A new hard working class in society caught in a trap.

SingleSue

ILW wrote: »

What areas are these? eg most of London is very expensive and high crime. I think many do get a bit carried away with the idea that some areas are unsafe to live in.

We used to live in a close which had a very bad reputation and to say we were a little eek about moving there is an understatement.

Very quickly though, we realised that it had been misrepresented as the close was lovely, the community great, there was no violence or theft or neighbours from hell and everyone looked out for each other.

It still had the reputation of not being very nice though......purely because it was social housing.

Percy1983

I will say there is cheap areas around me where I wouldn't feel safe walking about, I will add in said areas my brother has been mugged for 3.80 and a £10 mobile phone, I have had one attempted theft of my car, my other half car has had her car radio stolen, her car vandelised (2 seperate events) and had a handbag stolen (while it was on her shoulder). That is in the last 4 years alone, would you want a be walking around with your child in such areas?

ILW

Percy1983 wrote: »

I will say there is cheap areas around me where I wouldn't feel safe walking about, I will add in said areas my brother has been mugged for 3.80 and a £10 mobile phone, I have had one attempted theft of my car, my other half car has had her car radio stolen, her car vandelised (2 seperate events) and had a handbag stolen (while it was on her shoulder). That is in the last 4 years alone, would you want a be walking around with your child in such areas?

I used to live in a very expensive village in Kent about 15 miles from London. Had more car break-ins and minor vandalism there than anywhere I have lived since, including some parts of SE London with pretty poor reputations. You can get mugged absolutely anywhere and the cost of local property bears no relation to the level of risk.

Percy1983

Yes there is a chance of crime anywhere as nowhere is immune, but there is areas with a lot higher levels of crime than others so its about playing the odds. If unlucky you could be the 1 person in a nice area who gets there car stolen, if lucky you could be the one person in a bad area who hasn't had there car stolen (yes I know extreme examples).

twirlypinky

I would love to be a sahm when the time comes, but i take home little under double what the oh does, so he'll be a sahd and I'll weep every morning when i leave for work.

As it is I'm working 45 hours a week and he's often working 50 as we scrabble to get a deposit together.

In the Halifax on saturday i asked about 90% mortgages and the lady just shook her head and said "only if you're a FTB". We're not, we're also trying to clear oh's negative equity.


Someone on another thread said that we should stop trying to profit out of our house and think of it as a home, whch is all well and good. We're happy to not make a profit, it's making a loss that is kicking us in the teeth. Halifax are refusing to even give us a rate to change h2b's mortgage to a repayment one

Jowo_2

ukcarper wrote: »

I’m just sitting here waiting for a delivery so I logged on to entitledto and calculated income of someone not working and someone earning £15k a year. Both with two children 5 and 7 and rent of £750 a month. Non worker £433 a week including all benefits worker £508 pay + benefits.

Good example. The £75 difference you identified is larger than I expected. Percentages aren't my forte but I think this means the person working is 17% better off?

It means that someone working 35 hours per week may feel they are being paid the equivalent of £2.18 for their labour, plus the aggravation of arranging child care, plus the expense of travelling to work, plus missing seeing their kids for long periods, compared with a stay at home parent.

Batchy

Jowo wrote: »

Good example. The £75 difference you identified is larger than I expected. Percentages aren't my forte but I think this means the person working is 17% better off?

It means that someone working 35 hours per week may feel they are being paid the equivalent of £2.18 for their labour, plus the aggravation of arranging child care, plus the expense of travelling to work, plus missing seeing their kids for long periods, compared with a stay at home parent.

Exactly... hardly worth the hassle...

You could earn that delivering Avon mags, and being a representative! with kids in tow, working when you like!

silvercar

Batchy wrote: »

Exactly... hardly worth the hassle...

You could earn that delivering Avon mags, and being a representative! with kids in tow, working when you like!

But then you wouldn't be claiming to have no income, would you?

Non worker £433 a week including all benefits worker £508 pay + benefits.

Plus the promotion prospects. The pattern to your life. The self esteem.

Batchy

If I never worked, or my partner never worked we would be that worse off. So its a no brainer, we will continue to work full time where possible.

I love working and getting out of the house. Not many think like this, this mindset will never change as my career is still in growth phase! So I believe I have plenty to look forward to!

ukcarper

I suppose it all depends on your outlook, but if you have just £200 a week disposable income an extra £75 could make quite a difference. Also you have the chance of progressing up the pay scale but the effective tax rate will be high as they withdraw your benefits in line with your increased salary.