Income brackets: PERCEPTIONS of low and high?

chewmylegoff

Tancred wrote: »

So what exactly is the point of this thread? The facts prove that the average salary is either £26.5k or £31k, depending on whether you choose to go for median or mean average. The readers of this forum are disproportionately highly paid, quite wealthy individuals by comparison with the population at large. Many people hardly ever use the internet, and would also not be interested in economic debates - this does not lessen their importance. The rich perceive only people at their class level. If you asked the Duke of Westminster what he perceives as 'middle income' he would probably come up with £15M a year.

The national averages are largely irrelevant because the geographical location that the earnings are received in makes an enormous difference to whether that income is high or low (and indeed what the actual income is as a family with salaried income of say £10k in London may be receiving another £20k on top of that in largely untaxed benefits which are equivalent to additional gross earnings before tax of nearly £30k - so the standard of living that can be achieved from that household income of £10k is far different to a single 18 year old living in an HMO in Skegness earning the same £10k).

Still, I agree with you that someone earning £1m a year (gross) is far more than comfortable, wherever they live (and if they aren't they have just made unsustainable choices).

Prothet_of_Doom

lostinrates wrote: »

Are there houses being sold that suggest personal incomes above these limits? Any business owners for example living ion the nw of England? any leading public sector jobs?
Successful large farms ?


It seems to me impossible that a whole region of England is 'low paid'while totally plausible that we all experience a lot of confirmation bias ) which brings it back to a perception of pay and wealth.

Is there any way realistically for people, not individuals interested in this, but a majority of people, to make informed judgments LESS coloured by perception, (and I think this touches ALL of us) ? Can there ever be a summation of situation not impacted by our perception? I cannot quite imagine how that would work?

I live in an afluent middle class dormitary town north of Liverpool L37. House prices are higher here than other areas, and there are a few Roads where you'd need £1m plus to live, so there are Football players and CEO's and the like (John Moore (RIP) of the littlewoods empire, John Toshak, Steven Gerrard, Mr E Hughes (RIP) etc)

Most houses start at £200K, but the 4 bed detached house my parents owned when I was 9, (and was 1.5 x joint income for a teacher and an engineer), recently changed hands for £400K. Typically a 4 bed detached would be £350K to £500K

So I'm guessing that yes, there are people with high incomes.

What I have noticed from the cheap end of town is that gradually the cheaper semi's which start at about £170K are getting snapped up by BTL investors, and most are rented by young families who want to live in 'nice' area. Typical rents are 50% higher than other areas in Merseyside

Halle71

Tancred wrote: »

LOL!!! :rotfl:

You are coming up with totally unrealistic choices. You don't have to live in a multimillion pound house in London - you can live perfectly comfortably in a very nice house in the country. And you don't need a yacht. I'm focusing on what you need to live reasonably well, not wallow in luxury. And your job will become irrelevant because you will have retired - and have all the time in the world to do anything you wanted to.
It seems to me that your greed knows no limits. People like you will never be satisfied - much like the leading character in the 'Wolf of Wall Street'.

Wow, the tone of this thread has suddenly changed!
Wolf of Wall Street eh? I'm a knackered mum of a baby and 4 year old, I shop at Lidl, wear Gap and go out once every couple of months with my friends. We eat out a couple of times a week and have a cleaner which is as luxurious as our life gets. No coke or hookers in sight.

So I'm greedy am I? If greedy is wanting to provide for your kids and plan for your old age then yes, guilty as charged.
As I made clear in my initial post about windfalls/giving up work, this is going off on a bit of a tangent to the original question and totally pie in the sky since I don't participate in any lottery etc. I actually started this line of questioning (what sort of windfall would it take for you to leave work?) and, although the yacht was tongue in cheek, there was meant to be a little room for luxuries.

And as for not being happy with what I've got, I am very happy thank you. We are financially secure and the kids are healthy and happy in lovely schools/nursery. We are very fortunate.

And FYI, a million pounds would buy you a lovely but modest 3 bed, 90 m2, terrace house in Clapham or Balham close to decent schools. In fact, if you moved our house three miles down the road it would be worth circa £1M - I'm not talking a mansion in Knightsbridge or Chelsea.

And yes, we could move out and get more for our money but then we wouldn't be near our friends and what would be the point of all that free time? So no, I would buy an amazing house if I won a million and invest some for the kids, but would still work in some format.

lostinrates

Halle71 wrote: »

In the area we would want to live (SW London) modest 3/4 bed terraces are circa £1M so there would be nothing left for bills. Or yachts :rotfl: We may also move to NZ where my partner is from so no NHS etc and even visiting NZ costs us £4.5k each year now we are restricted to school hols.

I guess the £5M thing is because, once I am out of my job for a few years, my skills would be null and void so there would be no chance of going back to work. If we ever need to help kids out, need private healthcare or schooling it just seems limiting. Of course I will never earn that in my lifetime so you're right, but it's my perception of £5M FOREVER

'X' (say five million) compared to earnings in life time for a professional couple in their early thirties might not just be in 'income' but in pension accruing value, their home increasing in value, and of course, who knows what inflation will do to a lump sum. While interest and canny investment might see it grow, a poor investment choice, poor interest rates etc aren't that great for a lump sum.





