure the abolition of stamp duty for over 60's will be enough ,for example if a pensioner wishes to downsize and sell their £250,000 house they would normally pay about £7,500 stamp duty but the value of the house they are selling may be £10,000 or more less because of the influx of properties onto the market ,most people tend not to sell when prices go down

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

6 month lease refers to the warning they have to give you right? So the minimum amount of warning they have to provide is 6 months?

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

No, the lease was for 6 months, so you are guaranteed the property for 6 months. I think they gave us two months notice in that we got a letter we couldn't renew two months before the lease was up.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Doesn't mean a thing with the cascade down effect, because at the bottom, you have got all the buy to let people buying all the starter homes. Until that little problem is resolved I'd hazard its a bigger problem than old people living in a house that's too big for them.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Well that's insane. Surely there is a minimum termination period? Otherwise you could be out of a home in a single day...

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Yes, it's probably about two months. Either way, we were buying a place at the time, and were dependent on completing that within said timeframe. I think we got the keys with two weeks to spare. This was not a fun time.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

not really,Danielf got the letter saying that the landlord would not be renewing the lease on the expiry date ,the landlord has to give minimum 2 months notice and then he has start eviction proceedings so a tennant will always get a few months extra in which to find somewhere else to live

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Yes, Marty is right. I just looked it up.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Well that should be increased to a 6 month notice if you ask me....

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

You can't really, seeing the contract is for 6 months. It would mean the Landlord would have to give you notice the moment you sign the contract.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I would also point out that the over sixties would be looking in the very same market as first time buyers. It don't look like anyone gains from this.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Well increase the tenancy agreement then :D

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Yes Damien got it right, in essence once you've gone over your fixed term, you usually have to give a months notice, and in the Landlords case, they need to give you two months notice.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Yes, we did ask about this, but the landlord wouldn't, as she wanted to be able to kick us out at short notice. She did absorb the agent's 'cost' (£150) for printing out a new contract every 6 months though.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

you can download and print a standard tenancy agreement for free :D

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

They'll have paid off the mortgage, nothing owing, and it'll be worth in real terms far more than they paid for it regardless. In addition it'll reduce the price of their new home if the market isn't at its peak.

I'd love to see a £250,000 4 bedroom house, stick a 1 in front of that for here!

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I appreciate what you are saying and agree to a certain extent but quite a few of these people will be looking to make as much as possible because they bought the house as a investment for the future and human nature being what it is they won't be happy if the house they are selling is worth 10-20 grand less than it was worth a year ago .As with most schemes like this though the proof of the pudding is in the eating ,so much depends on personal circumstances and future markets

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

If they bought it as an investment rather than a home, and thus cling on to get maximum return, there's a big part of the problem.

Oddly that's the exact opposite of many people's criticism which is that these are people's homes so there should be no hint of pressure for them to move and this would imply pressure.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I doubt that it would have the desired effect - price of smaller (starter) properties would go up, surely?

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Probably not, people will be wanting to move up the chain increasing supply as they vacate and demand overall will drop as people are in more suitable housing that's a better fit for their families, or just themselves as the case may be.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Seems unlikely. The houses that are freed up will be taken up by the over 60s that downgrade. A few people will have more space to stack their kids as they upgrade, but there will not be more houses on the market. It'll just be a bit of swapping at the top end of the market.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I think before the government try anything like this they need to make it possible for people to enter the housing market should they wish to .Lower house prices ,lower deposits ,employment and wage levels all to be addressed first because this whole scheme depends on first time buyers being able to afford to buy a house ,it's no good having a glut of decent houses on the market if nobody is able to buy them

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Then a further shortage of 1bed/2bed properties after tho (already a shortage). It just moves the problem from part of the market to another, although I agree 'if' they losing money downsizing its silly.

---------- Post added at 19:31 ---------- Previous post was at 19:30 ----------

indeed. To help address that there probably needs to be a cap on buy to let of some sort as well, and regulate that more as well.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

While i see what this is intended to do i have my doubts it will work given how the property market right now operates. In theory yes vacating larger homes should enable people to move up the chain but thats assuming they can get the mortgages for them something which is now a lot harder then it was a few years ago.

Second any pensioner selling their 3\4 bedroom house is going to have the rest of their retirement in mind and associated costs so will want max value for the property they are selling see point 1 :(. This and other measures that are being considered\implemented by this government are short term fixes to a much longer term problem that needs construction not moving the pieces round the chessboard.

As i have said in another thread councils need to start approving houses to be built that are affordable rather then just going for the higher value properties because they then rake in more council tax. There needs to be incentives for independent builders to construct more of the affordable housing so they have a good reason to do that rather then build estate after estate of high value housing trying to maximise profits.

This is a problem we have had for quite a while with no political will in the past to sort it out or plan for it to be sorted and whilst i applaud this government for finally trying to deal with it. I cannot help feel they are going about in the usual shorttermism way we are all too used to seeing rather then the long term approach that is really needed.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

There are far more 1 and 2 bed overcrowded properties than there are 4 bed. Absolute worst case the policy reduces overcrowding.

