Income brackets: PERCEPTIONS of low and high?

ukcarper

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm sorry, I am finding your post a little hard to follow.


I do agree gen's post is very key though.

I'd be surprised if any one on an above average salary could not live opn less, but they might have to make considerable sacrifices.

We could live on less. However DH could not continue to provide for him self doing the job he does and filling his requirements for that job on the average salary, for example. He could however, ditch that job, and we could croft some where. We'd have to change lifestyle considerably, but it would be possible.

All I'm saying is that even though his job involves costs the salary is high never the less. There are always cost involved in working and proportionately these could be just as high if not higher for someone lower down the pay scale for example and season ticket from the commuter belt is the same no matter what you earn.

lostinrates

Tancred wrote: »

I cannot possibly comment without knowing what your DH does for a living and knowing where you live. However, if, for the purpose of argument, your DH is a partner in a firm of City accountants, he could always find a good accounting role in a small country practice near (or nearer) where you live, could he not? He would have to take a pay cut but he would have much less commuting and possibly also find the job less stressful and more enjoyable.

As you say, you cannot possibly comment without understanding the nature of what he does.....:D

Tancred

lostinrates wrote: »

Interesting, so you conclude that my posts are from one perspective? That's interesting.

AAMOI I do wonder what you conclude non discretional spending includes for me.....and what it doesn't:)

I couldn't possibly comment.

lostinrates

ukcarper wrote: »

All I'm saying is that even though his job involves costs the salary is high never the less. There are always cost involved in working and proportionately these could be just as high if not higher for someone lower down the pay scale for example and season ticket from the commuter belt is the same no matter what you earn.

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

Yes, I agree, the season ticket is the same. Perhaps the outfitting requirements might not be for example. Or the things that cost money but are convenient because of the huge number of hours worked in a week which are less common (though not unheard of) in lower pay scales. . For example, DH doesn't often have time to make a packed lunch AND go to the gym. He never has time to do a full shop. Nor the ability to plan for one, because he doesn't know when he'll be working or not. Lack of ability to organise proves quite a frustration and cost.

Tancred

mouche wrote: »

7.5 years ago when we my husband and I moved to the UK, our combined income was 24K less than it is now. However, we now have a house, a child and a car. I wouldn't say we are worse off than we were then, but we aren't a great deal better off either. We still watch every penny and we save hard but still can't save as much as we used to.

As others have said on this thread, I think low/ medium/ high perceptions will depend on so many factors but most especially on expenses. However, for a family like ours, in London, I would say combined family income:

Very Low: under £30K
Low: £ £30K - £60K
Medium: £60K - £100K
High: over £100K

For London these figures are probably fairly accurate when looking at combined income, though I would say medium starts lower, around £50k. For somewhere like Birmingham or Manchester I would say £60k combined is certainly not at the low end of medium.

Tancred

lostinrates wrote: »

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

Yes, I agree, the season ticket is the same. Perhaps the outfitting requirements might not be for example. Or the things that cost money but are convenient because of the huge number of hours worked in a week which are less common (though not unheard of) in lower pay scales. . For example, DH doesn't often have time to make a packed lunch AND go to the gym. He never has time to do a full shop. Nor the ability to plan for one, because he doesn't know when he'll be working or not. Lack of ability to organise proves quite a frustration and cost.

I don't take a packed lunch, I fork out £6-7 a day on the awful rubbish at the staff canteen. My wife, who earns about half of my wage but is a lot more sensible than me, takes a packed lunch. As for food shopping, it always tends to be a delivery from Ocado. We also use Amazon and eBay a lot for other stuff.

CKhalvashi

Generali wrote: »

As for self-employed? Net profit minus net investment in capital goods and stock plus wages and dividends paid to owners would be the calculation I guess. Something like that.

Taking into account the potential risk if things go wrong.

What I have is worth nothing compared to that factor.

lostinrates

Tancred wrote: »

I don't take a packed lunch, I fork out £6-7 a day on the awful rubbish at the staff canteen. My wife, who earns about half of my wage but is a lot more sensible than me, takes a packed lunch. As for food shopping, it always tends to be a delivery from Ocado. We also use Amazon and eBay a lot for other stuff.

Deliveries just aren't a possibility on an unpredictable work schedule . I however love them

( cannot you at least buy a nicer sandwich from somewhere)

_Ed

It's quite an interesting thread really. It’s amazing how your own perceptions change as your circumstances do…

I started work 10 years ago as an engineering graduate from a good University with a pretty respectable starting salary of 25K. I felt comfortable, but by no means rich and thought you'd need 40K to start to really feel well off.

When my earnings reached 40K, I still felt comfortable but 60K became the magic threshold for well off in my head.

Ten years on and married with a little one, my wife and I have a combined gross of around ~150K including bonuses (this is in London - with the earnings split pretty evenly between us). In my head this sounds like an enormous sum of money, completely unimaginable to my 23 year old self.

I suspect lots of people would consider us rich - imagining we live an opulent lifestyle with copious spending on extravagant luxuries. When I was on 25K, I know I would have imagined that.

In reality, our lifestyle is pretty modest… we definitely feel comfortable, but certainly not rich. To give you an idea we've just bought a terraced house in South London. This isn't somewhere flashy; it’s a 3 bed terrace in a modest area for around 3x joint salary.

With the new addition to the family we've just got a car - second hand for a grand.

As a little extravagance to help my wife, and so I don’t have to spend my weekends cleaning when I’d rather be playing with the little one, we have just decided to get a cleaner in for 2-3hrs a week.

This weekend I'll be up on the roof fixing the leak (weather permitting) – certainly not perusing designer shops or out on the golf course.

And our main holiday last year was to Sicily, which was lovely, but certainly not exotic by modern standards.

Of course, that leaves us with spare cash to put aside each month.... but even then perceptions of savings change with time. Ten years ago a 15K savings pot would have been huge. Now it's contingency to have the roof redone if my dodgy repairs aren’t up to the job ;-)

Obviously we’re in a very fortunate position – we are very well off and could spend more if we chose to. However, our perception is that even with our income, it doesn't feel like there’s money sloshing round to be wasted. It’s certainly not lifestyles of the rich and the famous.

I'm always amazed when I head back to see my parents up north where salaries are significantly lower and yet I see new BMW’s and Merc’s everywhere. I really don’t understand how people can afford it. Of course, how they spend their money is their choice.

I now suspect to feel really rich I’d need to earn millions. Of course, to a family bringing in 20K a year, 150K would probably feel like millions to them.

lostinrates

Thanks ed. I appreciate your well thought out contribution.

I agreed, it IS interesting.