nazo
Junior Member
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by nazo on Mar 24, 2024 21:30:26 GMT
100k / year is probably a fraction of what most of the Tory cabinet make on their portfolios without having to lift a finger so it's no surprise if it feels like chump change to them. Hunt has a pretty large property portfolio, a fair bit of which was purchased in bulk to get stamp duty relief because paying tax is for poor people.
Part of the reason why us plebs are so poor is because of cunts like him who buy up all the housing for investment or holiday homes leaving none for anyone else. People cry about socialism at the prospect of taxing the wealth of the rich to ease the burden of the poor but there's a massive redistribution of wealth happening as the rich buy everything up and then squeeze everyone else for everything they've got.
Someone who makes £100k a year working is basically in the same boat as someone making £30k, just in a slightly nicer cabin.
|
|
X201
Junior Member
Posts: 4,898
|
Post by X201 on Mar 24, 2024 21:40:00 GMT
Someone who makes £100k a year working is basically in the same boat as someone making £30k, just in a slightly nicer cabin. Or as Paul Heaton put it: Born into a better class That only rolls a two A slightly lighter accent and A slighter better shoe Those shoes are walking on thin ice Though you hold a decent job Looking at this dump, one financial slump Straight back on the rob
|
|
myk
New Member
Posts: 737
|
Post by myk on Mar 24, 2024 22:08:23 GMT
If someone on £100k lived the same lifestyle as someone on £30k they'd be very comfortable; it's our society that encourages that not to be the case. My outgoings are ~40% of my income after tax, I don't feel any squeeze at all.
|
|
Frog
Full Member
Posts: 7,072
|
Post by Frog on Mar 24, 2024 22:13:27 GMT
Some peoples mortgages are very close to 40 percent after taxes due to the increased interest rates. There is no one size fits all "people should do this" as everyone's situation is individual.
|
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,400
Member is Online
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Mar 24, 2024 23:59:53 GMT
The thing with nonsense like this is that, as a society, we are funny about money. There is this weird martyr complex where someone will always say ‘bullshit, I’m on minimum wage and live like a prince’ like it’s a competition to eke out the most meagre existence so we don’t ever examine how insane it is to even be talking about a six figure income not giving people a life of relative luxury.
|
|
X201
Junior Member
Posts: 4,898
|
Post by X201 on Mar 25, 2024 5:57:28 GMT
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 845
|
Post by otto on Mar 25, 2024 9:20:32 GMT
Both my wife and I earn north of 100k each and while I won't deny that we're comfortable it definitely doesn't feel like megabucks, I suppose it never does. We're not able to put away savings, and we're not living in some palace, just a 1920s semi in suburbia. I remember earlier in my career I was talking to a friend who was a lawyer in the private sector and he said "I don't understand how anyone can get by on less than 100k", at the time I was earning a lot less than 100k, and I thought he was being a real twat, but I see now how he might have thought that, as your outgoings grow in line with your income your disposable kind of shrinks and it becomes hard to imagine how it's possible to get by earning less, even though most people do - you get a bit trapped in the golden cage. You still play the lottery and imagine the freedom that a huge windfall might bring.
|
|
askew
Full Member
Posts: 6,606
|
Post by askew on Mar 25, 2024 9:54:10 GMT
You gotta stop with those bespoke wooden frames! 😛
|
|
|
Post by rhaegyr on Mar 25, 2024 12:19:09 GMT
I can't get my head around some of these £100k comments.
My brother and his missus have two kids and are manage/are comfortable on less than a 60-70K joint income (albeit in a council house).
Me, the missus and the dog (no kids) have a combined income of around 70K and we're comfortable (even paying for a wedding next year). Mortgage on a 3 bed semi too.
Maybe the north/south cost of living gap is much bigger than I imagined. Or you're all bathing in champagne!
|
|
Tomo
Junior Member
Posts: 3,268
|
Post by Tomo on Mar 25, 2024 12:26:47 GMT
Not able to put away savings on £200k+ combined?! Wow. Where the hell do you live otto? Vancouver?
Give us another 100k and I'd be like a pig in shit.
|
|
mcmonkeyplc
Junior Member
General Martok Qapla!
Posts: 3,019
|
Post by mcmonkeyplc on Mar 25, 2024 12:26:55 GMT
As Frog said, it's not 1 size fits all and it definitely varies by dependents, age of dependents, geography and home ownership. For most people it's the mortgage that's the chain around the neck, for others education fee's, for others care fee's for others it's all of those plus more. Try and get your head around the diversity of peoples lives
|
|
|
Post by Duffking on Mar 25, 2024 12:28:42 GMT
The difference is fucking massive, honestly. But even down south (aside from maybe trying to become a home owner in London?) 100k is plenty to live *comfortably*, BUT, given the percentile of earners that puts you in, I feel like you should be way more comfy at 100k than most people will be.