---------- Post added at 14:14 ---------- Previous post was at 14:12 ----------

This vexes a bit given we the tax payer are paying for health care and potentially pension for said people who want to get maximum value for their property, as clearly 3 times what it cost them in real terms might not be enough.

Eek intergenerational rage showing.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Why are European style rent controls never considered?

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

European = Bad. It's in the rulez...

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

You need to keep that intergenerational rage under control or you may be an early candidate for blood pressure medication;)

I see my house as a consumer durable with which as I own I can do with as I please. The fact that it could easily accommodate a family in addition to my wife and myself is no more meaningful to me as the fact that the two cars we own could seat 10 (collectively) but neither often carry more than one or two.

The last government interference in the housing market was when either Lament or Lawson ended multiple purchase mortgage tax relief (students, friends etc buying collectively) and gave 6 months notice. The housing market rocketed during those 6 months turned over and crashed. Governments are best kept out of anything involving free markets because they always cause more problems than they cure.

Within the multiple stratas of house prices the only thing that matters to an owner is differentials. People only look to move if needs are pressing and differentials beneficial. I have never given terribly much interest in the value of my house simply because it is a home and as I intend neither to liquidate or use it as collateral, the value is of little interest.

As for down sizing and the stupid ideas by that self appointed think tank. It would take somewhat more than a free ride on a purchase regarding Tax to even grab my attention. In a move that is small change in the final analysis.

I have said it before and will do so again. In a free market buyers bid up prices. As supply is always behind demand and will always be whilst the population explodes the shortage causes inflationary upward forces. The suggested internal movements within the market would skew the distribution downwards in strata and possibly have undesirable consequences at all price points.

There has already been a proxy for this demographic shift in Bath where my sister lives. Properties in London sold to rich foreigners have seen lots of people heading for Bath with a couple of million in their back pockets. House values exploded in Bath as the newly cash rich came to town and where London was silly so now is Bath. Cash rich oldies would also change price dynamics but as the amounts in question are minimal they would inspire nothing so it is a bit of a non story which isn't going to happen anyway.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Probably because landlords are seen as businessmen wealth providers so our law favours what they want. So in short it would probably be seen as reducing their invement potential and as such a bad idea.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Have to agree Taff.

Trying to remove my 2 boys from my house seem fruitless.
One has saved all his working life (10 years) and the other has NO chance.
Neither could take on even my first home. But it might free up properties for those down the chain?

Not 60 yet but would miss my irreplacable garden, view and neighbours.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Said people will most likely be tax payers who have contributed to the their state pension and most likely their own personal pension.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Another thing seems to be the older generations benefited from getting there first. Being part of an era where it was a lot more feasible to buy properties as an investment and then watching as limited stocks meant the value shot right up and put the idea of owning a home out of reach of the generations that follow...

Maybe that's just me being blinded by my own personal interest but the whole thing seems immoral and unsustainable. I wouldn't go so far as too tell people that their homes are too big for their needs and they are obliged to downsize but we really should do something about people who see property as route to the rich life and screw society.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Doesn't work that way, they were paying the pensions of then-retirees. This whole idea of contributions isn't the case. It entitles to the state pension, doesn't contribute to its funding.

Personal pensions are, amusingly, being funded via worse pension benefits and backfills from company bottom lines.

We youngsters have it so good yet we get to work longer for less generous pension benefits and subsidise overly generous private ones from the past to boot. Go figure.

---------- Post added at 16:28 ---------- Previous post was at 16:27 ----------

An excellent advertisement for land value tax, thank you.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

We are forgetting that the housing shortage is not the fault of those who own their house ,instead of looking for scapegoats and suggesting that they should downsize and vacate houses that very few would be able to afford anyway ,the government should apply tax breaks to house builders .It is suggested to give tax breaks to over sixties so instead give tax breaks to the builders or free up more land as has already been suggested ,there are many ways that the builders could be encouraged to build more houses other than high selling prices

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Would deflate the asset bubble they're trying to hard to maintain. Take the ability to charge ridiculous rents away and BtL chancers will stop buying as they can't get a return on huge, interest only mortgages which they shouldn't actually have access to in the first place. Given these guys are a big part of the market right now, it's them and cash buyers mostly, there would be a danger of house prices adjusting back towards long term trend and we can't have that.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Given the amount the planks paid for land in many cases their options are limited.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

"Getting there first" wasn't the thought on my mind. My thoughts were to find a small palace to rest my head with the one I love. I've/We've earned every penny to buy those bricks and we haven't finished yet.;)

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I wasn't talking about people who own a home, I was talking about people who own multiple homes with the intention of using them as a way to make money. Buy-to-let landlords as so on. They had the capital to monopolise a finite resource that people need and drives prices up screwing those that come after.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I just wonder who is going to buy the homes of these downsizing over 60s given that most young people are unable to get a mortgage.

It is also worth noting that many over 60's may have elderly parents or children who for one reason or another are still living at the over 60s homes.

Given that there are plenty of vacant homes that could be repaired, maybe the government could give local authorities or housing trusts the powers and the funds to buy said properties at auction, do them up and rent them out or sell them on at low cost.

