Handy little website courtesy of the IFS - "Where do you fit in"?

lostinrates

Really2 wrote: »

I agree I think a few may have put down earnings not income. (to be fair when you start it it is not that clear, but I always class income as after tax)

Aha, it depends what the debate is whether I do or not! What is certainly true is that its only the bit after tx that really matters.

Jacka87

I agree that there are probably lots of people who put pretax numbers into it. however that does not explain why I am sitting in around 85% mark. That states that I am better off than 85% of the UK population. Or the other way is in the 80-89% bracket. So in other words if you take 10 people and get there details, assuming I was one of those people then only 1 person should be beter off than me! Nonesense!

As I said, the average UK salary is often reported to be around 23-24k pa. now obviouslly that will be taking a dent in a recession etc as wll as the fact that the numbers will be skewed by the mega high earners like footballers etc. So on that basis maybe should come in just above average as my salary is hitting the uk average mark. However my gf earns less than the average so that should pull us back down a bit. Still had it cane out between 50-70 thats 2 whole bands I would have said fair enough. But to come out at around 85% nonesense. I am the bottom of the food chain at work so thats a couple of thousand people ahead of me already! lol

mbga9pgf

Hey hamish, are you going to ignore my post on the affordability thread much longer?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=24478149&postcount=103

Or are you going to carry on round pretending that official stats are wrong and carry on making your own up?

mbga9pgf

Jacka87 wrote: »

I agree that there are probably lots of people who put pretax numbers into it. however that does not explain why I am sitting in around 85% mark. That states that I am better off than 85% of the UK population. Or the other way is in the 80-89% bracket. So in other words if you take 10 people and get there details, assuming I was one of those people then only 1 person should be beter off than me! Nonesense!

As I said, the average UK salary is often reported to be around 23-24k pa. now obviouslly that will be taking a dent in a recession etc as wll as the fact that the numbers will be skewed by the mega high earners like footballers etc. So on that basis maybe should come in just above average as my salary is hitting the uk average mark. However my gf earns less than the average so that should pull us back down a bit. Still had it cane out between 50-70 thats 2 whole bands I would have said fair enough. But to come out at around 85% nonesense. I am the bottom of the food chain at work so thats a couple of thousand people ahead of me already! lol

Jack, remember, there are a lot of families out there that dont earn a wage, who are completely economically inactive yet show in their stats. Doesnt alter the fact these families are included in the total number of families stats which the bulls spout so regularly as a reason why house prices are not going down (when actually they will be crashing again by this time next year!)

Jacka87

Just thought I should say that 58% of money savers, who replied in the poll at time of me writing this post, are in the top 20% of the UK population.

So that either makes money savers very well off people or the calculation is flawed!

I have my guess written down already....

mbga9pgf

How many prole, low earners are interested in posting on a forum discussing economics?

The calculation isnt flawed, its published by the IFS !!!!!!!

Really2

Working population is what around 30 million.

So in reality the top 20% would only be around 12 million households. (looks like top 20% for a single is around £35,000 per year before tax)

That would sort of go along with how many earn over the average wage.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Hey hamish, are you going to ignore my post on the affordability thread much longer?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=24478149&postcount=103

Or are you going to carry on round pretending that official stats are wrong and carry on making your own up?

Typical of you crashaholics to ignore the content of an entire thread on the subject, and then continue being ignorant.

I'm beginning to suspect it's just wilful ignorance though,. more cherry picking from the bears.

An excellent illustration of why the old fashioned measurement of house prices to earnings is so irrelevant in todays post ERM low rate environment.

The graph on the left is the traditional salary/price one.

The graph on the right is the percentage of disposable income allocated to mortgage payments.

In 1990, at the peak of the last boom, almost 70% of disposable income was allocated to mortgage payments. Whereas at the peak of this boom in 2007, only 46% of disposable income was allocated to mortgage funding, and today it has dropped to only 39%.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

mbga9pgf wrote: »

How many prole, low earners are interested in posting on a forum discussing economics?

The calculation isnt flawed, its published by the IFS !!!!!!!

The calculation isnt flawed, it just completely irrelevant to house prices.

It includes millions of people on benefits, in council houses and pensioners.

You may just as well have included the income of children from pocket money and used that to claim proces were too high!!!!:rolleyes:

System

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It includes millions of people on benefits, in council houses and pensioners.

Hadn't thought of that.

Is there a version that strips all those people out?