• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Under 25s most likely to be impacted economically

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
More reports again this morning that the young are being the hardest hit by the Covid-19 economic shutdown, despite at the same time being the group that is least likely to suffer any substantial medical hardship from the pandemic.

Young people are most likely to have lost work or seen their income drop because of the coronavirus pandemic, a report suggests.

More than one in three 18 to 24-year-olds is earning less than before the outbreak, research by the Resolution Foundation claims.

It said younger workers risk their pay being affected for years, while older staff may end up involuntarily retired.

This comes as the number of people claiming unemployment benefits increased by 856,000 in April.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

thejuggler

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2016
Messages
1,186
No real surprise. Easy to hire, easy to dismiss. We can expect a lot of furloughed workers to be made redundant as they approach 2 years in the role.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,190
Location
St Albans
More reports again this morning that the young are being the hardest hit by the Covid-19 economic shutdown, despite at the same time being the group that is least likely to suffer any substantial medical hardship from the pandemic. ...
I suppose there's a trade-off with a risk losing a job rather than the risk of life-changing (or life-ending) sickness.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"

Add to that that the youngsters are being asked to screw up their own lives further to save the lives of the "boomers" who have screwed up their lives already. (As a Gen-Xer I sit on the fence :) )

You can quite see why some of them have no interest in complying.
 

Huntergreed

Established Member
Associate Staff
Events Co-ordinator
Joined
16 Jan 2016
Messages
3,019
Location
Dumfries
Add to that that the youngsters are being asked to screw up their own lives further to save the lives of the "boomers" who have screwed up their lives already. (As a Gen-Xer I sit on the fence :) )

You can quite see why some of them have no interest in complying.
As an 18 year old, I can totally understand this perspective. If you ask the wide majority of our generation, of course they will want to do what they can to protect the elderly and vulnerable as it’s the decent thing to do, however at the same time, at this stage a lot of us are quite worried as there is little to no certainty about the future of our careers, education or prospects. Living in Scotland this is especially prominent as Sturgeon is taking a much harsher approach than the majority of the UK.

The main view point from those I’ve been speaking to is:

“of course I want to protect the elderly and vulnerable, but I absolutely do not want to throw my future away just to do this in the short term”

Many people I know in this age group have been terrified by the government campaign which we now know worked too well, with many saying they’ll defer their studies for a year or risk getting fired for not returning to work until a vaccine becomes available as they don’t want to die, not realising the absolutely minimal risk it poses to them.

I share most of these views and, whilst I agree that the lockdown for the most part has been necessary and effective in protecting our elderly and vulnerable, I’m starting to fear the government have their minds set on this to a degree where our futures are almost being neglected in the thought process and that we will lose out on opportunities to live how we want to simply because of government oversight in the short term.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
As an 18 year old, I can totally understand this perspective. If you ask the wide majority of our generation, of course they will want to do what they can to protect the elderly and vulnerable as it’s the decent thing to do, however at the same time, at this stage a lot of us are quite worried as there is little to no certainty about the future of our careers, education or prospects. Living in Scotland this is especially prominent as Sturgeon is taking a much harsher approach than the majority of the UK.

For your reassurance, she's starting to make noises about copying England now, just about 3 weeks later. Which sort of makes sense, as Scotland is about 3 weeks behind London on the curve.
 

BJames

Established Member
Joined
27 Jan 2018
Messages
1,359
As an 18 year old, I can totally understand this perspective. If you ask the wide majority of our generation, of course they will want to do what they can to protect the elderly and vulnerable as it’s the decent thing to do, however at the same time, at this stage a lot of us are quite worried as there is little to no certainty about the future of our careers, education or prospects. Living in Scotland this is especially prominent as Sturgeon is taking a much harsher approach than the majority of the UK.

The main view point from those I’ve been speaking to is:

“of course I want to protect the elderly and vulnerable, but I absolutely do not want to throw my future away just to do this in the short term”

Many people I know in this age group have been terrified by the government campaign which we now know worked too well, with many saying they’ll defer their studies for a year or risk getting fired for not returning to work until a vaccine becomes available as they don’t want to die, not realising the absolutely minimal risk it poses to them.