If the government are that concerned about the difficulty in obtaining homes maybe they should take the homes of career criminals and put them up in prison as they deserve.

Why should law-abiding people who have worked all their lives and paid their taxes be forced out of their homes simply because they are over 60? Are all the MPs who are over 60 going to sell their mansions to live in a 2 up 2 down or a retirement home? I don't think so.

Time to consign this idea where it belongs.In the rubbish bin.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

The rarety of residential land is the cause for that ,if the government free up more green belt land (as suggested) then the price should fall ,whether it would fall to prices as low as they where 20yrs ago is another matter

http://www.advice-landforsale.co.uk/...e-regional.htm

---------- Post added at 17:12 ---------- Previous post was at 17:06 ----------

A) Local Authorities already buy properties in need of repair from owners who cannot afford to modernize ,they are called "Aquired Properties"

B)no-one is suggesting that home owners get "forced out" of their homes they would be offered lower or zero stamp duty as a incentive to sell

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Apologies, Damien :)
I still want to scoot my 2 boys out though :)
And a holiday home/weekend bolt hole will always be out of the question :(
I do feel for locals who cannot even get a first entry home.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

No-one said that, nor did this come from the government. Please read at very least some articles if not the entire report.

Nothing personal against you but that amount of people who seem to think this report advocated housing squads knocking on people's doors and forcibly evicting them is crazy, it advocates nothing of the sort.

---------- Post added at 17:21 ---------- Previous post was at 17:20 ----------

Europe is great, as are most Europeans, just the EU that is ****.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

It initially struck me that the founders and principals of the intergenerational foundation might be led by a tree hugger who lived the life of a super eco friendly existence and actually believed in righting the supposed injustices within certain areas of UK life.

A little investigative journalism paints a different picture. Do as I say not what I do comes to mind;)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052351/The-man-says-pensioners-leave-nest-homes--1-5m-bedroom-des-res-parents-live-alone.html

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Nice character assassination piece that one. The guy rather shot himself in the backside making excuses for his parents.

Doesn't for a moment change the perfectly valid nature of the report though, the tax system is biased against downsizing hence far lower rates of it than elsewhere in the developed world, which is causing issues.

It's not that complex and I've absolutely no idea why this is so controversial, it's far less controversial than proposals to charge land value tax, though both are quite reasonable if implemented correctly.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I've have noticed quite a few over 60s looking very plump..down sizing won't hurt them too much. They could use being on a diet :D

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I wouldn't go that far, hard to be mobile and BMR drops so easier to put the tonnage on.

What is a bit of a Mod Edit take is those situations where there's wringing of hands over how to heat a property twice the size actually required, and completely non-means tested payments to do so.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Yes, i have to think that when resources are tight, means testing must be in.

But equally, there are those who don't save for a pension...prefer getting drunk.

That has got to be a factor

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

There are already quite a few people who upon reaching retirement do actually downsize already ,they sell the big 1940's detached house or whatever and buy a 2 bed bungalow using any excess cash to add to the pension fund ,most people will do that as a matter of course

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

It's still half the rate it is elsewhere, clearly there's something stopping them, the tax system is at least part of it.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Low house prices perchance ? .Regardless of any tax incentives people selling up to downsize will want max return for a ,usually ,25yr+ investment .If they can manage financially they will wait untill the prices go up again

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

With down sizing to release capital for say the purchase of possibly an additional pension annuity therein lies another undesirable consequence of Q.E.

With Q.E buying government debts (gilts), the interest ratio has been depressed and annuities dived in yield or become far more expensive for the same yield.

I think that a much overlooked factor in these arguments is that when a home has been the "nest" which in my case is 30 years, there are costs involved in establishing a new home and moving out of the old that dwarf the proposed tax element into insignificance.

I think that a view that a home is simply viewed from the aspect of sleeping accommodation potentially somewhat misses the point of what I view a home as and may suit a semi nomadic lifestyle but certainly doesn't suit my view where putting down roots is all important.

The argument on heating costs for unused bedrooms is a little naive. Thermostats and closed doors are a rather cheap and simple option for managing the amount of heating applicable to the areas in use or not in use at any given time. Simple solutions rather spoil the thrust of an argument though;)

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

From the Fail:

But then about his parents:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1bbXgboAD

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Are you saying house prices are low relative to how they were 25 years ago?

This is a long term trend, and house prices aren't 'low' they are ridiculously high by any sensible measure.

---------- Post added at 12:52 ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 ----------

Oh to be able to do such wonderful things rather than being obliged to a semi-nomadic lifestyle. :rolleyes:

A tad naive thinking you can mitigate the extra cost through thermostats and closing doors too.

Sorry and all that but this post smacks of 'I'm alright, Jack.' Nothing personal.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Yes and even down here in Plymouth a house bought 15 years ago for £39.000 is now worth £200.000 so house prices apart from a blip here and there are still relentlessly rising.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

That may be the case in London but elsewhere they are starting to fall

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/m...#ixzz1bbiBw2nC

Also you have to remember that any profits from the sale of a house due to downsizing are worth much less than they where 20 yrs ago ,this chap has a interesting take on the problem ,he argues that because of the devaluation of sterling house prices have actually fallen 70%.I'm not saying he's right or wrong in his assessment i'll leave that up to the experts but it is a different way of looking at it

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

martyh starting to fall does not = low tho.

on historical trends the prices are way too high.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

We are forgetting one thing.

