to be getting a bit fed up with squeezed middle bashing.

(112 Posts)
rosieposey78 Thu 10-Oct-13 17:22:56

Ie those single income families with an income of 50 to 60k who are apparently moaning about the loss of £20 per week. If that is a problem they have made wrong financial choices or are bad with money etc etc.
Well we are almost a single income family who has lost child benefit. Some £50 per week. No proble with that. We just have to be a bit careful but we can cope. We do however pay loads on fuel. Dh has long commute and live in fairly expensive area so no we are not rich and do not avoid paying our dues. We opted out of child benefit.

comewinewithmoi Thu 10-Oct-13 17:24:43

Me too!

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 17:32:00

and me but TBH dave cam and Ed Miliband put themselves across as the squeezed middle with all this we are all in it together shite and they are so not, maybe people get the impression we are bleating about nothing, saying that we don't have a huge mortgage

manicinsomniac Thu 10-Oct-13 17:37:20

I don't really understand the thread tbh. rosieposey there's no need for anyone to nash you because, as you say, you know child benefit was nice but not necessary to you and you aren't complaining.

But, imo, anyone who earns over £50K and does choose to moan about losing child benefit deserves to be bashed. Nothin wrong with thinking privately that things were better when you had it but to complain that you needed it on a public board where there are people who aren't sure where their next £5 is coming from is a bit tactless.

NotYoMomma Thu 10-Oct-13 17:40:34

but you said yourself

you are managing.
you're squeezed

wh have combined income of 38k so nothing but cb here

we too are squeezed but managing. we live in a cheaper area than I would like for financial reasons and enjoy nice food, dont have to worry about leftovers and batchcooking etc

we are still lucky because we still jave options that others do not.

others out there are actually struggling, using foodbanks on the breadline

rosieposey78 Thu 10-Oct-13 17:52:22

I guess its the assumption that on 50 to 60k we must have foreign holidays and send dc to private school etc. Just not the case. We don't worry about choosing between eating and heating etc but we have had to cut back on school dinners etc.

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 17:54:27

I'm seething about the whole cb thing, absolutely seething, it is SO unfair.

NotYoMomma Thu 10-Oct-13 17:55:38

I dont think anyone has mentioned private school on those wages? I would assume state school on 50-60k

YouTheCat Thu 10-Oct-13 17:57:41

Everyone is squeezed. Middle, working, unemployed - all feeling the pinch.

There's only one bunch not feeling it and a lot of them are in government... funny that.

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 17:59:18

I'm seething about cb too.

I thought it was just window dressing, to make "We're all in this together" sound less hollow.

I know think it was a brilliant piece of divide and rule.

I'm finding it bizarre that people are turning on each other, mithering about who deserves most to have various cuts inflicted, rather than questioning the premiss in its entirety. The very rich are pulling further and further away. As a percentage, they are fractionally small. But doing so very, very well out of the "economic crisis".

Latara Thu 10-Oct-13 18:04:30

The govt is using cuts and the media to successfully turn people against each other - when we should all be pulling together and protesting against the govt.

It's middle classes against working; non-claimants vs benefit claimants; everyone vs immigrants; private sector vs public sector; young vs old... etc.

Divide and rule?

Another one seething still at the CB, and £50/60k may be a lot to live on in certain areas, but where we are it is not.

YouTheCat Thu 10-Oct-13 18:22:30

What Latara and thecatfromJapan said.

It shouldn't be all 'poor me' - there is always going to be someone worse off/better off whatever your income.

It should be poor us - pretty much all of us.

SaucyJack Thu 10-Oct-13 18:26:11

I wonder if it's a regional thing in your defence?

I live a few miles outside of Brighton. A bog standard 3-bed costs around 300,000k. I can well imagine that 50k doesn't really go that far when you have a spouse and children to support.

NotYoMomma Thu 10-Oct-13 18:28:30

hmmm it probably is regional actually.

im in the north east and on much less so have found it hard to by sympathetic

I forget about housing costs

YouTheCat Thu 10-Oct-13 18:32:21

Also NE here.