I share most of these views and, whilst I agree that the lockdown for the most part has been necessary and effective in protecting our elderly and vulnerable, I’m starting to fear the government have their minds set on this to a degree where our futures are almost being neglected in the thought process and that we will lose out on opportunities to live how we want to simply because of government oversight in the short term.
As a fellow 18 year old (although living and studying in England) I echo the above 100%. I'm first year at University, and to say that we have been ignored by and large is an understatement. When Grant Shapps was asked a question at the conference about plans for Universities from a member of the public, he admitted that he wasn't sure but would quite like to know the answer... but when Williamson was up at the conference just two days later, not one word was mentioned about Universities... I know schools are the priority in the short term but everyone I've spoken to don't know what on earth to expect come September.

And I agree as well with the fears around the government campaign, some people my age are far too fearful (and I attempted to make this point in another thread but apparently I'm discounting the vulnerable which is not the case).
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I've generally found it's millennial females who seem overall to be most fearful (and sanctimonious). I think most under 25s get that the risk for them is very low.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
As an 18 year old, I can totally understand this perspective. If you ask the wide majority of our generation, of course they will want to do what they can to protect the elderly and vulnerable as it’s the decent thing to do, however at the same time, at this stage a lot of us are quite worried as there is little to no certainty about the future of our careers, education or prospects. Living in Scotland this is especially prominent as Sturgeon is taking a much harsher approach than the majority of the UK.

The main view point from those I’ve been speaking to is:

“of course I want to protect the elderly and vulnerable, but I absolutely do not want to throw my future away just to do this in the short term”

Many people I know in this age group have been terrified by the government campaign which we now know worked too well, with many saying they’ll defer their studies for a year or risk getting fired for not returning to work until a vaccine becomes available as they don’t want to die, not realising the absolutely minimal risk it poses to them.

I share most of these views and, whilst I agree that the lockdown for the most part has been necessary and effective in protecting our elderly and vulnerable, I’m starting to fear the government have their minds set on this to a degree where our futures are almost being neglected in the thought process and that we will lose out on opportunities to live how we want to simply because of government oversight in the short term.

It will pass and normality will return, even if it's a different normality.

A cohort of young people will have had a phase of their life disrupted.

Disrupted. Not "thrown away".

My father's career was disrupted for five years in the 1940s; my grandfather's between 1914 and 1918.

Then they resumed their lives. As you will.

(And nobody's shooting at you . . . )
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
7,785
Location
West Riding
It will pass and normality will return, even if it's a different normality.

A cohort of young people will have had a phase of their life disrupted.

Disrupted. Not "thrown away".

My father's career was disrupted for five years in the 1940s; my grandfather's between 1914 and 1918.

Then they resumed their lives. As you will.

(And nobody's shooting at you . . . )

To be fair, I think leaving uni/education and emerging into a world of turmoil, economic uncertainty and ever diminishing career prospects is increasingly normal. It must be the 1990's when a year last emerged into 'good times.' You just have to get on with something and do the best you can.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
To be fair, I think leaving uni/education and emerging into a world of turmoil, economic uncertainty and ever diminishing career prospects is increasingly normal. It must be the 1990's when a year last emerged into 'good times.'

True (that even happened to me in 2001) - but at least the education itself was a stable thing.
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
7,785
Location
West Riding
True (that even happened to me in 2001) - but at least the education itself was a stable thing.

Same here, I started uni during the 2008 financial crisis.

