Re: They toooock ewre joohbs!!!
Except it has everything to do with wages! In 1990 a friend purchased a house worth a little over $50,000 NZ. On even a 10 year mortgage he barely noticed the payments. Same house is nearly $500,000 now, but the wages have not risen to match.
Wages in general track inflation. From OECD data, average wages have increased from NZD 31K in 1990 to NZD 68K in 2019 in NZ (2.2x), and £14K to £36K (2.6x) in the UK. Over that period UK consumer prices increased by around 2.4x.
Over that same period average house prices (in USD for convenient comparison) have increased from $25K to $126K (NZ) and $21K to $115K (UK), in both cases a factor of approx 5x. The problem with housing affordability is not related to wages, it is related to house prices increasing well beyond inflation.
You didn't do much reading before posting did you? Try pretty much any newspaper, food bank, economist (yes even they sometimes get some minor stuff right), budget advisor, shop owner, supermarket owner, butcher/greengrocer, ice-cream seller... There's a lot of cheap stuff that does hide the full impact , but the information is so readily available it'd be hard not to see it.
I did plenty of reading, which is why I posted facts from the OECD, not hand-waving arguments like "ask an ice-cream seller".
All the data you need is at https://data.oecd.org/
Here's one that (on a brief skim read) shows otherwise.
So, you went to a web site for an organization that relies on showing high poverty levels, and found a statement that claims increasing poverty. Hardly surprising.
The information is NOT hard to find.
Indeed, or at least the facts aren't. If you look for them.
Perhaps you can provide a citation for this "OECD data" that you claim shows otherwise?
Try the OECD, it's the obvious place to get OECD data! For example this chart has many variants which show that poverty levels in the UK are stable, or even decreasing.
Look at the schemes to provide food to kids in schools because the parents can't always afford to provide them with lunch. This was almost entirely unheard of in 1990
Hardly. When I went to school in the 60s and 70s we took our lunch money in each week to get canteen tickets, and we all knew which kids qualified for free meals.
Take a look around at the % of the population who do go out for a movie/show each week (if you can find any theatres left) or even each month - the numbers have dropped considerably
Hmm, so when it's hard to find a theatre, fewer people visit them. No shit, Sherlock!
How many of those 'poor' people don't go because they prefer to use their Netflix subscriptions to watch on their 60" flat-screen TVs at home instead?
I'm not in my 50s, and I had a much better standard of living back in the 90s, and the same can be said for most people I know
That's unfortunate for you, but it isn't the case for most people I know in that age group, who have better cars, better holidays & more meals out than they did in the 1990s.
in the 90s I could get a mortgage with a 0% or at most 5% deposit, while also much lower prices. So a $60,000 3brm house + decent yard, 5% deposit is $3,000.
Yes, I bought my first house for £30K in 1985, with a mortgage that was around 2.5x my salary. Today it would be much more difficult, but that's because house prices have far outstripped inflation so even my good salary today would make it less comfortable. That is a housing problem, not a wages problem.
Given the level of your research, and your "I'm one of the lucky ones so no one else matters" last paragraph, I'm not surprised you posted AC!
Would it really have made a difference if I'd posted as "Ben Jones", or as "Alphonse Colquhoun-Smythe"? If so you should perhaps rethink your own preconceptions.
As for research, I've done plenty, over many years. I always prefer to post from facts, not from tabloid hearsay.