But if you're squeezed, you're squeezed. It is irrelevant how much is coming in if most of it is going straight back out again.

So let's start getting angry. It isn't the people on benefits or the working class that has done this. Just as it isn't the middle classes who have made the cost of living increase by so much more than any (pitiful) wage increase.

rosieposey78 Thu 10-Oct-13 18:37:10

Agree divide and rule thing.

PlatinumStart Thu 10-Oct-13 18:37:36

Cutting back on school dinners seems like a massive sacrifice to me - they are hardly a luxury.

That isn't in anyway a criticism or dig - I just think if I as in the position where I had to cut down on something like that I'd feel pretty bloody pissed off.

I also think that living on 50k near to London would be tough

SoonToBeSix Thu 10-Oct-13 18:38:22

High earners have choice though, tgey say they have no
money because they live in expensive are so pay a lot for their mortgage. That is a choice though, in certain areas of the north west you can buy a decent three bed with a garden for 60k. If people moved they would have a much higher disposable income.
However the people who already live in the NW and earn 20k not 50k plus do not have the choice to downsize.

Trapper Thu 10-Oct-13 18:39:13

I would suggest that anyone who was £20/week of their earnings removed would be justified in moaning about it - regardless of where they live or how much they earn.

Trapper Thu 10-Oct-13 18:40:05

I would suggest that anyone who was £20/week of their earnings removed would be justified in moaning about it - regardless of where they live or how much they earn.

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 18:41:50

Well, it's not always a choice to move and free up income. You could do that and use up all your money living while you wait to find another job.

Floralnomad Thu 10-Oct-13 18:42:11

soontobesix , that's not a practical answer is it ,if your 60k job is in London you can't live in the NW !

AmberLeaf Thu 10-Oct-13 18:52:43

I also think that living on 50k near to London would be tough

I get what you mean re housing costs etc in the south east, but I think using the word tough about someone living on 50k [less after tax though of course] is where people get pissed off.

PlatinumStart Thu 10-Oct-13 18:54:57

soontobe sorry that's crap. The vast majority of people who are "high earners" are so because of the area in which they live. The same job in London and Newcastle does not pay the same salary.

YouTheCat Thu 10-Oct-13 18:56:34

That's true, though I don't think the London premium covers the disparity tbh.

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 19:02:37

I just want to say I know other people with lower incomes struggle too I am not pleading poverty or anything

soontobe, that would be one hell of a commute.

Retropear Thu 10-Oct-13 19:14:52

Another one seething over the CB,it's the total unfairness that gets my goat on top of feeling it.

MrsHowardRoark Thu 10-Oct-13 19:16:14

My DP's job only exists in London and we live outside to pay cheaper rent. His commuting costs are £4000 a year and he never sees us because of the long hours.

I would love to know how we could save money living where we are.

All of this just makes people look inwards and fight with their friends and neighbours. Meanwhile, companies evading tax costs more than the whole bloody benefits system.

noisytoys Thu 10-Oct-13 19:19:19

Me and DH are close to £50k joint wage now I am working full time. We pay £700 mortgage (on a small 1.5 bed flat) and £1200 childcare. The wage is soon eaten up and we are just as poor as when I wasn't working!

Retropear Thu 10-Oct-13 19:19:27

Alongside the fact Boris thinks we spend it on filling our imaginary wine cellar and ski- holidays.The very same Boris who doesn't even know the price of bread and thinks that funny.

Oh and the fact that shiny Dave thinks designer flour and bread makers are the norm.hmm


valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 19:26:11

What really riles me is when DC tries to make out that 40k is a lot of money when in fact that probably didn't even pay his school fees. Not. A. Clue.

SoonToBeSix Thu 10-Oct-13 19:27:09

Yes certain jobs involve living near or in London but by no means all . To suggest that you cannot earn 50 k plus outside London is rubbish.

