MSE Poll: How much are you worth (or do you owe)?

175 Posts



Poll started 27 August 2019
So are we a nation of savers or debtors? Take any unsecured debt (ie, EXCLUDING ANY MORTGAGE/STUDENT LOAN) away from any savings and where do you end up?Whether you've "net worth" or "net debt", pick your relevant option:
Did you vote? Are you surprised at the results so far? Have your say below.
If you haven't already, join the forum to reply.
Thanks!

0
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides
Replies
And why is the mortgage not debt?
The poll cannot be answered in its present unclear state.
Do you want to know people's net SAVINGS or their net WORTH ?
If I have £20,000 sitting in the bank, I include it. But if I put it into a pension I exclude it. If I put it into an ISA do I include it?
If my house is worth £400,000 and I have a £100,000 mortgage, I ignore the £300,000 equity. But if I remortgage to increase mortgage to £200,000 then I am £100,000 'better off'? But if I then spend that money on house improvements I then ignore it again.
And how should we be reporting results? At household level? How are couples factored in - divide the result by 2? Or does the reporting follow legal ownership of each individual asset?
Really can't conclude anything about this, except that it certainly isn't capturing 'how much you are worth' - I think the closest it comes is 'how much are your liquid assets worth, net of debt (aside from mortgage debt)'
That's probably why I seem to be at the low end of the "what I'm worth" scale for my age group.
Not a very well thought-out poll.
If it breaks, well it wasn't working right anyway.
perhaps I will say I am in my 20s and a millionaire and see what comes in my emails.
By contrast, only 15% of 25-34 year olds have over £100,000 in assets and 25% owe more than they own.
One of these groups gets free bus travel, free eye tests, a winter fuel allowance and free TV licences. The other subsidises it.
It seems crazy to me that, until recently, all over 75s, irrespective of their wealth, got free TV licences. The decision to limit it to those with low incomes is entirely sensible.
What? You mean that people who have worked for 40+ years have more financial assets than younger people? Whodathunkit!
Yes, this is what happens when the State Benefits system is basically a Ponzi scheme. We older people have paid tax and NI all our lives to pay the pensions and other benefits of previous generations. Now it's our turn to have someone pay for us. Personally I think the fuel allowance should be taxable, but as for free bus travel, it's worth pointing out that you can get this at any age if you're medically unfit to drive, and also scrapping it will bring countless older people who probably shouldn't be driving any more back onto the roads.
That's a separate thing entirely. The problem here is the BBC's funding model, not any so-called intergenerational fairness issue.
However, my point was that, taken as a whole, over-65s are by far the wealthiest group in society. The fact that (some of) this group (the over-75s) received free TV licences, irrespective of how wealthy they were, was, in my opinion, absurd. Especially when younger groups, who are on the whole much less wealthy, were subsidising that.
The picture painted by critics of the BBC's decision - masses of impoverished OAPs losing their only companion - is demonstrably untrue.
May I add to the list.., If "I" am a couple with joint assets, is it safe to assume that I should I halve my worth?
(Just so we know we are all on the same page.)