I think that goes across the board though. The ability to live is just way lower at every salary point than 30 years ago. The percentile I'm in now 30 years ago would have been an absolute piece of piss to get on the housing ladder, but instead we had to save like absolute demons to get a reasonably sized flat with a near 40-year mortgage term with a 10% deposit.
People on 100K+ *should* be very comfortable IMO, and people who earn "just" the average should be able to afford to save for property. I mean, everyone should, but you know.
Seems like the way the world's going the number of people who can feel like the amount of money they have makes life easy just gets squeezed year after year, more and more slide toward poverty, and the Government would rather come up with ways to try and convince us that this is fine and the norm. Wealth used to be something you could work your way into, but now it's just something you might get when your parents die for the most part.
|
|
Tomo
Junior Member
Posts: 3,268
|
Post by Tomo on Mar 25, 2024 12:28:51 GMT
Oh yeah I get that. I'm sure people have the same perspective on my situation.
|
|
|
Post by clemfandango on Mar 25, 2024 12:32:45 GMT
I can't get my head around some of these £100k comments. My brother and his missus have two kids and are manage/are comfortable on less than a 60-70K joint income (albeit in a council house). Me, the missus and the dog (no kids) have a combined income of around 70K and we're comfortable (even paying for a wedding next year). Mortgage on a 3 bed semi too. Maybe the north/south cost of living gap is much bigger than I imagined. Or you're all bathing in champagne! Property prices have a massive impact. We have a 5 bed Victorian terrace in south Manchester. It’s work £650k and that’s pretty cheap compared to some other areas around here. Down south is even more expensive. Me and my wife (plus two kids) have a combined income of around £160k and we never feel like we have any money… Other parts of the country property is dirt cheap.
|
|
|
Post by gamingdave on Mar 25, 2024 12:34:44 GMT
North/South property (price) gap is huge, especially London. I live in North Islington and my rent is 3 times what I paid on my mortgage when I lived in rural Northumberland. And that property was nearly 3 times the size of this one, plus outside space. There are cheaper places in London to live, but when I moved here it was to be near the kids (after a divorce and the mum moving back to London), so had little choice.
I have mates back home who earn half what I earn, but have more money each month after bills, and much more living space (including gardens).
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 845
|
Post by otto on Mar 25, 2024 12:34:51 GMT
Not able to put away savings on £200k+ combined?! Wow. Where the hell do you live otto? Vancouver? High Wycombe. I mean I suppose our case is a bit unusual in that I have to maintain (and travel to) a second residence in Belgium for my work, plus I’m maintaining my ex because courts, and my wife is also exposed to major expenses for similar reasons. I don’t mean to offend anyone, I know we’re very fortunate to earn what we do, and it’s obviously possible to live well on far less, but I don’t think the difference in quality of life is massive at these levels, it’s not lottery winner differences.
|
|
Tomo
Junior Member
Posts: 3,268
|
Post by Tomo on Mar 25, 2024 12:36:11 GMT
Noooo, no offence. Curiosity. Good for you man! Sure you've worked hard for it
|
|
knighty
New Member
Posts: 382
Member is Online
|
Post by knighty on Mar 25, 2024 12:37:05 GMT
Yeah me and the wife are on a combined 90k ish down south. With two kids that’s enough to live comfortably in a rented house (£1375 a month) and start paying off debts (incurred thru the kids for nursery, wife when part time with kids), but certainly not enough to save much for a deposit. And when the debts gone (hopefully within the year!) saving 10k a year will still take us another 3 years at least for a deposit. By which time the wife will be 45 and probably too old for a mortgage. And we do not live particular expensive lives, other than a 3-4k holiday a year.
|
|
Tomo
Junior Member
Posts: 3,268
|
Post by Tomo on Mar 25, 2024 12:39:00 GMT
I remember reading a BBC piece a few years back about some studies where they surveyed people to try and figure out the salary point at which it's diminishing returns for more money vs better quality of life and I think the figure they landed on was £110k salary. I imagine that equivalent value has increased quite a bit in last few years.
|
|
Frog
Full Member
Posts: 7,072
|
Post by Frog on Mar 25, 2024 12:45:07 GMT
Don't forget one person on 100k is £5600 a month. Some of the rents people are paying are 3 grand a month easily in London for a 3 bed. Doesn't take long for that money to start disappearing quickly.
|
|
|
Post by simple on Mar 25, 2024 12:45:38 GMT
Its crazy the disparity when it comes to incomes and living expenses in this country.
We’re on a combined household income of £70k here and we have a three bed, two bathroom house with one kid and aren’t hurting for anything we need. I’m pretty sure my wife’s sister and her partner will be on a combined £40k or less and even they’re homeowners up here in the post-industrial fringe of Northumberland. My brother in Kent is probably on £100k by himself (plus he’s got a partner who has properties she lets) and our place is way bigger than theirs.