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 19:31:33

£40k is a lot of money. I suppose what riles people about the term 'squeezed middle' is that they are nowhere near as squeezed as the (working) people right at the bottom of the employee pile who have not only had their housing benefit cut by 20% but also now have to find an extra £35 a month or so towards council tax - out of where, exactly? To them, £40k would be a fucking fortune, and just by owning your own home at all you are inhabiting a lifestyle that they have no means of accessing. I agree though that DC is being very disingenuous when he tries to pretend that he thinks it's a lot of money - he probably wrote cheques for that amount to pay for one night of restaurant-trashing when he was in the Bullingdon Club. So I guess both him and the so-called 'squeezed middle' are BU.

Freshlysqueezed Thu 10-Oct-13 19:34:09

I really really don't get why you are all seething over child benefit. We still get it as we are both working on a household income of approx £60k. But we have to pay thousands of pounds a year in nursery fees which those on one income of 60k do not have to So even though they have lost child benefit they are way way better off than us as child benefit barely makes a dent in the nursery fees. Yes I guess it is unfair that a household where both earners take home 40k each so have an income of 80k still get CB. But lets be realistic here that is such a small percentage of households that fall into that bracket it would have cost too much to administer. I just dont get why loads of stay at home Mums where the partner earns 50k plus feel so hard done by because they have lost CB. Listen you are still better off than those on the same income where both parents work but still get CB - please stop seething and find something better to do!

MrsHowardRoark Thu 10-Oct-13 19:35:29

We don't own our own house and have no chance of doing so.
I can't afford to go back to work because of the cost of child are combined with the commute is too much for us.

We have no savings and no way of saving. But even my own family think we must be well off. We're really not.

But as I said ^ it's just distraction tactics to stop people getting pissed off at the source.

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 19:36:41

people with joint income get CB as the norm

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 19:41:34

I don't think it's distraction tactics. I have actually seen little in the press bashing the squeezed middle but have heard plenty from them on here and irl bemoaning their dire fate which I think is unseemly when other people are reliant on food banks to feed their families, which is where bad feeling comes into it. I almost had a falling-out with a friend a couple of years ago after I was made redundant from my previous job. She sympathised with me and made a comparison that some people she worked with were having to scale back from two long-haul holidays a year to one. She seriously thought that that was what being 'squeezed' actually meant. There are plenty of people around like that, both on mumsnet and outside it, who just have no clue about what poverty actually means, even when they are talking to someone who is faced with the grinding, depressing reality of it.

rosieposey78 Thu 10-Oct-13 19:41:57

Yes but a family with one earning say 55k and one earning 10k could still have childcare to pay but they lose some child benefit yet 2 on 48k still keep it. Plus single parents lose out too.

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 19:42:50

Oh I know 40 is a lot of money, but not to the very privileged such as DC and his crew.

rosieposey78 Thu 10-Oct-13 19:44:30

I know about poverty. I have a sibling on jsa. I actually sub him because it is so hard. 71 per week and out of that some council tax has to be paid.

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 19:45:41

this is what I was meaning valium they are acting like we are just like them piss off dave angry it is to cause a divide i think , I had to laugh when gideon geroge osbourne put a picture out of himself with a half eater burger as he was working late like a normal person

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 19:48:48

He's about as normal as any other shape-shifting lizard - how dare you!

MrsHowardRoark Thu 10-Oct-13 19:50:17

I come from an extremely poor background, so I'm under no illusions about the position we are in.

I do think the whole benefits issue is a distraction, not just the 'squeezed middle'. Almost every cut has people pointing the finger at what other take that they don't earn, deserve, need etc

Viviennemary Thu 10-Oct-13 19:50:44

I sympathise up to a point. But a lot of people do move out of London and the surrounding areas because they simply cannot afford to live there. This has been going on for decades. So it's a lifestyle choice. IMHO.

Redpipe Thu 10-Oct-13 19:50:46

It's highly unlikely one parent earning 10K would choose to work and pay more for child care is it?