I'm not so sure. I think Higher Education has been a form of slow crisis for quite some time and the current predicament is just accentuating the situation, particularly in that HE now depends financially on large numbers of international students which will be most affected by the virus.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
I've generally found it's millennial females who seem overall to be most fearful (and sanctimonious). I think most under 25s get that the risk for them is very low.
I think that could possibly be a reflection that for any ‘educated’ Millennial (ie. those who went to University), that this is the first recession that we have lived through (as most would have been at school or university in 2008), thus awareness of the economic difficulties isn’t something we really have an understanding of.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
I think that could possibly be a reflection that for any ‘educated’ Millennial (ie. those who went to University), that this is the first recession that we have lived through (as most would have been at school or university in 2008), thus awareness of the economic difficulties isn’t something we really have an understanding of.
I think both this and the original idea are not true. The original idea is not based on evidence, and this idea ignores the majority of millennials who came of age at the turn of the new Milennium in 2000. Most will therefore have been in early adulthood before the 2008 global financial crisis. Some will not remember the world pre-crisis well, as they were too young. None are too young to remember the crisis.

To put it another, way all millennials lived through recession.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
I think both this and the original idea are not true. The original idea is not based on evidence, and this idea ignores the majority of millennials who came of age at the turn of the new Milennium in 2000. Most will therefore have been in early adulthood before the 2008 global financial crisis. Some will not remember the world pre-crisis well, as they were too young. None are too young to remember the crisis.

To put it another, way all millennials lived through recession.
Very few millennials that attended university will have lived through a recession before in the UK. The 2008 recession would have been whilst people were at university or school still.

If someone was born in the earlier part of this (and the commonly accepted definition according to Wikipedia is born 1981 to 1996) then yes they would, however it would be at a younger age and possibly impacted in a different manner to someone of a different standing.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I think a lot of people don't understand what a Millennial is - it is someone who came of age (i.e. turned 18) between 2000 and 2010, pretty much, not someone who was born then. Someone born in 2000 is a post-Millennial or Gen-Z.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
Very few millennials that attended university will have lived through a recession before in the UK. The 2008 recession would have been whilst people were at university or school still.
Around half will have been out of education by the end of 2008. The recession was in 2009. Most of the other half will have been old enough for it to affect their lives, either because they were at university or because they were of at least upper secondary school age where they were aware of what happened because of their parents' financial situation.
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,594
Im not under 25 but just finished a uni course . Just got offered palce on a grad job , but because of this recruitment is frozen and cant actually make the offer. Was meant to start in the autumm . I orignally asked to start in May after uni finished, not happening. Hopefully things will get better i can start .
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
Im not under 25 but just finished a uni course . Just got offered palce on a grad job , but because of this recruitment is frozen and cant actually make the offer. Was meant to start in the autumm . I orignally asked to start in May after uni finished, not happening. Hopefully things will get better i can start .

It's even worse when you hadn't got a job lined up, feels like they've all disappeared for now!
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
Around half will have been out of education by the end of 2008. The recession was in 2009. Most of the other half will have been old enough for it to affect their lives, either because they were at university or because they were of upper secondary school age where they were aware of what happened because of their parents' financial situation.
I respectfully disagree; in 2007-2008 I was working for a bank in a department in which 95% of our work was as a result of house purchases.

I remember the reaction of my colleagues and supervisors at the time as to what was going on where the number of new mortgages were decreasing by double digits as summer 2008 approached. The lack of understanding at the time was probably not helped by an occurrence such as that never having occurred before.

When I started university later that year, the contrast between the people I used to work with and my new classmates could not have been more stark.

I most certainly did not experience this, despite being young but over 18 and in a job because things are very different as you get older and have your own bills to pay.

Yes, those born 81-87 would have been impacted by the recession; but it would have been at a very early stage and most likely
not at a point where someone would have done a job for a long time.
 

matt

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
30 Jun 2005
Messages
7,812
Location
Rugby
Yes, those born 81-87 would have been impacted by the recession; but it would have been at a very early stage and most likely
not at a point where someone would have done a job for a long time.

Yes I fall into that catergory, I lost my job after year on a graduate scheme.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
I respectfully disagree; in 2007-2008 I was working for a bank in a department in which 95% of our work was as a result of house purchases.

I remember the reaction of my colleagues and supervisors at the time as to what was going on where the number of new mortgages were decreasing by double digits as summer 2008 approached. The lack of understanding at the time was probably not helped by an occurrence such as that never having occurred before.

