dugsbody

Meanwhile, you can keep denying reality that the young have a much, much harder time buying an equivalent house to their parents generation.

Then you don't understand the arguments. Mortgage payments as a percentage of income have stayed roughly the same as average, but because of lower interest rates the cost of the house has become stratospheric and disqualifies a lot of people from owning it. Not to mention that obviously the data is self correcting. If people can't afford a house in an area that their parents could (on lower wages too), then they move to a worse area where they can afford, and wow, would you look at that, mortgage payments as a percentage if income stats stay the same.

Exactly. Low interest rates allowed people to bid house prices higher and still pay the same per month. Interest rates have been the main driver of house prices globally, for many decades.

I seriously doubt it is as high as that, if not zero for many banks.

It is going to get worse, because the trend over the next decade or two is for more people to retire than enter the workforce, increasing the productive / unproductive balance. The data for this is available. Look at where the majority of our spending has increased. Pensions and welfare. This includes old age care. Not to mention that older people use the NHS more. Note: This is not an elderly demonisation post. We're all going to be old one day and relying on the NHS and hopefully our pensions. I'm only stating the reality. And as I say, it is going to get worse. We're going to have to find a way to generate a lot more productivity to pay for it or the young are going to be screwed by tax rises. I think a wealth tax will eventually be introduced too.

You're promoting the message. And you seem confused what the actual message is. Of course you're going to get stick for it. Don't like it? Don't post.

I'm surprised you lower yourself to that.

To me, that is the real point. Search on rightmove for all properties in London, currently for sale (never mind sold) for > £1m. 10,901 results Absolutely crazy. The postman and his wife who worked part time at the library are now millionaires, while their children, at 35 years old, struggle to afford a two bedroom flat in the same area. They won't recognise the reasons for this, and will blame the children for eating too many avocados and buying too many mobile phones.

I think he suggests that "the libs" are making his life worse by wringing their hands about the future of the planet. Everything will all be fine if we just stop hand wringing. Naturally.

Why? He isn't responsible for the UK facing worse inflation than other economies. That is political. Aside from that, what do you really think his job is? It certainly isn't to "control inflation". It is to be a political puppet and not get fired by the current government. You're aiming your angst at entirely the wrong person.

Of course he will, because he gets all the upside with no downside risk. His company could go bankrupt, he'll be fine.

I considered posting my total investment, but it isn't great to advertise these things. You know that I have at least a few BTC, because I've said before I sold one (or was it half, I forget) for XRP near the very peak of XRP. Possibly my worst trade ever 🤦‍♂️ My first buy was around < $2000 (I honestly haven't kept track, but I should for tax reasons). I spent a few thousand GBP. I topped up later in 2017 with another few thousand GBP. I bought some Ethereum too. In total I've spent less than £20k. I haven't bought or sold since then. Since I'm getting on (mid 40s) and have a very good career, £20k is not nothing to me, it's just not make or break. It's obviously now worth more than it was, but nowhere near life changing amounts. For it to be life changing, it would have to approach $200k, as I got in to the game too late and lost a BTC in the XRP trade.

All good. Except, those who rate themselves the highest at critical thinking are often the lowest. They're not really very good at critical thinking, and are therefore much more likely to err by overestimating themselves.

For me it is the disproportionate nature of the bet that got me involved. That and realising other people could easily continue bidding the price up. I invested an amount I was willing to lose (still quite large), and immediately removed it from my spreadsheet on which I track my finances. That money is gone. But, it also has the potential to generate a massive windfall, and the potential is actually reasonably good odds. I think it has more than a 50% chance from here of going to $100k. To me, that is a good bet. Buying right now, 5x your money out at > 50% chance. (Of course, the 50% chance is made up, it's only my thoughts, but that is how it works for every investment, a guess on odds).

Not a chance. Crypto, even with all the cruft, is still relatively small compared to the traditional finance system and Zug's favourite, the shadow banking system.