MinesAPintOfTea Thu 10-Oct-13 19:51:24

The thing is, if you think life in the squeezed middle is harder than out is in an income of £10k and living un a rented property, why not get a poorly paid job, still your house and get all these wonderful benefits?

Its harder than for the upper class but it was ever thus. That's why people want to be upwardly socially mobile. But dint fall for the divide and rule tricks.

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 19:54:21

minesapintoftea I am not sure what your post means but i get the girst

we have been poor and on benefits it is shite this thread isn't really about benefits well it is about the CB but I do think people do struggle

drawsofdrawers Thu 10-Oct-13 19:54:53

What do you get if you earn £50k - £3k a month, a bit less if you pay into a pension?

Must be awful if you live in London with kids.

Rent on 2 bed flat £1250-1400
Childcare £1000 at least (could be 1400)

Doesn't leave you with much for your bills and travel and food.

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 19:57:53

50k is the top scale the cuts affect my dh doesn't get 50k

MrsHowardRoark Thu 10-Oct-13 19:58:44

I don't think we are worse off than those working for minimum wage or less or those surviving on benefits.

The point is that earning 50k and having no money isn't due to poor money management or choices.

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 19:59:26

I am allowed to seethe about something which is completely unfair.

I seethe because of the assumption that if my Dh is a high earner then I have access to his wages. Cb was always paid to the woman for a good reason. And the whole pension issue too. It's so much more than 'just losing 20 quid a week' because you aren't paying nursery fees. In fact cb was never for nursery fees was it? I though TC went towards that? Happy to be corrected.

I am seething because the tax office couldn't even be arsed to send out letters and it was up to US to ring them and sort it out.

And mostly I am seething because the fucking Tories are in again.

NutritiousAndDelicious Thu 10-Oct-13 20:01:06

£50k in London/south east is the same as £25k in the north IMO.

I don't think it's fair at all. It should be over £100k I think.

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 20:01:53

exactly valium many many women are help finicially hostage by their husbands partners and CB was little independence they had

mrsjay Thu 10-Oct-13 20:02:17


valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 20:02:36

Viv-lots of people have family commitments, looking after elderly parents for instance. It's really not easy to up and move. We've already done that and are still feeling squeezed.

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 20:04:29

Mrs jay, that makes me angrier than anything tbh.

When we lost working tax credits it seemed fairer. This is just unfair and people should be pissed off about an unfair system.

Floralnomad Thu 10-Oct-13 20:17:29

freshlysqueezed your children are not going to be at nursery forever though and when they're at school you will still get your CB which others on less income still won't . People do what is best for their circumstances ,you choose to work ,others choose to stay home with their children or work PT around their children .

missfliss Thu 10-Oct-13 20:19:39

If hubby gets a new job in London then we will lose ours. We also live a few miles outside of Brighton whee houses are expensive.
Since he lost his job last week we have been in the position of realising that my income won't cover our mortgage so if no job forthcoming we may well have to sell upsad
Truthfully though if it came to it we could live somewhere cheaper and still commute. We have chosen to only have one child ( unless things change) because financially it would be a stretch to have two.
I would love not to work, but can't afford to leave my 4 day a week job ( it pays enough to justify childcare and commute) .
Obviously if he gets this job I'd prefer to keep the £80 per month, but I get ( especially with current situation) that 'need' is a relative term and I don't see why our life choices should be supported over people with greater need in this climate.

Ultimately though I wish that wealth was less concentrated in the hands of so few overall

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 20:24:45

We've lost cb. I'm sitting here cold because we cannot afford heating. I'm dreading the real onset of winter.

I'm seething for all the reasons valiumredhead lists, to be honest.

Somehow, it always feels like Narnia before the arrival of Aslan whenever the Tories are in.

(Hmm. Maybe someone should do a study on the effect of childhood fiction on the perception of 1992. I'll bet that would figure large for quite a few people.)

NoComet Thu 10-Oct-13 20:30:18

For 2 DC it's well over £2000 a year. ie most of the cost of a summer holiday, or more than the DDs extra curricular activities cost a year.

