Comments by "MeTube - tacticalvote co uk" (@OneAndOnlyMe) on "The UK’s housing costs are sucking life out of our economy" video.

People in their 20s are just starting out, they won't have the jobs that pay well because they lack experience and unless they are graduates in a big corporation they won't be getting decent bonuses either. The best start a child can have is for their parents to invest for them during the first 20 years. By age 20 a child would have the deposit for a house.
7
@WillyJunior Agree, the victim mindset does not foster a positive attitude, which is essential to being successful and seizing opportunities.
4
The older generations will leave some of their wealth to their children. Regular generations Z and A folk are going to inherit more wealth than any other generation has done. Painting the older generations are wealth extractors is an interesting way for Richard to support his own argument. Many people would say the older generation simply seized opportunities to build up their wealth so they could retire comfortably - which is everyone's objective. I don't blame the older generation. I blame government policies that created a planning system that favour NIMBYs.
3
That's a huge generalisation. Young people are working and do want to work. They want good jobs, well paid jobs for which they've studied and trained. Outside of London and other metro centers, housing is still within reach, granted you need a sizeable deposit, but a couple can save £15k each within a couple of years when both are working in good jobs.
2
We DO have a fundamental shortage of housing. Yes, people are "housed" - but many are living at home with parents for far too long into their 20s, and some into their 30s because of housing shortage.
2
"redistribute wealth" - Won't happen. Why? Because the better off and wealthy are the larger demographic in society, and they are not going to vote against their own interests and lifestyles. We need to help lower earners with better opportunities and provide social/affordable homes, but taking from those who have worked hard to hand down is not the British way.
1
25% of a pension fund forced to be used for public service investment means 25% of a pension fund generating lower returns which in turn means lower income in retirement. It would drive people to investment in other vehicles that even with tax would return better gains. Pensions are invested in the stock which over the long term (40+ years) and does always provide good return, but if 25% of that is going to be a lower return then people will opt for direct investment into stock markets, in effect manage their own pensions. (We are in an era where the tech sector is going to produce vast wealth for those willing to take the risk over the long term. S&P 500 tech sector returned over 40% in 2024.)
1