When I started university later that year, the contrast between the people I used to work with and my new classmates could not have been more stark.

I most certainly did not experience this, despite being young but over 18 and in a job because things are very different as you get older and have your own bills to pay.

Yes, those born 81-87 would have been impacted by the recession; but it would have been at a very early stage and most likely
not at a point where someone would have done a job for a long time.
I think you're making a different argument. You're making an argument that younger adults, such as 18 year old, were less affected by the crisis. You hint that this is because they lived at home. I think that's not true regardless. Of course, for those with parents who were doing well going into the crisis they might have just ignored the news of what it was doing.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,538
Location
UK
It will pass and normality will return, even if it's a different normality.

A cohort of young people will have had a phase of their life disrupted.

Disrupted. Not "thrown away".

Thrown away, all of the fundamental things that I enjoy have been banned, and all of my plans completely overthrown. For a disease that poses basically no risk to me.

It reminds me of an old sci-fi story, where young people sell years of their life, for the old to buy. Unfortunately this process is inefficient, so 10 years must be donated, for one to be reclaimed. I just don't think the time that we're all being forced to waste makes up for the time that we are saving. Especially if we then account for the social distancing, and economic disturbance that we're all staring down the barrel of indefinitely. The suggestion of a new normal seems like something from 1984, or a fourth book of Gullivers Travels, than something that a government should be suggesting seriously for it's people.


In the first world war, the government issued bonds to pay for military expenditure; we still haven't paid all of these back. Then the loans from WW2 were only paid back a few years ago. Perhaps in the long term the costs of this pandemic will be paid off, but in the long term, we'll all be dead.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
Thrown away, all of the fundamental things that I enjoy have been banned, and all of my plans completely overthrown. For a disease that poses basically no risk to me.

It reminds me of an old sci-fi story, where young people sell years of their life, for the old to buy. Unfortunately this process is inefficient, so 10 years must be donated, for one to be reclaimed. I just don't think the time that we're all being forced to waste makes up for the time that we are saving. Especially if we then account for the social distancing, and economic disturbance that we're all staring down the barrel of indefinitely. The suggestion of a new normal seems like something from 1984, or a fourth book of Gullivers Travels, than something that a government should be suggesting seriously for it's people.


In the first world war, the government issued bonds to pay for military expenditure; we still haven't paid all of these back. Then the loans from WW2 were only paid back a few years ago. Perhaps in the long term the costs of this pandemic will be paid off, but in the long term, we'll all be dead.

Or maybe things will be pretty well back to normal in a year's time. A lot of people will have had their plans disrupted. But they can then move on.

I fell ill a few weeks before I was due to go to University. It put me back a year. Did it really impact adversely on my life? No. (Because that was one year. And I've had 40+ since then.)

Will the fact that travel, sport or entertainment were suspended for a few months really be a huge deal when we look back in 3, 5 or 10 years time ?
 

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,214
Location
London
Yes, those born 81-87 would have been impacted by the recession; but it would have been at a very early stage and most likely
not at a point where someone would have done a job for a long time.

You might be onto something there. I also agree with @Bletchleyite. There is - a *lot* of support for continued lockdown “at all costs” within that group.

I’m in the “millennial” age bracket. In the last recession, we were in our mid 20s. I lot of my peers hadn’t yet bought, and were back living with parents etc., with no real responsibilities. So weren’t particularly affected by it. Quite a lot just decided to go travelling.

I remember that recession better than most of them, because I was one of the ones who had stretched to buy as soon as I could, and promptly lost my job! I can remember exactly how that feels: wondering how you will pay your mortgage on a property you can’t sell because nobody is buying. It isn’t a good place to be.

Those same people haven’t been affected this time around either (yet). Now in their their mid 30s, many are in established careers, so will be working from home (or furloughed, but with employers topping up). The irony is a lot also now have young families, and big mortgages to support, which won’t yet have been substantially paid off - yet they are still baying for this to continue!

I’m afraid they’re going to be for a very, very rude awakening once the economic side of this thing properly hits.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top