Income brackets: PERCEPTIONS of low and high?

lostinrates

ukcarper wrote: »

I think that your own perception is directly related to your income and the incomes of the people you know. People often say it is impossible to live on less that £50k in London yet 75% of people working full time in London earn less than that. I would consider £60k a very good salary and less than £20k low, high I find harder but say £75k.

It certainly is possible to live on less. DH does five days a week on a portion of his income.
( edit, not in way we would choose to live as our sole lifestyle or longterm option mind you)


But of course, the 75per ent earning less than 50k are probably not ALL living off just their salary. Some will be in two salary house holds. Some will be entitled to tax or family credits, etc etc etc .


Salary and take home, as tancred pointed out earlier in the tax context, are not necessarily the same thing. While he was considering it in a negative context, for some its a positive one.

Jaybo10

We live in London and have a household income of ~£80k.

I feel this is middle income territory for this part of the world. However, my perception changes depending on where I am and what I am doing.

I come from a relatively poor background and I have earned what I consider a 'low' salary for most of my working life (I was on 20-23k just over 4 years ago. I quit and changed career and now earn more then double that amount.

I feel lucky to earn the amount I do and I am now a home owner which 5/6 years ago I though was impossible - this, even though it is 'debt' makes me feel that I earn a middle income or more.

We also do not have children so I have much more expendable cash then others, again making me feel the benefits of our salaries.

However the moment I am with people who have either a noticeable higher salary then me or those who made much better financial decisions then me when they were younger, I feel our income is not so great.

Even after typing this I am not sure this is what I mean. I want stuff other people have (fancy clothes/exotic holidays/ new car blah blah) I see people with this and assume they can afford it/they have more money then me. I also discount the fact I too could choose to have this however we decide to spend our money in different ways. Nevertheless the envy makes me feel I do not earn as much as I think.

I am waffling now!

I often define 'rich' in my head as someone who does not have to worry about bills.

So for London my perception is

Low up to £25/30k

Middle 30k-100k

High 100k-2/300k

Superhigh anything above that

ukcarper

lostinrates wrote: »

It certainly is possible to live on less. DH does five days a week on a portion of his income.

But of course, the 75per ent earning less than 50k are probably not ALL living off just their salary. Some will be in two salary house holds. Some will be entitled to tax or family credits, etc etc etc .


Salary and take home, as tancred pointed out earlier in the tax context, are not necessarily the same thing. While he was considering it in a negative context, for some its a positive one.

Possibly not but then that is people in full time work also a large number of people who work in London commute. I worked in London and had a family income of less than £50k and consider I have had a reasonable life.

It would be interesting to see what how much money people though you needed after housing costs to have a reasonable life.
.

lostinrates

Jaybo10 wrote: »

We live in London and have a household income of ~£80k.

I feel this is middle income territory for this part of the world. However, my perception changes depending on where I am and what I am doing.

I come from a relatively poor background and I have earned what I consider a 'low' salary for most of my working life (I was on 20-23k just over 4 years ago. I quit and changed career and now earn more then double that amount.

I feel lucky to earn the amount I do and I am now a home owner which 5/6 years ago I though was impossible - this, even though it is 'debt' makes me feel that I earn a middle income or more.

We also do not have children so I have much more expendable cash then others, again making me feel the benefits of our salaries.

However the moment I am with people who have either a noticeable higher salary then me or those who made much better financial decisions then me when they were younger, I feel our income is not so great.

Even after typing this I am not sure this is what I mean. I want stuff other people have (fancy clothes/exotic holidays/ new car blah blah) I see people with this and assume they can afford it/they have more money then me. I also discount the fact I too could choose to have this however we decide to spend our money in different ways. Nevertheless the envy makes me feel I do not earn as much as I think.

I am waffling now!

I often define 'rich' in my head as someone who does not have to worry about bills.

So for London my perception is

Low up to £25/30k

Middle 30k-100k

High 100k-2/300k

Superhigh anything above that

This isn't waffle at all, its a wonderful answer, thank you. I really appreciate the time and thought you have put I to it.

PlymouthMaid

In the South-West here and my own 'perception' is that low earner is under £20 grand, middle 20-30 and high anything over 30 thousand. I suspect that the modal values down here would be in the low -low/middle bracket.

lostinrates

ukcarper wrote: »

Possibly not but then that is people in full time work also a large number of people who work in London commute. I worked in London and had a family income of less than £50k and consider I have had a reasonable life.

It would be interesting to see what how much money people though you needed after housing costs to have a reasonable life.
.

My experience was that we actually lived really cheaply in London. But we lived very centrally.

There is lots and lots to do for free in London, you can do something everyday spending no money. This is not the same outside london at all.

We were also lucky that we were often invited to lots and had a large social circle of wonderful, dynamic people. I do miss London and easy access to it a lot at times.

moneyistooshorttomention

lostinrates wrote: »

Some will be entitled to tax or family credits, etc etc etc .

That's also a VERY relevant point...ie that some people get their own personal choices subsidised by the State (ie the rest of us) in the form of things like "family credits"/other forms of "payment for having children"/etc.

A totally objective viewpoint says "Just why should some people get subsidised for THEIR personal financial choices, whilst others don't?" but I've often "banged my head against that particular financial wall" and got more than a little fed-up with the self-justification that comes back from those benefitting from having THEIR own "personal financial choices" subsidised whilst others don't:(

Hence...a realistic take on income imo includes ALL income (both earned income and whatever-the-State-dishes-out to subsidise "OWN personal financial choices").

lostinrates

PlymouthMaid wrote: »

In the South-West here and my own 'perception' is that low earner is under £20 grand, middle 20-30 and high anything over 30 thousand. I suspect that the modal values down here would be in the low -low/middle bracket.

What about when you consider weekender zones of the southwest? The Cornish resorts? Boden-eqsue Dorset and places round Bath for example?

ukcarper

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

That's also a VERY relevant point...ie that some people get their own personal choices subsidised by the State (ie the rest of us) in the form of things like "family credits"/other forms of "payment for having children"/etc.

A totally objective viewpoint says "Just why should some people get subsidised for THEIR personal financial choices, whilst others don't?" but I've often "banged my head against that particular financial wall" and got more than a little fed-up with the self-justification that comes back from those benefitting from having THEIR own "personal financial choices" subsidised whilst others don't:(

Hence...a realistic take on income imo includes ALL income (both earned income and whatever-the-State-dishes-out to subsidise "OWN personal financial choices").

I agree that all income should be taken into account but many people would not be able to live and work in London without the benefits they receive and without these people the city would grind to a halt. The choice as I see it is pay these people a living wage or keep paying benefits you will pay either way unless the companies employing them are prepared to take a cut in their profits.

moneyistooshorttomention

lostinrates wrote: »

What about when you consider weekender zones of the southwest? The Cornish resorts? Boden-eqsue Dorset and places round Bath for example?

I would say that's totally irrelevant personally.

The only people to be taken into account income-wise in a low-paid part of the country (ie the south-west in this case) are those who actually live there...ie REALLY live there. Meaning have their primary and ONLY home there and have to earn their primary and ONLY income there.

Second Home-Owners don't count in this equation...because they don't actually "belong" there iyswim.

If someone isn't "taking the rough with the smooth" then they aren't a "local" imo and I don't understand why anyone would think they might "come into the equation" personally.

I have been on the receiving end personally of people from "higher income areas" moving into a low wage area and upping the "cost of living" for locals as a result. It's a distinctly sore spot...