Income brackets: PERCEPTIONS of low and high?

lostinrates

A staggering 8 years ago I started a thread I found quite interesting about perceptions of income brackets.


This interestingly tied in with the announcement on the 'new' higher rate tax bracket of 50% at 150k.

With the new announcement and discussion here, and some time between there I'm interested to see how PERCEPTION of what people see as high and low is now.

I'm not interested in the figures we know or can google. I'm interested about how we feel and if how we feel has changed in the eight :eek: years. (Also whether my typing has significantly improved:rotfl:)


My op then ran a little like this:


Often I read, and refer myself, to low, middle or high earners. I wonder what other posters mean when posting the same phrase, because I often think we have very different perceptions from each other as a group

I used to feel that the tax guidelines were woefully inadaquate (with high earners starting at 40kish) which in parts of the country is not a lot.

I'd be intersting in comparing this with other posters' perception and finding out what you all class as low/medium/high (super-rich -high?) and if your perception changes when talking about couples rather than individuals (as that often comes up in debate too.) Is high different to super rich-making four categories or inclusive of it?

as a point of discussion does the new high tax ban lead to the definition of the 40k-150k 'middle rate tax payers' as middle earners' ?

[/QUOTE]

AndyGuil

The announcement is by a party that is not in power and is unlikely to be in power. The tax at that rate is silly. It will just reduce the tax intake and just harm jobs.

150k is a lot of money but the job to earn that is only possible to carry out by a few. Average Joe doesn't have the skills or ability to carry out the job. A significant amount of people do aspire and achieve this from nothing. Why hurt this with silly tax levels.

michaels

8 years - doesn't time fly when you are enjoying yourself...

On perceptions, I think it is very hard to get a reasonable view - like it or not we all see those who move in the same circles as us and those who have a high media profile. I think it is very hard for me, for example, to get a feel of just how many people there are who live in the poorer parts of London or most parts outside London. I see lots of well heeled commuters on the Thameslink trains and the semi-detached owning parents at school or my contemporaries from uni and my family which is all nice but hugely unrepresentative of the UK as a whole. I think the media also help to perpetuate a myth of wealth because many journalists come from a similar priviledged background and earn decent London salaries and mix with their slightly left of centre chattering class contemporaries.

And even the data I think is difficult, good data only appears to exist for PAYE so relatively little is known about self employed, directors etc and of course the whole black economy. I used to think I was doing OK, my income puts me in the top 15%(?) of PAYE earners and yet if I instead look at family income we are suddenly only at the median point; and living in a more expensive than average part of the country that probably makes our disposable income considerably below average after housing costs.

Edit: Your typing is definitely better than mine

lostinrates

AndyGuil wrote: »

The announcement is by a party that is not in power and is unlikely to be in power. The tax at that rate is silly. It will just reduce the tax intake and just harm jobs.

150k is a lot of money but the job to earn that is only possible to carry out by a few. Average Joe doesn't have the skills or ability to carry out the job. A significant amount of people do aspire and achieve this from nothing. Why hurt this with silly tax levels.

Andy, I'm specifically interested in perspetion of salaries rather than just the tax band. That other people's gripe. . I'm simply using it as a vehicle FoR discussion of perception of income.

theEnd

For me (and this is London).

Low < 40k
High > 90k

No idea how anyone (even single) can live on < 30k in London.

lostinrates

michaels wrote: »

And even the data I think is diffcult, good data only appears to exist for PAYE so relatively little is known about self employed, directors etc and of course the whole black economy

i think this is an extremely valid point, one we used to refer to more a while ago. I wonder if there is any thing in that thread actually.
. I used to think I was doing OK, my income puts me in the top 15%(?) of paye earners and yet if I instead look at family income we are suddenly only at the median point and living in a more expensive than average part of the country that probably makes our disposable income considerably below average after housing costs.

you're doing alright I think.

lostinrates

theEnd wrote: »

For me (and this is London).

Low < 40k
High > 90k

No idea how anyone (even single) can live on < 30k in London.

Thanks, this is the sort of answer I was sort of hopeful for, along side plenty of (good natured) discussion of course.

AndyGuil

lostinrates wrote: »

Andy, I'm specifically interested in perspetion of salaries rather than just the tax band. That other people's gripe. . I'm simply using it as a vehicle FoR discussion of perception of income.

If you refer to the tax rate then it is going to be discussed as it is giving a suggestion of what is high which effects the neutrality of the question.

Depends where you live and if it is household income. It also depends how many people are being supported (kids etc.). Mine are household and no kids.
Living in London - 35k/120k
Living in South East (working or not working in London) - 25k/80k
Rest of UK - 20k/60k.

lostinrates

AndyGuil wrote: »

If you refer to the tax rate then it is going to be discussed as it is giving a suggestion of what is high which effects the neutrality of the question.

Depends where you live and if it is household income.
Living in London - 35k/120k
Living in South East (working or not working in London) - 25k/80k
Rest of UK - 20k/60k.

I'm quite happy for the conversation to have legs, . The most insightful discussion here is round about I think, but I'd also like to get the initial ground covered if possible! Thanks for coming back!

The depends aspect is exactly the sort of thing I am keen on seeing too.

AndyGuil

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm quite happy for the conversation to have legs, . The most insightful discussion here is round about I think, but I'd also like to get the initial ground covered if possible! Thanks for coming back!

The depends aspect is exactly the sort of thing I am keen on seeing too.

I've update my post.

I think once there are kids and other dependents it can cause these figures to.rise drammatically. A "high earner" on 150k with 4 kids and a partner to support will be worse off than a couple earning 30k each with no dependents.

bugslet

Here in the North West, I would say anything over 60k is high. Under 20 low, but I know a lot of people that earn less than that. What credits etc they may or may not get, I don't know.

I also work in a low wage industry, so that possibly colours my perception. Van drivers aren't going to earn much over 20k, most less. Truck drivers can make around mid-30s, but it's long hours to do so, and a lot are on £7.50 - £8.50 an hour.