IMO there are other benefits to remaining in employment any way that when related to cash lump sum terms are worth quite a lot.

lostinrates

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

I live in an afluent middle class dormitary town north of Liverpool L37. House prices are higher here than other areas, and there are a few Roads where you'd need £1m plus to live, so there are Football players and CEO's and the like (John Moore (RIP) of the littlewoods empire, John Toshak, Steven Gerrard, Mr E Hughes (RIP) etc)

Most houses start at £200K, but the 4 bed detached house my parents owned when I was 9, (and was 1.5 x joint income for a teacher and an engineer), recently changed hands for £400K. Typically a 4 bed detached would be £350K to £500K

So I'm guessing that yes, there are people with high incomes.

What I have noticed from the cheap end of town is that gradually the cheaper semi's which start at about £170K are getting snapped up by BTL investors, and most are rented by young families who want to live in 'nice' area. Typical rents are 50% higher than other areas in Merseyside

Thanks for expanding prophet of doom .

lostinrates

Halle71 wrote: »

Wow, the tone of this thread has suddenly changed!
Wolf of Wall Street eh? I'm a knackered mum of a baby and 4 year old, I shop at Lidl, wear Gap and go out once every couple of months with my friends. We eat out a couple of times a week and have a cleaner which is as luxurious as our life gets. No coke or hookers in sight.

So I'm greedy am I? If greedy is wanting to provide for your kids and plan for your old age then yes, guilty as charged.
As I made clear in my initial post about windfalls/giving up work, this is going off on a bit of a tangent to the original question and totally pie in the sky since I don't participate in any lottery etc. I actually started this line of questioning (what sort of windfall would it take for you to leave work?) and, although the yacht was tongue in cheek, there was meant to be a little room for luxuries.

And as for not being happy with what I've got, I am very happy thank you. We are financially secure and the kids are healthy and happy in lovely schools/nursery. We are very fortunate.

And FYI, a million pounds would buy you a lovely but modest 3 bed, 90 m2, terrace house in Clapham or Balham close to decent schools. In fact, if you moved our house three miles down the road it would be worth circa £1M - I'm not talking a mansion in Knightsbridge or Chelsea.

And yes, we could move out and get more for our money but then we wouldn't be near our friends and what would be the point of all that free time? So no, I would buy an amazing house if I won a million and invest some for the kids, but would still work in some format.

Halle, please know that I as to OP appreciate your replies. I'm really sorry you feel got at. I cannot apologise enough, but obviously I cannot control other people's replies, just keep asking for courtesy. In the main it has been really courteous though, and some really interesting ideas have been put forward.



I think the idea you raise about the carer break for parent hood impacting on earning and your profession is also impactful, not things every parent (I,m slightly tempted to write mother) has to face if they have a choice or not to stay at home.

The costs of getting back into a career or retraining in a new field can be significant but portfolio careers are pretty 'standard' now. Though definitely risk an impact on earnings.

Prothet_of_Doom

Tancred wrote: »

So what exactly is the point of this thread? The facts prove that the average salary is either £26.5k or £31k, depending on whether you choose to go for median or mean average. .

A statistian would tell you to use median, as the tail end of the normal distribution is so long and flat, and tends to infinity, and the other end is truncated by benefits.

Either that or do a mean average, with data removed for anyone over say £150K

Mathematically if you have 1 person earning 100Million, and 22,000 people earning 26500, the average is 31K and the median is 26500

Tancred

Halle71 wrote: »

And FYI, a million pounds would buy you a lovely but modest 3 bed, 90 m2, terrace house in Clapham or Balham close to decent schools. In fact, if you moved our house three miles down the road it would be worth circa £1M - I'm not talking a mansion in Knightsbridge or Chelsea.

And yes, we could move out and get more for our money but then we wouldn't be near our friends and what would be the point of all that free time? So no, I would buy an amazing house if I won a million and invest some for the kids, but would still work in some format.

I think this statement says it all. It encapsulates all that is wrong with this country. The Boden set, like you, and people living in council estates not far from you, could be living on different planets. I fear for the future of this country with class divisions so brutally set out. I remember a programme - on channel 4 I believe - where people of different classes were forced to exchange families for a week or two. Only in Britain could something like this happen and end up as a hilarious comedy.

Tancred

chewmylegoff wrote: »

The national averages are largely irrelevant because the geographical location that the earnings are received in makes an enormous difference to whether that income is high or low (and indeed what the actual income is as a family with salaried income of say £10k in London may be receiving another £20k on top of that in largely untaxed benefits which are equivalent to additional gross earnings before tax of nearly £30k - so the standard of living that can be achieved from that household income of £10k is far different to a single 18 year old living in an HMO in Skegness earning the same £10k).

Still, I agree with you that someone earning £1m a year (gross) is far more than comfortable, wherever they live (and if they aren't they have just made unsustainable choices).

I'm not disagreeing with you - valid point. However I was referring to salaries and not to household income, which is another statistic altogether, because it includes benefits.

Tancred

tomterm8 wrote: »

Er, if we were required to have a point to a thread a fair few threads I've started on the board would never have existed. I'd have probably been banned years ago:D

Lostinrates posted the thread because she was interested in what people perceive, not necessarily in the actual facts. Differences between perceptions and facts can be interesting in themselves.

Interesting in confirming that the great majority of people using this forum are very well heeled, but not much else.