A guy can have kids again no matter the age.

So he might dump the wife, trade in for younger model, and need the rooms

Of course, older ex-wife sues husband, younger new wife has lesbian relationship with older wife

and he then lives in one bedroom flat (alone)

But house is still being used

simples :D

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

you know some strange people...

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Rules should not be based on exceptions.....;)

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

[I have sympathy with the need to follow the money but it is the modern way and fortunately although my horizons had to become extended they did not require physical relocation. I still work, of sorts and would rather not go into to detail, but thanks to the internet my activities are in the USA courtesy of electron flow. IMO the key to get money to flow to an individual wherever they are, is electronic.

Not intended to be a low blow but on second reading could have been seen as such. Sorry about that. I do sympathise with your position as you are where I have been so often and that is between a rock and hard place. You obviously earn good money but to be physically where your talents can be maximised, it costs good money to live. A very unpleasant catch 22.


That's the way we did it when I was a child and the laws of physics haven't changed. Each radiator has a thermostat flow control which irrespective of the boiler calls governed by the central thermostat can moderate the overall flow in the heating circuit and concentrate the heat in the area which will minimise the calls on the boiler by triggering the thermostat off. Closing doors stops the interchange between hot and colder areas to a degree.

I'm alright Jack is a phrase I am familiar with from the past and to me it represents an arrogant disregard for other's welfare providing one's own is OK. I abhorred that attitude in others and hope it is not present in me. I can sometimes can be a little provoking in debate but always with the hope of adding two positives to a negative.

Lets have a real debate. Should I re-read the Fourth Turning to find out who wins the intergenerational battle. The younger cohort have the reigns of power from the greys now but the poor little lost souls haven't a clue what to do with them;). Greys still hold the money so the new boys on the block operate by proxy. It's only a game of strategy like chess and your lot are certain winners when all our pieces fall over:) In the long game you cannot lose and we cannot win.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

We don't have the reigns yet, not until more of your lot shuffle off the mortal coil (I'm not wishing you an early death by the way!), and sadly due to a huge amount of immigration to balance out the generations the political landscape in my cohort is a mess, with large swathes wanting to dip their hands into my wallet. :(

---------- Post added at 10:50 ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 ----------

I have some ideas actually sir, they do require some sacrifice on my part though, going to have to drop my OU course for another year and collect some industry certification to improve my earning power in a slightly different field. Not happy about it but needs must.

---------- Post added at 10:58 ---------- Previous post was at 10:50 ----------

I dunno, even with the losses dealing in real terms it's not a bad story. We can talk about ounces of gold and their value all you want, that's more about the appreciation in the value of gold than sterling and unless you're planning on selling a house and investing all the profits in gold entirely irrelevant. I'm pretty sure I could buy less nuclear weapons for the prices of an average house than I used to be able to back in the cold war era when there were 25,000 of them knocking around, it's not really relevant.

This however is. Inflation adjusted, and of course it should be remembered that people downsizing, err, kinda need to buy another home whose value will likewise fluctuate.

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2011/10/12.png

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Crivvens - according to that graph I bought a house in southeast England at just about the perfect time (1999) and sold it to move north at a pretty good time too (2004). We rode a pretty huge upswing in prices and benefited from it in about the only way you can, by moving from a high house price area to a relatively low one.

I nearly used this thread as a sermon illustration last Sunday. There is increasing interest in Christian circles in community living of one sort or another, and the prospect of multi-generational occupation of large homes currently in the possession of newly-retired boomers sort of plays into that idea.

It's encouraging in a way that that notion even came up in this thread. The classic portrait of a baby boomer is one who climbed the income ladder in an age of rampant individualism and then pulled the ladder up behind him leaving the rest of us to pay his pension out of dwindling resources. If the medium-term economic prospects for this country are such that they force a reappraisal of our individualistic, somewhat selfish society (which is by no means the preserve of the boomers I should add), then that in my view is no bad thing.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

The intergenerational difference is rarely put in sharper focus than by comments like this one from a Guardian story:

While I understand the sentiment I don't think I need to give my opinion, nor could I within forum rules.

This, well.

Cool, won't mind us not paying for your partner's health care / state pension nor yours once you retire in that case. More sickeningly the directly above comment was quite popular on the story going by the amount of recommendations.

You were saying about the classic portrait of boomers Chris?

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

If they've worked all their life they've paid for their own pension/ health care already, and probably for those that haven't contributed.

I also echo the sentiment in the quote.


If I can afford it, I'll have it and keep it.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

You're a class act, Pierre.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I find it difficult to escape the notion that a generation is being blamed for doing what current generations wouldn't do any different. Baby boomers have lived through a time a relatively great prosperity. It doesn't surprise me one bit that house prices increase in times of prosperity.

