I have two children in their early twenties and I do wonder how long they and their friends will put up with the way things seem to have ended up. In the UK they are priced out of the property market and are expected to pay extortionate rents for very poor quality accommodation. Most young people now seem to be expected to be prepared to take internships as a way into full time work. Those internships are often expenses only and can last for years.
If I was there age I'd be thinking about how to get out of the system altogether and set up something new and different.


>>>But ground property is taxed yearly and over here we have a VAT-type of buy tax, which was 2% in the 80's
>and is now between 3% and 5%. Just reallocating or moving because of job shift will cost you more percentage wise.
>And what is the reason for those VAT-type of taxes ? Filing is not as difficult a process as it was,
>and that was the origin/ previous reason for the tax.
>
>They're just taxes that add a predictable amount to the cost of buying property. It also incentivizes longer-term investing rather than speculation and trading that drives up prices for everybody else.
>
>>>GB inflated away WW2 debt, but in what way has our generation "benefited" by inflation ?
>
>Somebody who took a mortgage in the 1970s could have paid it off on a credit card in the end. An equivalent young person today will struggle even to get a mortgage and has numerous other debts bequeathed by the previous crew that now demonizes inflation. You wait, when the young figure out exactly what has been done to them, maybe they'll decide not to participate in these sorts of constructs that continue to enrich the gerontocracy at the expense of the young.
>
>>>FORCING cash holders to invest only opens the door
>to the snake oil sellers bundling bad paper and selling them as secure (AA+ or higher) investments.
>Or in shares, where the company is raided by emergency credit of a new 15% investor, forcing
>to accept interest of >15% for "emergency credit", silently sucking away company funds,
>leaving other shareholders with worthless shares later...
>
>??!! Nobody says you have to be greedy and invest in returns that are too good to be true. Certainly I agree that selling shares is better than borrowing at high interest for many companies, which is what has happened in Australia after taxpayers started creating large pools of equity to pay for their predictable future needs, and for those of future generations. Had the US started doing the same at the same time as Australia, there would be hundreds of trillions of dollars of invest-able public wealth today and no possibility of a recession. Instead the 1% has absorbed or lost most of that $ leaving underclass conditions ripe for revolution and a middle class grimly clinging onto prosperity that was assured for the previous generation.
>
>>>IMO otherwise churning/gambling which you detest even more than me is made necessary.
>What is wrong with the idea of ME deciding when and how much I work and retain the value ?
>If I work double shifts 7 days a week for 25 years to follow up with playing golf at 50,
>living cost paid by me previous effort ?
>
>Just don't keep it in cash! Invest it. In the stock market if you must, or in local business if you can. Every $ you invest is a $ they don't need to borrow, making it easier for them to employ and grow- and growing your share at the same time.