Me and Mrs Simple are both at the top of our salary scales too. If I was going to go any higher I’d be looking at moving from a line management grade position into proper departmental level strategic management type position and my wife would be chasing a deputy headship.
|
|
zephro
Junior Member
Posts: 2,857
|
Post by zephro on Mar 25, 2024 12:51:23 GMT
As if on time: www.theguardian.com/society/2024/mar/25/uk-housing-is-worst-value-for-money-of-any-advanced-economy-says-thinktankThe average floor space is 38 sq metre per person... We live in a 46 m^2 flat not near a tube station on the boundary of zone 2 and 3 in London (North Islington). 2 middle aged adults. A quick look around suggests an ex-council flat on the edge of the dodgier (though it's fine nowadays) estate with actually 76 m^2 is 500K, so on a nice leafy street it's more like 700K. My brother and friend's in similar boats but with kids end up paying 2-4K per child per month on nursery (in a lot of cases it wasn't worth the money for the mum to go back to work). You run out of money fast on basic necessities like a roof or childcare. Mme and the wife together how now hit the 100K combined in the last year or so and it's fine, we are saving money for the first time in our lives. But in our 40s and most of that would vanish when we move somewhere that's got bang average floor space. So it doesn't feel terribly luxurious. Or not top 5% of people in the country luxury anyway. I clearly should not have married someone who works in a shop, my fault should have married into money. Like an Edwardian.
|
|
|
Post by simple on Mar 25, 2024 12:59:27 GMT
Childcare is insane. There was a point when my son was in full time nursery where I paid the nursery bill and my wife paid for basically everything else and that made us about even.
|
|
|
Post by Jambowayoh on Mar 25, 2024 13:10:40 GMT
As Frog said, it's not 1 size fits all and it definitely varies by dependents, age of dependents, geography and home ownership. For most people it's the mortgage that's the chain around the neck, for others education fee's, for others care fee's for others it's all of those plus more. Try and get your head around the diversity of peoples lives Indeed for some people 100k is astronomical and for some people it really isn't depending on their circumstances, family make-up, home, area they live, if it's a single earner household. So many permutations. The issue is that how we've gotten to this position where 100k can now be classed as an income range where people can legitimately say they still struggle. That's a fucked up scenario in of itself.
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,140
|
Post by cubby on Mar 25, 2024 13:13:41 GMT
I think the mistake otto and his like are making is taking 100k in salary, when you should be paid in land or stocks for your portfolio and only pay capital gains tax. Silly boy.
|
|
mcmonkeyplc
Junior Member
General Martok Qapla!
Posts: 3,019
|
Post by mcmonkeyplc on Mar 25, 2024 13:18:32 GMT
Childcare is insane. There was a point when my son was in full time nursery where I paid the nursery bill and my wife paid for basically everything else and that made us about even. Also to play the tiniest violin on the planet, people who have a household income of over 100k get absolutely no help in childcare cost, apart from 15 hours a week minimum. Which is fuck all for full time workers.
|
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,400
Member is Online
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Mar 25, 2024 13:21:33 GMT
Y is the population shrinking tho?
|
|
zephro
Junior Member
Posts: 2,857
|
Post by zephro on Mar 25, 2024 13:53:32 GMT
Part of the problem is that "places where you likely get paid 100K" and "places where it's fucking real expensive to live", basically directly correlate. So London, Oxford/Cambridge etc.
Even Manchester where if you were doing well you could move to Didsbury (in the 90s or 00s when I was a student), and tech jobs are growing in Manchester, Didsbury is very much "well good luck with that when a house is 650K".
|
|
|
Post by Bill in the rain on Mar 25, 2024 13:59:58 GMT
I call shenanigans if the average floor space in Japan is bigger than that in the UK!
Of course, the 'average' probably doesn't mean a lot as there are people living in huge palaces in the country and tiny flats in the cities, but I really can't see how that's true.
Even if country homes in Japan were huge, the population is very heavily skewed to living in the big cities, and the apartments in the big cities aren't huge.
Every time I see one of those UK house shows like 'sort your life out' where there is a family living in a house that 'they've clearly outgrown' or 'doesn't have enough space' I always think that in Tokyo that'd be considered huge, and it's about 4 times bigger than where we're living.
Isn't this because people in the UK like old houses and don't really like new ones?
Ask most people to pick between the terraced Edwardian house and the brand new Barratts Homes one and wouldn't most people pick the former?
|
|
|
Post by Whizzo on Mar 25, 2024 14:02:46 GMT
We don't have to pay for Kaiju insurance in the UK either so there is that.
|
|