It doesn't strike me that baby boomers have in any way been knowingly irresponsible. Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to how they might have been?

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

You can find bits about it all over the internet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-voting-muscle
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/book...-WILLETTS.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...se-prices.html

An interesting debate both ways can be read at http://www.totalpolitics.com/opinion...-selfish.thtml

The point isn't the relatively great prosperity, it's that all the money from that prosperity has been spent, along with more, and some of that 'more' has been saved up in PFI for future generations to pay, along with the distinct lack of signs of that prosperity.

Rather than saving up for pensions they covered current pensions, as generations do, and spent more than they were putting in despite the North Sea oil revenues and the relatively low cost of education and health care. Their parents paid for their education, my generation will pay for their health care and pensions in retirement.

Had they done something like this there would've been little cause to complain.

Prosperity doesn't mean house prices rocket, they were fairly flat until 1997 despite periods of extremely rapid GDP growth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_property_bubble

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I don't have time to read all of it, but to be honest, I'm still having a hard time with the notion. It seems a bit easy to me to take the current situation (intergenerational inequality) and conclude that it must be the fault of the previous one, unless it's clear that the previous generation was deliberately irresponsible. For one, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Secondly, coming up with things like the cost of climate change seems ludricous to me, as it's simply not the case that these costs were envisaged 20 or 30 years ago.

All in all, it seems to me people were doing what seemed prudent at the time (and they were doing it all over the world). Playing a blame game when circumstance have changed doesn't achieve much.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Hrm nope. By the 80s it was very clear that birth rates weren't going to be enough to replenish the work force when Boomers retired, the can was kicked down the street.

Climate change I'll go along with, the pensions and health care costs I won't.

As you've said though there's no reason to think it would or could be any other way, doesn't mean I have to like it, and I sincerely hope that my own generation bequeath the one below us with a better legacy though I'm not entirely sure how we can given we'll both be paying pensions and health care for boomers along with more and more of our own costs.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I'm not denying that in hindsight things could have been better. What I'm saying is that this seems a silly blame game. The generation before the baby boomers gave us 2 world wars and a ravaged Europe. The generations before that were quite good at generating wealth. They simply robbed the rest of the world. I'm sure they will be eternally grateful. Equally, I'm sure the current generation will find something to do wrong.

Let's not forget that we're in a better position than we were after WW2.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I think that the current generation is miffed because for the time being they do not have the opportunity to be in a position to gain as did the boomer generation. Windows of opportunity arise fairly rarely in any lifetime and for many boomers it was the private house boom in sales and privatisation.

For many the privatisation bonanza saw their exit in the '87 crash. For me that huge bonanza yielded a small amount over Libor rates so the whole experience was a useless exercise. Nobody without real money and a constitution of iron held long enough to make real money and even some who did saw their nest eggs broken to 10p in the pound in 2000. Myths abound but reality is different.

Houses are a completely different ball game and few would argue that they are stupidly high. I can think of one owned by a relative that was bought new 43 years ago for £10K and now would carry a price tag of 80X that amount. The owner and all other boomers have done nothing to influence that but the answer for bidding up prices to stupid levels lies with the surprising wealth friendliness of the Labour administration from 1997.

Oh yes they did favour wealth and from what I heard the number of bright young things hitting £250K salaries increased with incredible speed. They pumped prices up not the boomers because in a market passive onlookers have no influence on prices. Only bidders move prices up and then only if not overwhelmed by supply.

As to what happened to all the benefits from the bounties that were found or were one offs. Various governments mishandled them and with usual gross incompetence vast numbers of billions vanished into the ether. If there was ever a boom for real money to be made it was from 1997 to 2007 and relatively few of the boomers were going to go out on a limb in their fifties so proportionately did not really gain.

I actually think that the problems being blamed on the boomers should be better directed at those who did rather nicely in the golden decade, courtesy of Labour.

---------- Post added at 18:29 ---------- Previous post was at 18:06 ----------

Governments would never relinquish the grip on the source of revenue which was always going to head into crisis. Dozens of times the questions were raised but no answers were ever forthcoming. Even the carefully negotiated de-linking from NI by some companies retained a symbiotic link as control would not be given up. My work pension is intrinsically linked with the state pension in a complex web.

A lot of people wanted to opt out of the government schemes or anything linked with them but with NI just going into a communal pot along with tax the hand to mouth system carried on. It was known decades ago that the ratio of payers\receivers had been 7:1 and would likely become an unsustainable 2:1 but it was left for whoever found the problem on their watch to deal with.

We never had any more control over our destiny in the past than your age group do now. We were hostage to fortune as are you.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Interesting comments from Paxman here.

Somewhat amusing that the top two most recommended comments are both from ex-pats living in Thailand.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I would much rather somebody who supposedly decides to portray a collective guilt was not a person who had supped more than adequately from the supposed cornucopia.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-four-years.do

I would rather a person who was obviously educated to a very high level did not generalise as though the levels of education afforded to him and his like were commonplace. Amongst my dozens of peers I can count the numbers who went to university on the fingers of both hands and the one who went to Cambridge on of a single digit.

