Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis
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.
|
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.