Also as a SAHM it was the only money in my name, so yes I realise lots of people are far worse off, but I'm still fucking pissed off.

needaholidaynow Thu 10-Oct-13 20:35:33

Nothin wrong with thinking privately that things were better when you had it but to complain that you needed it on a public board where there are people who aren't sure where their next £5 is coming from is a bit tactles


Some people have different views on what struggling is.

There is "struggling"- The people who have "lost" their CB who can still afford to live without it.

Then there is struggling.- The people who you wouldn't believe 20 quid would make a difference to their life that week. An extra 20 quid could get some food. Not much food, but some.

Droning on about how life is so "hard" now CB doesn't enter your bank account anymore when there are others who, like the other poster said, aren't sure where their next fiver is coming from, doesn't fill me with very much sympathy.

Freshlysqueezed Thu 10-Oct-13 20:35:39

Floralnomad I work part time actually but childcare is still £600 plus a month. When they are both in school there is still berakfast club, after school and holiday care to pay for which will soon add up. Oh and fyi not everyone has the luxury of choosing to work - many of us have to.

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 20:36:53

<I seethe because of the assumption that if my Dh is a high earner then I have access to his wages. >>

This is the case with all state benefits though. You wouldn't be entitled to JSA either. And given that you do not say you are homeless, then I would assume that you do have access to your husband's wages.

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 20:39:16

<<We've lost cb. I'm sitting here cold because we cannot afford heating. I'm dreading the real onset of winter.

If you can't afford to turn the heating on on a wage of £50k or more, can I very gently suggest that you do a few household budgeting sums?

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 20:43:25

And so you should be star

coldwinter Thu 10-Oct-13 20:44:01

<I seethe because of the assumption that if my Dh is a high earner then I have access to his wages. >>

If your DH is not giving access to his wages, then this is financial abuse. Women's Aid can give advice and support around this issue. It is not okay for your DH to treat you in this way.

MrsDeVere Thu 10-Oct-13 20:44:26

I think that you have a right to moan if you feel this is unfair.
It is also pretty hard to imagine what it is like to be actually poor if you have never experienced it.
Anyone would be peeved if they suddenly lost a part of their income in an illogical way.

However....I have seen it said SO many times that poor people should suck it up and move if they cannot afford to live in the city. Why should they be able to stay there etc etc.

Yet on this thread people on decent incomes are explaining it is simply not that easy.

If its not easy for a couple with a good income how come so many posters think it is easy for someone on NMW? The same problems apply.

(NB. not assuming that the same posters who are saying it is hard for good earners are the ones saying it is easy for poor people).

However much I sympathise with someone having a chunk of money taken off them, you really do have to understand that there are people going out of their minds with worry on MN. They don't know how they are going to replace school shoes or heat the house or buy food.

I haven noticed much squeezed middle bashing either tbh.

Retropear Thu 10-Oct-13 20:44:58

Freshly but it is temporary,you have 2x tax thresholds,pay less tax and will be getting help with childcare from the gov.

Aside from that,they're your children. Who did you think was going to pay for their temporary nursery bills?You could have saved beforehand which is what we did to enable a sahp.

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 20:45:45

If your mortgage is high it doesn't matter how many household sums you dohmm

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 20:51:11

Cold winter-I was using that add an example as it does happen-just not in this house, joint everything, joint names on everything and full access to all money. Thanks thoughsmile

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 20:57:49

If your mortgage is high then you shouldn't be looking to the govt to pay you a state benefit in order to fund it when you are raking in £50k a year.

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 21:02:42

I feel pity for people who come on mn simply to act like wankers.

There are no sums in the world that can get you a personality that makes people want to be with you.

I never used to get why people do this. They say shit that they must know they can't say in RL. So why say it here? Some kind of wank fantasy, where they jizz their hidden hostility over the keyboard? Or are they such sad fuckers that they don't know you can;t say that sort of stuff in RL?