We, the boomers were born at the end of an era and that era saw the two world wars in which 10's of millions were slaughtered in the globally anarchic pursuit of power. In my formative years the spectre of having to serve under conscription played a part in the decisions made regarding career choices. It was withdrawn before any actual impact but for his age group did not figure in any equation.

I have said periodically, to my wife, over the past two\three decades that in our case through hard work and sacrifice we are rich beyond our wildest dreams of avarice compared with our teenage year expectations. Being a lifelong cynic I added that at some point the establishment will try to take it all back and here we are, on the threshold of the reclamation.

I disagree with every single element in the look back in anger or envy over the past. Compared to the two generations before we did enjoy release from the shackles of being cannon fodder suffering the multiple diseases that ravaged mankind and most importantly the non threat of hunger. To think that the more modern technological advances were showered like an endless stream of gifts is outside of my experience and most of my peers. The only good thing about that era was I suppose that during the long tedious period of saving for a freezer, you actually appreciated the thing when it could be afforded and didn't throw it away when the warranty expired.

IMO, it's over and that era is on its way out. Nuclear weapons ended the prospect of global wars because you cannot subjugate and enslave people if the environment will not allow life. Money is the new control factor coupled with the twin control of supply.

As a new world order emerged from the war era another is emerging and those favoured must do what is needed to benefit. Looking back in anger will miss what is often in front of one's nose, if forward looking and is a pointless debilitating exercise anyway. It is easy for a boomer to think back and wonder if alternative decisions could have yielded better results. When I so indulge the answer is always mitigated by facts. It takes time to amass what people see as credentials and that is money and asset collateral. Just like today without either an individual is only worth their last salary cheque and that isn't worth much as this week I have spoken to three people who have either drawn their last or shortly will.

Perhaps the insight into social engineering is something that comes with age. I am truly disappointed to see how readily sections of the community are so easily duped into the blame game by less than subtle political manoeuvring. With so many factions of the community overtly blamed for all of the ills it more than difficult to know where one should be positioned to be one of the good guys. What a good job is being done to create the divide and conquer scenario. What a shame that the public are so gullible. All of this stuff is 101 psychology for beginners which is distract, divide, cause tensions and squeeze the lot in the knowledge that they will not form a collective response.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I trust you feel better after that, clearly a quite sore point!

When an entire generation has so little to look forward to it's not that surprising they look back in anger and envy over the past. They have no prospect of amassing 'credentials' however long and hard they work and they know it. If they're lucky they'll be paying a social landlord and if not they'll be paying on average over 40% of their income towards someone else's mortgage, most likely a member of the older generation who leveraged the massive increase in their own house price to purchase another.

It's rarely summed up better than through all the comments on that story mentioning how people have worked since the age of xxx - at least there was work for them to do which is more than many of our youth can lay claim to.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Unfortunately although I know that I am verbose beyond all logic you still do not get the point.

We Boomers had expectations and aspirations that for the most were zip, nada, nil but against the measure of our parents and grandparents just to survive without succumbing to Polio, Tuberculosis or being atomised in some muddy field of warfare looked like a positive way forward. Even that was frequently in question with wars almost constant and a culmination in the near miss of the Cuban crisis.

Of course there were jobs a plenty and at one point I had three (day, evenings and weekends) but they were at exploitative low pay and mind numbingly boring which if you were prepared to tolerate brain dead toil allowed the extraordinarily slow creation of enough capital to actually climb on the lowest rung of the housing ladder. With a non working wife and two children I turned down offers of council accommodation whilst against my wife's wishes I struggled for 5 years to acquire a house which needed complete renovation.

Nine years later, the fourteen years of saving and re-building reached a workable asset base which had initially and all the way through looked as though it had no prospect of success. The only way forward then was to risk the lot on business ventures which true to my inner philosophy of I will not be beaten, won through but not without a ton of grief on the way.

Nobody has or has ever had a working crystal ball. We had no hopes or aspirations any more than now. What we did have collectively and individually was a determination to make the most of what was available and contrary to the themes currently in circulation didn't decide to lose the human race in self defeatism and criticism of others before even trying to run the race. Perhaps in the educational lack of competitiveness they should have pointed out that although not coming first is acceptable, not taking part is not.

There could be a far better tomorrow just around the corner and with luck you may not have to strive for 14 years just to become a player. Luck sometimes visits those who are unprepared but mostly overnight luck is after years or decades of diligent preparation with hope but not expectation.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

You're rather wasting your time personalising things with me given I'm in the evil top 5% in terms of income, though oddly bottom 20% of assets due to the whole generational thing.

While I appreciate your personal story it's quite irrelevant - it doesn't change that taxes will be going up to pay the boomers' health care bill, over half the NHS budget goes to retirees and the boomer cohort is massive, those of us coming after will retire later and in most cases with poorer benefits, housing costs generation X triple or more what it cost you, your generation hasn't left much of a legacy of infrastructure and rather than following the responsible Norwegian model spent one-off windfalls on, well, what did it go on I'm still not sure, and are furiously clinging on to the proceeds.

