£194,400 minimum wage

Windofchange

davomcdave wrote: »

If you think about it rather than just pressing the angry button then it's going to be at best extremely difficult for the lowest legally paid people in the country to save tens of thousands of pounds. I'm quite surprised you believe otherwise and patronising them probably isn't going to help much either.

You won't get through to him unfortunately. Everyone has a £500k inheritance and earns £100k a year in his world. If you don't you are just choosing to be stupid or are lazy. Don't start on those with zero hours contracts or who are paid less than minimum wage...

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

You won't get through to him unfortunately. Everyone has a £500k inheritance and earns £100k a year in his world. If you don't you are just choosing to be stupid or are lazy. Don't start on those with zero hours contracts or who are paid less than minimum wage...

here we go again. take something i said and extrapolate it to suggest i said something else.

how many times do i have to say it? i proved minimum wage couples can afford to buy after saving and living frugally for a number of years. what can you do to disprove me? come on, use your brains for a change instead of posting pointless newspaper articles all the time!

Windofchange

Can't find anything recent, but from 2008 a family needs £24,801 after tax to provide a basic standard of living.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/household-bills/9680091/British-families-need-25000-just-to-survive.html

A single person £13,400

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jul/02/welfare

The first article cites no luxuries at all - food, clothing etc.

The second article allows for £29.73 a week for social activities. If this person saved this £120 ish per month, they'd save about £1500 a year? So yes, in 5 years or so they would have £7.5k, but how many young people want to do this? Never go out, never go on a date with someone, never have a beer? Then you have the question as to whether on £13k a year someone can afford anything anyway at 4.5 x salary!

So, yes, at best extremely difficult as per davomcdave. But no it is all down to new cars, iPhones and coffee. I think people such as yourself unfortunately have no idea just how hard it is for those in the bottom half of society.

Cakeguts

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-58146023.html This house is listed as being suitable for a first time buyer. It has been sold. The deposit for this property would be around 6k now please explain why someone earning minimum wage in this area would not be able to save that? It might take them a few years but it would be possible as long as they didn't buy expensive items that they didn't need like smart phones and cars.

If you follow look at other properties in this area you will see that there are a lot under 100k. A couple on minimum wage would be able to afford a house easily.

The problem is that it is the national minimum wage so in Heywood a couple can buy a house in the South East they could buy a garage. Makes you wonder why people stay in the South East to work on such low pay?

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

Can't find anything recent, but from 2008 a family needs £24,801 after tax to provide a basic standard of living.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/household-bills/9680091/British-families-need-25000-just-to-survive.html

A single person £13,400

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jul/02/welfare

The first article cites no luxuries at all - food, clothing etc.

The second article allows for £29.73 a week for social activities. If this person saved this £120 ish per month, they'd save about £1500 a year? So yes, in 5 years or so they would have £7.5k, but how many young people want to do this? Never go out, never go on a date with someone, never have a beer? Then you have the question as to whether on £13k a year someone can afford anything anyway at 4.5 x salary!

So, yes, at best extremely difficult as per davomcdave. But no it is all down to new cars, iPhones and coffee. I think people such as yourself unfortunately have no idea just how hard it is for those in the bottom half of society.

as i said posting articles that really do not fit our debate. whats the point of doign this? are you crazy. the study was based on a family with AT LEAST 2 children. why are you using this as a study? we are talking about a young couple on minimum wage with no kids.

economic

i think they should just get rid of minimum wage. then BagofWind and daveomcdave may become right!!

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

Can't find anything recent, but from 2008 a family needs £24,801 after tax to provide a basic standard of living.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/household-bills/9680091/British-families-need-25000-just-to-survive.html

A single person £13,400

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jul/02/welfare

The first article cites no luxuries at all - food, clothing etc.

The second article allows for £29.73 a week for social activities. If this person saved this £120 ish per month, they'd save about £1500 a year? So yes, in 5 years or so they would have £7.5k, but how many young people want to do this? Never go out, never go on a date with someone, never have a beer? Then you have the question as to whether on £13k a year someone can afford anything anyway at 4.5 x salary!

So, yes, at best extremely difficult as per davomcdave. But no it is all down to new cars, iPhones and coffee. I think people such as yourself unfortunately have no idea just how hard it is for those in the bottom half of society.

IF they save £120 a month?? where did you get this from? do you make this up to suit your theory?

in my 20s i lived at home despite earning 100k for most of my 20s. i dont have any regrets. my saving rate was over 80% every single year. i made sacrifices. why cant others do the same? and i even managed 1 or 2 holidays a year.

Cakeguts

The problem is that if you live in the South East you only see what happens in the South East. If you have lived in other areas of the country you can see what happens there. It has long been known that in the North West a couple on minimum wage can afford to buy a nice house. In other areas of the country a couple on minimum wage can afford to buy a house but it might not be in the most fashionable area of the local town. It is only the South East where you can't buy a house when earning the minimum wage.

Windofchange

economic wrote: »

as i said posting articles that really do not fit our debate. whats the point of doign this? are you crazy. the study was based on a family with AT LEAST 2 children. why are you using this as a study? we are talking about a young couple on minimum wage with no kids.

Ok, so to fit your argument we again have to strip out enough people to get to something where you can make sense of things. 18% of women at age 45 are childless. Why have you chosen childless couples then to present an argument saying that most people could afford a deposit? Why do you not address the 82% of people who do have children? Some will be divorced, split up etc, but still, big majority. By their 30th birthday, 47% were childless, so still less than half. But no, you want to base your argument on couples with no children as of course that gives them more disposable income and you can present your drivel.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/conceptionandfertilityrates/bulletins/childbearingforwomenbornindifferentyearsenglandandwales/2015-11-10

So yes a childless couple can afford to save a deposit. There you go. Well done. Strip enough people out of a cohort and you can prove anything you want. I bet I could prove that 35 year old women called Sarah working in finance could afford a house deposit if I drilled down low enough. It's farcical.

Windofchange

economic wrote: »

IF they save £120 a month?? where did you get this from? do you make this up to suit your theory?

in my 20s i lived at home despite earning 100k for most of my 20s. i dont have any regrets. my saving rate was over 80% every single year. i made sacrifices. why cant others do the same? and i even managed 1 or 2 holidays a year.

Nope from the part where it says it allows someone £29 or so social expenses per week. 4 x that is your £120.

As for the rest of it. You earned £100k a year and made some sacrifices whilst going on 1 or 2 holidays a year. Did you also cut back by drinking bollinger rather than Dom Perignon? You're hilarious.