I imagine them, all alone, getting sticky writing something shitty, and then running of to the bathroom for a quick, post-wank wee.

Good for you!

Glad you have something!

Anyway, peace and love. smile

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 21:08:25

It's either a personality disorder that grows out of deep loneliness


it's a kind of trolling.

In my humble opinion.

And there is way too much of it.

Usually, I keep quiet about it. But why? Why do we tolerate such mean idiocy?

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 21:08:54

Yes, you certainly sound most peaceful and loving yourself. hmm

ssd Thu 10-Oct-13 21:16:33

poverty must be all relative

my friend whose dh earns 70k plus claims they don't have a good income, claims its average

I told her she's living in cloud cuckoo land

we are on 25k joint, to me anything over 30k is a lot and moaning about losing cb is precious....I know its fundamentally unfair the way its worked out, but to say you cant live without it just sounds daft.

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 21:17:37

<<You could have saved beforehand which is what we did to enable a sahp.>>

And yet you can't manage to fund a sahp without a state benefit?

YouStoleMyHat Thu 10-Oct-13 21:20:33

Retropear makes a good point. These threads always have someone stating that two working parents 'need' the CB more as they have childcare costs. All parents have costs! Either childcare or sacrificing a salary. Either people should have to plan in advance for both situations or they shouldn't. Why is one always seen as 'better' than the other? Surely different arrangements suit different families.

Carolmillen Thu 10-Oct-13 21:22:52

Would you say that in real life thecatfromjapan? hmm

Carolmillen Thu 10-Oct-13 21:24:47

Nobody likes to lose money - no matter what they earn. Many people pay a LOT in taxes and for most, child benefit was the only thing they got back - even though they were paying for it anyway and more besides.

ubik Thu 10-Oct-13 21:26:10

Frankly if you are on 50/60k and are struggling to afford school meals for your children, then you need to look at your budget. Really.

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 21:28:19

Seriously, how much of a muppet must you be to sit there and take disabled people being completely shafted, the working poor being screwed and pretty much everyone being completely fucked by the "new tithing" of the masses by the very rich - through property [rents and mortgages] and energy - just because the "middle classes" are also taking a bit of a kicking?

That's what it is - a divide and rule, a smoke-screen.

Spend your energy being a twat on the internet, and resenting anyone you think is slightly less fucked-over than you. But don't try building solidarity and an anger that is directed somewhere more legitimate.

I think the thing that bugs me most is that cb was a payment that went to women-with-children.

I'm not an idiot. I'm cold because of modern capitalism, which siphons all that money away from me and my husband through insane and inflated property prices. And energy bills. And the decrease in public goods. CB is relatively small compared to the fucking fortune that we seem to willingly hand over. And is essentially a kind of crazy tithe that we pay to the rich. I can't think of another way to conceptualise it.

But it totally pisses me off that - with one piece of shitty, disingenuous footwork - a female benefit was just disappeared.

And - what a surprise - you tolerate that and your NHS will be next ...

Carolmillen Thu 10-Oct-13 21:31:29

You can't generalise like that ubik - it isn't a huge amount of money

Well said thecatfromjapan.

timidviper Thu 10-Oct-13 21:34:41

The problem is that people are so apathetic these days. Everybody complains, everybody blames someone else and nobody does anything about it. Nobody writes to their MP, nobody demonstrates, the people who get exasperated and try to stand for politics get made into a joke by the media and the powers that be get away with whatever they want.

Nothing will change as long as people think a post on Facebook is a political protest

comewinewithmoi Thu 10-Oct-13 21:35:04

ubik that's a crap statement.

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 21:39:39

carolmillien Yes. I would. To be absolutely honest, if someone said that to me in RL, I would almost certainly say a great deal more than that.

But it wouldn't happen.

Because people don't say that sort of thing in RL.

They don's say stuff like that in RL because a. You would have to be seriously off-kilter in your social interactions to say such a thing b. You know that the reaction you will get will range from (i) being completely socially frozen-out by the person you have said that to, to (ii) violence - seriously: people hit people for rudeness of that magnitude.