We've had mass immigration for one reason and one reason only from the economic angle, to provide enough tax payers to fund the large generation of retirees who will need health care and welfare. The numbers of immigrants almost perfectly match the shortfall between generations X/Y and the boomers.

Regardless of your personal story this is how it is. The housing ladder that you may have had to work hard to get onto is for many an utter fantasy now however many jobs they have and they've been forced to delay having children as a result, rents have never been less affordable, demand for housing has been increased hugely by immigration forced through the pensions ponzi scheme while certain demographics protest against building and have a planning system sympathetic to protecting their assets.

Malicious or not, victims of fate or not I personally have every right to be frustrated and exasperated with how things are, those who come after me or who may not possess my earning power and are looking to a future with not a lot of silver lining have every right to look back at the past enviously.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...r-parents.html

That extra wealth quite simply didn't materialise from nowhere, it's come from the generations following through their borrowing and in turn work to repay that borrowing, their worse pensions to cover previous defined benefit schemes, their taxes.

Those are the simple facts of the matter, I really couldn't care less whether you think everyone younger than you is vindictive or not, apart from some ignorant sods it's nothing personal I know, it's just your generation's politicians mortgaged us to keep you sweet.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Two posts that prove, if proof were needed, that some people on this forum have too much time on their hands.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Quite unlike you, presumably, being able to take time out of your busy schedule to inform others that you don't approve of something they apparently are passionate about.

Got any hobbies that you'd like me to rubbish just because I can?

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Ignitionnet,

The personalisation is for no other purpose than to dispel the stereotyping which yours and other's generalisations appear to portray. On every bell curve distribution there are outliers. The example you found is an outlier in the boomer group as much as you are an outlier within your age group.

To stereotype one has to centre within the bell curve and I can assure you that there a a heck of a lot of very worried boomers in the centre with a lot of extremely worried ones towards the negative end.

Your self depreciation of being in the top 5% of earners is misplaced, when in my eyes, it is worthy of applause. On a pro rata basis I wish I had been in such a position at such a young age but I wasn't as that was the time I was juggling debts during the 14 year build process.

As for the eluded to waste of funds and the use thereof which you insist was so boomer orientated. We had no more control over its use than now. We voted just like you have been able to do for 15 years and democracy dictated how the dice rolled. You had just as much say in the election and subsequent re-elections of Labour as did I and as the outcome has been and will be possibly the biggest financial crisis in history, blame knows no generational boundaries (apart from those without a vote).

The Daily Mail article you linked to is just more total nonsense. That is just grabbing some numbers that suit to supposedly prove a point and of course we all know many consultants who are of typical of each generation:(.

They also forgot to mention in the article that with a 30 year age gap the poor hard done by child will most probably have received a trickle down of the parent's small fortune and will indeed be a great deal more fortunate than the parents. A good case there for if there is only one child to lobby for the 1 million pound inheritance tax so beloved by the Tories which with the carry over would give the lot to the child. No worries about pensions for the child unless a parent manages a Monarch's telegram.

I would have thought the greatest harm done to this country in living memory or perhaps forever according to Mervyn King has been done by the last administration and this lot may do no better. Your vote and mine and we both end up unhappy chappies;)

I missed (apart from the house boom) much of the bounty in the form of ridiculous salary rises under Labour's wealth friendly regime. I would think the biggest task at hand for the top 5% is to hang on to those jobs. I do not care if my house goes down in price but as you pointed out the quantum rise started in 1997... see the linkage. House boom = salary boom. Looks like a rock and hard place unless you are lucky;)

The media appears as geared towards creating societal divisions as the current government. The we are all in it together and mending the broken society appears to have been somewhat lost in the generate hatred and let them smash it all to smithereens. Makes me wonder what joys are in store if internal divisions are a precursor.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

wages were low but so were living costs.

People may seem better off today but think where most people would be without easy credit.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I won't respond in too verbose a manner beyond pointing out that your generation certainly did have the throw of the dice as far as New Labour goes - the usual pattern is that people start off idealistic and vote Labour then lean towards Tory as they age and accumulate wealth, the Boomers as by far the largest block of votes had the power. You noted New Labour being wealth friendly.

I refer back to my previous answers with regards to inheritances. These are fine, apart from that they are a disaster for social mobility. Those born into relative wealth get a nice fat inheritance, those not born into it, robbed of the opportunity to accumulate it for themselves, don't have it to look forward to.

Regarding this earnings boom, I'm struggling to find it?

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/lab...-work/earnings

The only real things I can see are a transfer of wealth from one group to lower earners via tax credits and an entirely disproportionate increase in public sector compensation.

One big cause of the housing boom is obviously Gordon's pensions grab pushing a lot of wealth into the housing market via buy to let and supply not keeping up. Rather than prices dropping as they became less affordable fiscal policy was geared towards supply of cheap credit to give the impression of affordability.

As noted I have little interest in stereotypes I'm only discussing the demographics as a whole, to stereotype is silly especially by me given I'm hardly the stereotypical 30-something in most ways.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Living costs were ludicrously high. The basics of food, clothing and other day to day items were not only costly but in many instances of rubbish quality.

