Only freedom will do

edinburgher

Still feeling crook, Mrs E and I arguing aboot baby stuff, calm conversation on the cards before bed

AlexLK

I don't have a Range Rover. My mother bought three Land Rover Defenders (one for her, one for me and one to be mothballed for my son's first car) to celebrate the end of their production. It may seem a bit extravagant but she's had a Land Rover (Defender and prior to that Series cars) since the 1950s. The Defender was effectively a continuation of the Series cars that had been in production since 1948. The end of production was therefore a very significant moment in my mother's life as she has a lifetime of memories owning, driving, maintaining and being around Defender / Series cars. I have a lot of memories from childhood of these Land Rovers so it was a significant moment. Any other car, my mother would not have bought as a gift.

Interesting re. the thinking in terms of pre-tax salary. I do not understand that at all as that doesn't take tax or other incomes into account. I am no mathematician but talking in terms of earning, say, £50,000 when that is a pre-tax salary figure seems illogical, especially when the person is a PAYE employee they never see any of the amount which is taken in tax. Do you seriously consider thinking in terms of actual income rather than pre-tax salary figures to be a preserve of the wealthy?

Regarding children, they are very hard work in the first couple of years. I cannot understand how anyone does it more than a couple of times. As for being "rose tinted" about parenthood, I think most parents aren't if they are being honest: it's hard work, heartbreaking at times and especially in the early years there are elements that are both boring and revolting. Anyone who refuses to admit this is lying. All that said absolutely nothing can compare to sharing your child's triumphs and seeing your child develop new skills. It has taken my wife 5 years to begin to enjoy parenthood and I wish society didn't try tell her that every other woman feels differently because I can't believe that to really be the case. Let's face it no one would bat an eyelid had I not been interested for the last five years.

ETA: What is going on with the formatting of this page?

Debsnewbudget

I am struggling to read this tiny Font
Same thing happened on AlexLK page and it was a link someone had posted

SuperSecretSquirrel

AlexLK wrote: »

Interesting re. the thinking in terms of pre-tax salary. I do not understand that at all as that doesn't take tax or other incomes into account. I am no mathematician but talking in terms of earning, say, £50,000 when that is a pre-tax salary figure seems illogical, especially when the person is a PAYE employee they never see any of the amount which is taken in tax. Do you seriously consider thinking in terms of actual income rather than pre-tax salary figures to be a preserve of the wealthy?

I was quite surprised by ed's assertion... I would suggest that lower earners on an hourly rate will think less in terms of annual gross, but not in favour of their gross hourly rate, rather a far more useful measure - net pay weekly/fortnightly/monthly. This is the really useful bottom line figure.

I still think this way. Of course I know my gross annual salary, but having set up my salary sacrifice to pension etc, it's the net amount that lands in the bank that matters. I only really see the gross figure as useful when perusing the jobs market, and even then it's just a convenient ready reckoner - you have to dig deeper to see the true reality as company cars, pension match, and various other employee benefits can make a massive difference...

I know people that like to essentially brag about their income. They favour annual gross as it tends to overstate their idea of worth. It just wouldn't do to discuss actual income as that figure is far closer to that of "lower achieving" friends, uncomfortably so in some cases

As for income as a measure of wealth, tut tut mister ed, I expected better of you I'm sure we've all read the millionaire next door. High income affords you options, but wealth does not necessarily follow. Wealth is about net assets, the overall balance sheet. Earning 10k a month does not mean you are wealthy, it just means that you can earn a lot. You may also choose to spend a lot...

edinburgher

Alex, re. Wealth, buying 3 new high value cars because 'you've driven one since the 50s' sounds ludicrous to me (not in the rude sense, in the unbelievable/unimaginable sense).


@SSS - off sick in bed, so not up to quotes etc.

1) I never mentioned lower earners, we're talking about people in some form of white collar job. I haven't considered my hourly wage since I left the record shop 14 years ago. You don't think the same as other people. I can honestly say I've never discussed pay with colleagues where anything other than gross salary was considered over this 14 year period. Have had to work hard to demonstrate benefits of sal sac etc. To younger colleagues
2) Re. Income as a measure of wealth - you're responding to another point I never made, can't debate it as I never said that, I said that the truly wealthy consider income (usually because it's unearned).

Karmacat

Oh Ed! Sorry you're this ill that's not like you, must be pretty bad

You're not having to take care of littl'un today, are you? Hope you feel better soon.

SuperSecretSquirrel

Hi ed, sorry to see you're still feeling unwell

I only mentioned low earners as it makes perfect sense to me that someone in that situation thinks in terms of actual net income received, they arguably need a closer focus on true incomings and outgoings, and the net figure is a more practical number to focus on. It seems to me there's an unhelpful layer of abstraction added when thinking of gross salary (I thought this was the point Alex was making, which made you laugh) - it's never all yours, but there's a danger of kidding yourself that it is. This lack of clarity can help convince the white collared among us to p**s away our "loadsamoney" on £100 haircuts, £100pm gym memberships, and £600pm grocery bills, because we can afford it and are worth it, when really, no, we can't.

My surprise was rooted in the fact that I'd have expected you to use neither (net) income nor (gross) salary as a measure of wealth (since you have a mind that is similarly abnormal to mine ), but now I'm thinking the issue is that we have derived different meaning from Alex's post. I think you're seeing it from a truly asset rich wealthy person's perspective in terms of X amount from salary, plus Y from unearned income (I find the idea of "unearned" income an interesting concept, but I'll avoid spinning off on a tangent for once). I just read it as the mail being disingenuous specifying a 50k gross salary rather than a more honest/useful 35k net income. So yeah, crossed wires I guess!

Get well soon!

edinburgher

Oh Ed! Sorry you're this ill that's not like you, must be pretty bad

You're not having to take care of littl'un today, are you? Hope you feel better soon.

I'll live KC. Fever, profuse sweating, aches, photosensitivity and an upset stomach. Not sure, maybe something food related.

It seems to me there's an unhelpful layer of abstraction added when thinking of gross salary (I thought this was the point Alex was making, which made you laugh) - it's never all yours, but there's a danger of kidding yourself that it is.

I don't think I picked up on Alex's point properly because I thought it was an example of him having a very different focus from the rest of us at time. With his love of dead languages, classic car fetishism and tendency to tell people off for listening to the wrong classical music, he's very much the modern day example of a man who might think of 'an income of £50,000 a year' meaning just that

But that said, I'd argue that the abstraction as you put it is vital, as it gives people a baseline about which to converse. So while I can talk about wanting a new job with a colleague 'because it would be a £10k pay rise', I couldn't say 'I really fancy that new job because it will give me £200/month increased salary after deductions'! (Made up figures).

I'm talking, as it were, about talking about money (the way you would with a peer or friend, or the way a journalist might write an article about people struggling on £x).

You know I think like you on the income front, but I didn't think the DM was being disingenuous (sp?) about how they described incomes (by which I mean £ salary), it's just how most of the world seems to talk about their money.

Ps. The abstraction mentioned above is even more vital when you're someone with a high SR. Far easier to mention earning £x than it is to explain that you take home less than your colleagues despite earning more than them because you're stacking up hefty pension payments and NI avoiding deductions...

edinburgher

The new plantation shutters have just been fitted across our 11' living room window - beautiful! High cost aside, I can imagine that I'll look at them every time I enter the room and smile

Makes such a difference in terms of controlling the heat as well :j

smallholdingsister

Could you link to a pic for the ineffably nosy?