It is rude/malicious/inane/goady/stupid: any or all of these.

ubik Thu 10-Oct-13 21:43:20

Why's it crap? Our income is much less than that and we afford 2 school meals +childcare for the third child.

Mind you our energy costs have just gone up 8 per cent so no central heating for us this winter.

comewinewithmoi Thu 10-Oct-13 21:45:38

Round of applause ubik really wish matters could see out

Retropear Thu 10-Oct-13 21:46:03

We can manage bu feel it,who wouldn't?

valiumredhead Thu 10-Oct-13 21:46:54

Good post cat

ubik Thu 10-Oct-13 21:48:55

comewithwine = i think you may have had too much...confused

Struggling to pay school meals for your children is a terrible state of affairs - but with a good income like that, there must be some room for manoeuvre.

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 21:52:48

Don't kid yourself, thecatfromjapan - you haven't even got the balls to actually address me on here, never mind in real life. Btw, if losing £20 a week off your £50k+ income really means that you don't have enough money to turn the heating on, then I suggest that you do as I do and have a little wank (crying is optional) each time you post - not only will it warm you up, but you get that lasting afterglow as well.

ubik, its already been said up thread its all dependent on where you live, mortgage, rent etc.. In some areas in will be seen as a lot, in others its just not, so many different reasons, scenarios etc

It cant be generalised.

Retropear Thu 10-Oct-13 21:54:34

It's the unfairness of it and stupidity that gets my goat.

ubik Thu 10-Oct-13 21:59:07

It is unfair that couples with double income are still given CB but single income families are not.

But - is this really causing hardship for people in that income bracket? Really? Even in oh-so-dreadful London? I'm sceptical.

Carolmillen Thu 10-Oct-13 21:59:14

£20 a week is £20 a week - it pays for stuff and you get used to it. Some miss it more than others and some people might still need it - even if under the rules they are no longer entitled to it.

Retropear Thu 10-Oct-13 22:01:48

If 50 is wealthy well um so is 80k.Sooooooo either get rid of it for both(and help with childcare) or give it back.The unfairness and stupidity of it is just mind boggling.

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 22:02:11

I've read the mn guidelines Wallison. smile

That last post was a personal attack, however.

Retropear Thu 10-Oct-13 22:02:31

And what Cat said.

utreas Thu 10-Oct-13 22:06:48

All categories are struggling because in recent years we have been living unsustainable lifestyles and we are having to readjust them.

Wallison Thu 10-Oct-13 22:09:39

It wasn't a personal attack so much as an acknowledgement that with your deeply perceptive barbs about me posting and wanking you saw to the bottom of my poor trollish soul - after all, if I disagree with you, I must be trolling, right? Still, report me if you must - I am sorry that you feel so threatened as to have to do so.

rosieposey78 Thu 10-Oct-13 22:10:56

ubik that is exactly what i mean. I am not saying we can't afford school lunches we can. But i am naturally frugal so i spending £20 per week on something i can do cheaper is crazy.
Especiallyl when we lost 188 per 4 weeks in child benefit.
Honestly is that kind of cooment really any different to the woman on we pay your benefits telling the benefit claimant that she shouldn't buy a chicken.

ReallyTired Thu 10-Oct-13 22:12:48

We are very close to the 50K bracket. Infact DH has seen a tax advisor to see how we can keep our child benefit. He has suggested all kinds of ways we can LEGALLY reduce our tax liablites. For example DH has upped his pension contributions. It is stupid that all families earning close to the threshold have been made to do self assessment. I suspect the costs of implementing this stupid policy will cost more than it saves. (Especially as many people will seek tax advice to fill out their self assessment forms and learn about loop holes.)

I feel that the attack on 50 to 60K earners will damage the ecomony. If DH gets a bonus for good work then we are likely to lose some child benefit. We need people to be encouraged to work hard to get the country out of this mess. People will only work hard if they get to enjoy the rewards.