The only thing which stands out as cheap is petrol but cars were of rubbish quality, expensive to keep going and required a substantial DIY capability. That all changed with the 70's oil shock and everything about running a car became a financial headache.

Mass production of the levels of today's efficiencies took decades to arrive with the transition from hand assembled rubbish to robotics. Massive imports of foreign goods especially in the high tech area is a relatively modern phenomena and in white goods and electronics prices are comparatively as cheap as chips.

My parents generation had known the reality of real hunger. My father's motivation was to avoid the return to that situation whatever the costs and he worked into his mid 70's driven by the scars of earlier life. Many of the earlier boomers are driven to avoid a return to a life of little more than survival in what today is classed as poverty. You had to go through it to know it.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

It's good to see someone posting with knowledge of those times, rather than hearing todays generation crying about how unfair it is.

I'm not a boomer or todays generation but I've seen and lived through aspects of both.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Ignitionnet,

I believe that the purist definition of democracy is the election of the representatives of most to serve the interests of the most. If the boomers were the major voting faction then democracy has been served as designed.

Details could be produced to display that in many instances they have not had that good a deal but the scope is too large and life isn't forever.

You will not find evidence of massive salaries or earnings within general statistics because quite simply the top 5% are diluted down by the mass and are counterbalanced by those at the bottom. My eldest daughter rocketed into the stratosphere as did many other younger people I know and know of. even my GP friend after receiving massive boosts to his income stated that he felt quite poorly rewarded compared with his golfing peers.

It was those salaries that gave the quantum leap to house prices and the charts show the lift off in 1997 when Labour came to power. You can find statistics to disprove anything but cause and effect does not correlate.

If you work anywhere the City of London that was the primary source of the era of cornucopia. You presumably cannot have been unaware of the changing dynamic and as much as anything your predicament is as a result of that era above all else.

I have tried beyond all reasonable efforts to give a different perspective on some realities as opposed to convenient urban myths, However you appear so deeply entrenched that any effort on my part is starting to appear to be pointless.

I do however as I have done all the time sympathise with your position. In the 70's I was so distressed with my situation and the mess politician's were making of the world, that I stopped all newspapers, refused to view the news and plodded on without negative inputs. I refused to allow negative inputs to undermine my long term hopes for fear that blaming everyone and their dog for my position would actually make my personal life worse. In retrospect life moves on and things did get better and as my thoughts and feelings would have counted for nothing I am pleased to have moved out of political debate.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Aside from some apparent contradictions in your post you perhaps give me too little credit in some ways.

All this said it's probably a good time to let this lie - had I realised it would provoke such a reaction I'd have likely not posted the article.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

I agree.

I will not even ask what those contradictions are because (a) I know what they are and (b) they are contradictions only if selectivity is employed.

I have noticed that in conversations with people of your cohort that there is a tendency to focus on one element of a conversation or in this case typed words and and a failure either by choice or lack of analytical overview to reference to the concept.

I cannot comprehend that apparent tendency because by nature and education I take a holistic view and relate facts with reference to an overview. There are many instances in my replies where an earlier paragraph qualifies a statement in a later one and ameliorates something which may be contentious. In almost every event the amelioration failed. As I have experienced with regret in real life there is an intergenerational gulf which starts with communication.

BTW many thanks for the link provided in another thread re: the lecture on Corn syrup sugar. Most enlightening.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

They werent that high as my dad paid a semi detached mortgage by himself as well as covering our entire household bills, these days thats not possible unless on a silly high salary.

He disagrees with you as well, he said times were rough but no comparison to todays era for the young. So I guess its not cut and dry.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

Regional variations come into play again.

I have lived all my life in the Surrey, so called, stockbroker belt.

In those days the primary cost of interest to the boomers was house purchase. I travelled a lot around my twenties and the striking factor that I can remember to this day is the ridiculously low prices asked for new houses the further North I went. Actually anywhere outside of commuting distance of London saw a plunge in the prices. With most forms of transport proving unreliable, mobility wasn't an option. Re-location was and those on national standard salaries had a much easier time where housing was cheaper, much as they do today.

The harder the task of creating a deposit and the higher the price of house the harder the life. Had I lived some distance away from where I have chosen to live, life would have been a lot easier but as family members and others have found, the short term gains of cheaper housing is a one way ticket as differentials move with prices and they cannot return to where I live without a huge downgrade in housing.

Around that time I met dozens of people from all over the UK and everyone had a different take on the situation but the general theme was not good.

The status of poor and rich is highly variable inasmuch as somebody on £100K p.a. can be poor in London whereas they would potentially be rich in the Midlands. Similarly comfortable or wealthy in the Midlands may be a non starter near London.

Re: Over 60s Should Be Encouraged To Downsize
 

[QUOTE=Ignitionnet;35323702](snip) I'm in the evil top 5% in terms of income, though oddly bottom 20% of assets due to the whole generational thing.

I note that you are aged 33. Do you really think that assets come so quickly? Just wait 30 or so years and you may be surprised.

I think that you will find that the baby boomers were not asset rich at your age.