Nice People Thread Number 11 - A Treasury of Nice People

PasturesNew

lostinrates wrote: »

M'eh....do you want the long version of why not or the short one? Hmm, ultimately Either way the answer is, I don't think so ATM.

I hate starting threads, that creates a liability to have to continually return and "thank" or respond.

Ferk that

... especially as it'll be pounced on by "all the usual suspects" until it gets ridiculous and off topic... and all the other nonsense.

LydiaJ

PasturesNew wrote: »

Can't find it yet, they keep running it on the Breakfast show about wealth in Britain.

e.g. some snippets I remember:

1/4 of people have no pension
7% of people have a private number plate
11% have a second home

If I can find it it could end up as an NP "I've got that/not got that" comparison if we CBA.

Looks like a spin off and infographic compiled from this type of report: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2629227/Revealed-How-Britains-richest-families-HALF-countrys-household-wealth-1-10-people-call-millionaire.html

Tried to read the article, but couldn't swallow any more after this piece of statistical misunderstanding:

The figures also reveal that education is becoming more important to becoming a millionaire as in 2006-07, only 16 per cent of graduates were worth more than £1million.

Thanks anyway, PN.

PasturesNew wrote: »

That says "One in five graduates who hold at least one university degree go on to become a millionaire" - so there are more than 5 of you guys here with a degree, which of you are the secret millionaires??

You mean which of us will eventually become the secret millionaires, I think.

My dad's probably worth a million or so. I don't know that for sure, but I would guess so. His house is worth pushing £600k, and his physical and financial assets probably total more than £400k. He didn't get there overnight, though. Money was very very tight when I was little. He would only have got to the million as an individual at the age of 85. My parents as a couple maybe got to a million or so in their 70s, what with massive HPI and inheriting from their parents on both sides. Before that, nowhere near. They paid £2400 for the house in 1959.

PasturesNew

lostinrates wrote: »

.... live where we work and cut our cloth to get jobs in distance of other travel.

The trouble is that the closer to most jobs you live, the more the housing costs. I lived in the villages when I was younger as it was cheaper than living in the town. And jobs aren't always in towns, or on bus routes. I've rarely worked where there was a bus route.

We're supposed to "try to get on" which means looking further afield for jobs. Then, when you've not got a job, you need to find jobs to apply for, which tend to not be where you are living right now.

If one could get a job and keep it it's possible, over time, to move closer.... but if you're out of a job regularly jobs are spread over a 20 mile radius in all directions.

I'd LOVE to get a local job - I've started looking here and it looks like the new house won't be near jobs.... 20 miles away are jobs advertising £16-18k; round here the jobs look mostly like NMW jobs. So, for the sake of trying to earn another £3-5k/year I'd run a car so I could afford to pay for that car and benefit from the extra £1000/year or so that will mean the difference between existing, or scraping a living.

lostinrates wrote: »

I'd say savings are to be budgeted, in the same way that transport is, because they can buy you life savings like food, and give you something to firefight with. Its not Immeadiate like food and shelter now is, but then, neither is a car for some car owners ( like me for example)

You can only budget so far. If the income's not there in the first place you're budgetting to a certain extent, then fire-fighting.

lostinrates wrote: »

Fwiw, my fil, sil don't drive and have never owned cars, ( though dh's mother did and for a while fil had a scooter) yet are employed and lived very rurally in Italy.

There are some jobs that are in every location - and there are some people who are employed continuously for many years. On the other hand, there are many jobs that are hard to find and many people who are in/out of work throughout their lives.

I moved to where I am now because I had a job - then was laid off after 4 months. Now what? Now I'm in the wrong place... although I am "close to" the big town beginning with "B", I looked up the bus route/time the other night and it's an hour, so 1.5 hours door to door to work there and use public transport. By car I can probably do it in 20 minutes each way - and have the option of stopping off en route to complete other life tasks. Those extra 2 hours 20 minutes every day could be used better to relax or do household jobs than to sit on public transport getting depressed.

lostinrates

PasturesNew wrote: »

The trouble is that the closer to most jobs you live, the more the housing costs. I lived in the villages when I was younger as it was cheaper than living in the town. And jobs aren't always in towns, or on bus routes. I've rarely worked where there was a bus route.
i agree, absolutely. Many of the London /se threads centre on this dilemma exactly. Otoh, renting, which is more likely to be a common situation of people who have less financial choice I think, affords some choice, if not much.


We're supposed to "try to get on" which means looking further afield for jobs. Then, when you've not got a job, you need to find jobs to apply for, which tend to not be where you are living right now.
agreed again, and same point, At least renting gives SOME flexibility, but with imposed costs.
If one could get a job and keep it it's possible, over time, to move closer.... but if you're out of a job regularly jobs are spread over a 20 mile radius in all directions.

