The Real Cost of Living in Britain

lostinrates

Soubrette wrote: »

However, sometimes people post statement of affairs with sky, gym, high mobile phones etc and when challenged always have an excuse as to why they can't get rid of them - even though they can't afford them all.

A point often made on MSE and yet never fails to shock me. Recently a friend, who had approached us for a financial favour commented that she ''couldn't'' live like us without sky tv. I was a bit taken aback before rebounding with that I ''couldn't'' live with needing friends to bail me out while I had sky and other luxuries. I don't begrudge helping friends when we can, but I felt a bit...wrong in light of her sky comment.

treliac

lostinrates wrote: »

A point often made on MSE and yet never fails to shock me. Recently a friend, who had approached us for a financial favour commented that she ''couldn't'' live like us without sky tv. I was a bit taken aback before rebounding with that I ''couldn't'' live with needing friends to bail me out while I had sky and other luxuries. I don't begrudge helping friends when we can, but I felt a bit...wrong in light of her sky comment.

Hear hear lir. Unbelievable, what people think they should have, especially when they can't afford it. And they quite obviously think it's a reasonable attitude to hold.

We don't have Sky either...... I'm quite sure my life would be no better if I did.

nicko33

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Leaving aside the extremely poor English [Should be Fewer than....], what about the mathematics?

Surely "50% of the British Population live a less than average lifestyle. The other 50% live a more than average lifestyle"

I disagree.
It shouldn't be "fewer".
You're thinking of median rather than average.

And it's not talking about what percentage of the population lead what lifestyle, it's how many can afford the lifestyle they lead. It's saying that people are leading a lifestyle, but they can't afford it and are getting more and more into debt.

treliac

nicko33 wrote: »

I disagree.
It shouldn't be "fewer".

I agree with you. The 'less' relates to the percentage, not to numbers of people.

nicko33

PasturesNew wrote: »

After I posted that I thought some more and realised that no one person could eat a whole "large cod".

such an innocent

tara747

Dear me, lostinrates, no Sky???????? How can you hold your head up??? Wouldn't you rather give Rupert Murdoch £££ per month than have to admit that you don't have Sky?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You'd think they'd be able to spell council right

"Counsel tax"

Anyway, theres a lot of assumptions in this article. Thankfully, what most are good at is budgeting to their needs, and that's why we can continue. It's probably right, less than 10% probably cannot live the average lifestyle, but I don't believe everyone needs to live that average lifestyle.

For instance, they have added up both running a car, and also a season travel pass for both the husband and wife. I have a car, therefore don't buy a season ticket buss pass! I can't see anyone having a car, and then buying 2x seasonal bus pass's for themselves. They'll either have a car (and 1 pass), or have no car and buy 2 passes. (IMO). Most likely, they'll just have a car and no passes.

Think a lot of things have been merged....i.e. whats average in maybe London with the seasonal bus pass, probably isn't average in say Bath. But they seem to have taken both and added them together.

And £1,195 per annum for one schoolchild to cover uniforms, school lunches and trips sounds overdone. Many of these average families will be getting help with these things. So the cost may be taken into account, but any help seems ignored? So these figures seem to ignore all benefits, and only concentrate on income...whereas most of these people will be getting at LEAST tax credits.

They also assume a 3k holiday budget? I mean, come on!

On saying all that, it's still pretty bleak reading.

Oh dear.... people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones...

drc wrote: »

This article is a load of rubbish.

Firstly, it is not essential to;

a) own a dog
b) have a Sky tv package
c) have a chippy at the end of each week at £20 per pop.

and not having these doesn't say anything about not being able to afford the "average" lifestyle in the UK.

Secondly, as far as I know, it is relatively easy to go bankrupt in this country and after one year you are free to start again. So, the scary term "bankruptcy" doesn't have quite the connotations that it used to have (and its certainly no longer seen as shameful to go bankrupt).

I think that there are so many things wrong with society as a whole these days, most of which can be attributed to peoples attitudes. People have become used to the idea of "entitlement" and "because I am worth it". There is also the whole element of envy that if someone has something that you do not, that you should be entitled to it (even if the other person has worked hard for it and you haven't). The link between hard work, achievement and success has been broken. All must have prizes.

Hear, hear!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I completely agree with those who say that debts must be repaid. Those who have been living beyond their means need to face up to reality. I also agree that the article is a bit rubbish and that the things listed are not 'necessary'.

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

AD9898 wrote: »

Just wait until IRs reach realistic levels again (which they surely will do over a long mortgage period), that along with higher inflation, lower wage inflation will be the killer. I'd suggest with low IRs current lifestyle should be quite good, if it's not and families are burying themselves in the red now, they are likely to be in for a torrid time looking towards the future.

The curse of high house price inflation that has outstripped wage inflation is being nicely masked by low IRs, SLS, banks not repo'ing etc... when this mask falls, the devastation will be like a dam bursting.

People should realise we're living in great times at the moment, certainly compared to what's to come.

Totally agree,I just can't understand how people are getting themselves into trouble with debts while mortgage rates are so low.
We had a mortgage when mortgage rates went up to 15% and we had factored in those rises in our budget before we took the mortgage on,should they ever happen.
It seemed the sensible thing to do since we did'nt want any risk to our home.
I truly believe a lot of people nowadays live in self denial and that is'nt going to help them when reality takes a turn for the worst.

treliac

tara747 wrote: »

I also agree that the article is a bit rubbish and that the things listed are not 'necessary'.

It seems they are for too many.

treliac

MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »

I truly believe a lot of people nowadays live in self denial and that is'nt going to help them when reality takes a turn for the worst.

Although it's fair to say people made the decisions for themselves, I think it's also fair to say that greedy banks and building societies were all too willing to throw money at them. It must have been easy to believe you could afford it it you were offered loans so easily and could see yourself acquiring all the things you desired.

I don't understand how the financial institutions didn't see that this would happen. Or didn't they really care? They're unlikely to lose out in the long run and, if they are not properly regulated, my fear is that what goes around could come around again.

We are all having to pay to get through this mess, including the next generation who deserve a better start to life.

anna25071970

PasturesNew wrote: »

Does it really cost £20 for fish/chips for a family of 4? For starters you'd never ask for 4 bags of chips, you'd get "a large portion of chips" and share it.

Personally I'd cry if I had to spend £20 on that when I could have (laziest scenario) picked up a big bag of good frozen chips at the supermarket for £1 and a box of 4 good looking fish in batter for probably £4-6, then popped to the peas aisle for a couple of top brand mushy peas (40p/can = 80p). Thus saving at least £12.

In our local chippy (which does free delivery over £7 to boot), you can get a large cod in batter for £3.50 (enough for 2 people), large chips for £1.80 (enough for 2 people), pickled onions x 4 = (40p) so for 4 people, total of = £11.00 delivered (and that is in London!).

If they are spending £20 for fish and chips they must be getting it served in goldleaf or something .