Personally I would like to see child benefit scrapped and universal free school meals for all state school kids. Lower income familes could be helped out with increasing working tax credit.

comewinewithmoi Thu 10-Oct-13 22:12:59

Just yuk

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 22:14:11

I'd like non-means-tested benefit, higher taxes and lower property prices/lower rents.

It's no surprise that taxation went down, the double-income, long-working-hours, super-stressed, time-poor, resources-poor, on-paper-well-off family emerged - and property prices soared to soak up all that excess income they (now theoretically) had.

I think we should be worrying less about the narrow bands between who does and doesn't qualify for now-means-tested CB, and thinking really, really hard about how we are going to protect what remains of the welfare state.


rosieposey78 Thu 10-Oct-13 22:28:04

I accept that many people are far worse off than us. I have every sympathy and would never criticise them or suggest they are poor budgeters or need to move from an expensive area. Although i accept maybe others have.
Yet today i have seen loads of people saying things like that about that rich top 10 percent earning 50( plus. That was before this thread.

ubik Thu 10-Oct-13 22:30:27

I am not saying we can't afford school lunches we can

Well ok

I'm not sure what the problem is then, really. You would like the extra money, it is handy. Well yes. I would like a dishwasher.

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 22:37:12

You know, the idea that a lot of people, even those on higher incomes, are finding it tough is not incredible. Interest rates are being kept low precisely because a tax rise, an interest rate rise, will hit large numbers of people hard. There would be economic mayhem. And a lot of unhappy voters. Which is why it's not happening.

And yes, it is shit that benefits are being attacked whilst interest rates and taxes remain low. It is utterly crap that the already-vulnerable are being subjected to an economic onslaught that it would appear that the better-off are being protected from.

However, that still doesn't mean that those supposedly on higher-incomes aren't finding things tough.

For my money, I think it points to a new economic reality. The supposedly well-off are paying wodges of "their" money over to ... who? ... for what? ... where is it going? How can people, who on paper should be having such a luxurious lifestyle, be finding things hard? Why are they doing it? What do people fear?

Old-style exploitation was quite straightforward: it resided in the disparity between the money paid to the worker for their labour and the price the product of their labour was sold for (- and we should add the impact of the ghost of the cost of labour extracted by slavery and the value extracted from resources essentially stolen by colonialism). This is new-style exploitation, where people are exploiting themselves through commodification of things such as shelter ...

I don't know ....

Anyway. I know I am bloody cold, and I don't have much of a lifestyle, and I look forward to my old age with a touch of terror, frankly.

morethanpotatoprints Thu 10-Oct-13 22:39:33

It is becoming increasingly difficult for most people though or parents are having to make choices because of changing gov policy.
It is hard to have more sympathy for one group than another.
Clearly on a public forum like this it makes sense not to moan if you know where your next meal is coming from, because there are plenty who don't.

thecatfromjapan Thu 10-Oct-13 22:54:10

Really, if people in a First World country are going without food - and we know people are, because there are food banks and plenty of evidence - it is a disgrace. And there needs to be a lot more anger.

A censorship of problems of smaller magnitude - on a public forum - is not necessarily the ideal solution. In fact, I would argue that it serves to normalise what should be absolutely shocking. You start thinking that it is somehow OK that people are so hard up. That a lot of people are hard up and having problems. And you start to get a real underestimation of how many people are finding things hard.

Responses like "Oh, just budget better" are crazy because they individualise what is, in fact, a structural economic issue - shared by a lot of people. not just one or two flibbertigibbets who spend (enormous) sums of money on fluff.

There is a structural problem. I think it's probably under estimated.

Speaking out about the level of hardship that many people are experiencing in no way should minimise the fact that some people are suffering very, very much. It should make us more, not less, angry - because this is what should make us think "Most of us are in this together - and we are furious". It's not a temporary instance of belt-tightening - it's a structural change in capitalism. and it's worsened by a political will to cynically utilise an economic shock to erode public goods.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now