I'd LOVE to get a local job - I've started looking here and it looks like the new house won't be near jobs.... 20 miles away are jobs advertising £16-18k; round here the jobs look mostly like NMW jobs. So, for the sake of trying to earn another £3-5k/year I'd run a car so I could afford to pay for that car and benefit from the extra £1000/year or so that will mean the difference between existing, or scraping a living.
but the NMW jobs are jobs! and choice to go further is a choice! and choice , IMO is the biggest and most important luxury and opportunity for 'betterment'

You can only budget so far. If the income's not there in the first place you're budgetting to a certain extent, then fire-fighting.
again, absolutely agreed, and having the money to sink into a depreciating asset is not firefighting often, though of course PRACTICALLY, in a wealthy country like ours and lifestyle required by the way we live it has become so,


There are some jobs that are in every location - and there are some people who are employed continuously for many years. On the other hand, there are many jobs that are hard to find and many people who are in/out of work throughout their lives.]

I moved to where I am now because I had a job - then was laid off after 4 months. Now what? Now I'm in the wrong place... although I am "close to" the big town beginning with "B", I looked up the bus route/time the other night and it's an hour, so 1.5 hours door to door to work there and use public transport. By car I can probably do it in 20 minutes each way - and have the option of stopping off en route to complete other life tasks. Those extra 2 hours 40 minutes every day could be used better to relax or do household jobs than to sit on public transport getting depressed.

Again, I don't disagree with any of this, but,,,,its a choice some others will not have. People who have even less disposable income and less choice than you. To them this bit is a huge posh alert. I think its part of the reason we have disenfranchised people who don't work etc, because the gain is small and the choices often feel not like choices.

PasturesNew

lostinrates wrote: »

Again, I don't disagree with any of this, but,,,,its a choice some others will not have. People who have even less disposable income and less choice than you. To them this bit is a huge posh alert. I think its part of the reason we have disenfranchised people who don't work etc, because the gain is small and the choices often feel not like choices.

The thing is, a NMW wage job, perpetually, living in a bedsit, for a single person is grim. You never leave the house, never do anything, never go anywhere, have no friends .... it's grim over a lifetime. When you're younger that's fine, but the older you get the less friends you have that are happy to sit on the wall outside McDonalds and chat all evening for free......

I needed to put down £2,500 to move into this place, so even moving's not easy when you're renting and on lower wages with uncertain employment outcomes. Stability becomes more important the older you get too... a life on the move's expensive and stressful and demoralising as you have "no roots" and no connection with anybody/anywhere.

CKhalvashi

PasturesNew wrote: »

The thing is, a NMW wage job, perpetually, living in a bedsit, for a single person is grim. You never leave the house, never do anything, never go anywhere, have no friends .... it's grim over a lifetime. When you're younger that's fine, but the older you get the less friends you have that are happy to sit on the wall outside McDonalds and chat all evening for free......

I needed to put down £2,500 to move into this place, so even moving's not easy when you're renting and on lower wages with uncertain employment outcomes. Stability becomes more important the older you get too... a life on the move's expensive and stressful and demoralising as you have "no roots" and no connection with anybody/anywhere.

I do agree with most of that.

With regard to the £2500, most councils used to operate a deposit scheme, which was scrapped under the welfare reforms.

Ours is still run, but now by a credit union, where you're forced to save, which I do think for some takes the !!!!!!, but that's the way it is.

Benefits aren't needed for the scheme, just less than (I think) £18k p/a income.

PasturesNew

CKhalvashi wrote: »

Benefits aren't needed for the scheme, just less than (I think) £18k p/a income.

Benefits aren't even on the radar of most single people.... you just get on with it. Part of that is that single people wouldn't have got any benefits before WTC was invented and even since then the threshold is so low that you can end up with just £5 anyway, so it's off most singles' radars entirely.

Same with deposit scheme - I'd have never known that any Council deposit scheme might have been available to me when I started my job.... I thought that was a thing for people on benefits.

silvercar

CKhalvashi wrote: »

Quick Google suggests there are 1m Brits with second homes, although I'm not sure whether I trust the good old DM!

Half of them will be people who can't sell their starter studio flat and are renting it out when they buy the next place. As opposed to luxury river apartment with mooring and fishing rights overlooking the Thames.

CKhalvashi

PasturesNew wrote: »

Benefits aren't even on the radar of most single people.... you just get on with it. Part of that is that single people wouldn't have got any benefits before WTC was invented and even since then the threshold is so low that you can end up with just £5 anyway, so it's off most singles' radars entirely.

Same with deposit scheme - I'd have never known that any Council deposit scheme might have been available to me when I started my job.... I thought that was a thing for people on benefits.

With WTC/HB/CTB, there are three separate tapers which wil generally leave you better off, however you have to have the hours to get it IYSWIM.

It's too confusing for my brain to work out. If I need rough calculations, I'll pop into the council office and get someone to do it for me, but if you know the tapers, it works to something like 98% for some, however on the low figures, you'll be better off working anyway IMO.

For families it's very different, and the benefits are more generous.

CK

CKhalvashi

silvercar wrote: »

Half of them will be people who can't sell their starter studio flat and are renting it out when they buy the next place. As opposed to luxury river apartment with mooring and fishing rights overlooking the Thames.

Probably very true.

On a side note, how many of these do we think are in -ve equity, especially in Spain where it was worst?