What is considered rich these days??

Sorry if you've already answered this, OP, but how much do you have in savings, investments?

I agree with people on this thread who have pointed out how annoying it is when people claim they've "worked hard" for their money. Worked hard compared to who...a nurse, a doctor, a teacher? My mother used to say this about my dad - like he had a monopoly on working hard! Self employed people can use various methods to keep hold of way more money than us mere employees can, too.

Working hard more often than not doesn't result in earning several times above the average UK salary, so a failure to acknowledge or even see that there has been an element of luck reveals that you are indeed seriously "out of touch".

Perhaps your DH took risks thst have paid off, that many wouldn't have had the confidence to take, resulting in being able to build a successful business.

Hats off to him if he is employing other staff, being an excellent employer and paying all his taxes, but even so, I would still argue till the cows come home that he hasn't worked harder than a nurse.

There's an air of superiority emanating from your posts which I'm sure gets right up your SIL's nose. Try and be a bit less smug and boastful and the comments from her might well become less frequent.

Didn’t you have children you couldn’t afford if you were still “skint” even while benefiting off free childcare?

Where did the other £100k come from? The OP's DH earned (this year) £250k not £350k. If indeed he is an equity partner in a law firm then that income is not guaranteed and will fluctuate fairly significantly year on year to the extent that if the firm has a bad year he might have to give some back. Equity partners get an amount of money as drawings based on what the management team think the firm will make (and their individual performance). This will be lower than 1/12th of their drawings. Certainly in DH's firm he gets told what the amount should be each year but then in monthly drawings he gets about 2/3 of that (divided by 12). If the firm does well enough then the rest of it is paid out. Generally this distribution will be made a few times a year. If the firm does really well then they might get a bit more. If the firm hasn't done as well as anticipated then in theory money has to be paid back (or more commonly they don't get the extra distribution that had been hoped for). If the firm fails then the partners loose their stake in the firm (which is generally hundreds of thousands in the form of a loan taken out by the firm on their behalf).

Equity partners in a law firm don't get any pension contribution because they're not employees. They don't get any statutory job security because they are not employees, they will be able to buy into other benefits but that money comes out of their annual drawings rather than being given to them as an extra. The OP's DH will be on the pension taper and so won't get any tax benefit by paying into a pension anyway.

In a number of firms you are financially better of being a salaried partner (who doesn't have a stake in the business and is just an employee with a title) than you are being an equity partner). When I was first made equity I was effectively worse off because my drawings were roughly the same as my salary had been but I had no pension contribution etc.

Still not entirely convinced the OP's DH is a lawyer at all though given the super weird barrister thing.

I really don’t remember. I don’t expect anyone to stand up for me. I must speak as I find, I can’t change my opinions based on who I’m
replying to.

But thank you if you have.

Well now you know I did and, as I said, never again.

I reply on each thread as I find it and don’t really pay attention to user names.

If you did stick up for me, thank you, but I don’t remember any user names here.

I‘m not irate. I just think it’s weird that you think I live with zero income.

Oh good grief.

It did actually. Sorry you’re unhappy.

This thread isn’t about benefit claimants, not sure why you’re shoe hinting that in, except that you have a lot of contempt for people who use paid child care, as shown by your comment that those people ‘choose strangers and bedtime and weekends’.

What a nasty thing to say about people who are trying to juggle work and kids and don’t have free family childcare. Your posts drip with smugness.

I can afford them and they are now too old to require much if any paid childcare. I’m not sure why you’re getting so irate?

You must acknowledge that having access to free childcare is quite lucky - it certainly would have saved you a chunk of cash

Yes you’re rich - well done you (your husband).

Our combined income is only £95k. But we own a five bed detached house worth £950k with only a £55k mortgage, £550pm.

Nope. Just the OP's husband. The other couple hundred thousand practicing in the UK took the easier route.

Yes clearly it made you a very happy person.

I agree. However, the hypocrisy on here about benefits claimants having children they can’t “afford” does my head in when people who can clearly afford paid child care claim it for free as a benefit while working and denigrating SAHP as “ living off” their partner.

In my opinion, the OP’s children are benefiting from having her there.

BTW, we were skint for years due to me going part time, but I wouldn’t change a thing about it as my 12 years part time and being with my sons most of my week were the best years of my life.

This may be true but the SIL seems to be utterly jealous making the kind of remarks she makes about another family's lifestyle. Personally I would tell her that that harder we worked the luckier we became and suggests she tries it instead of taking pot-shots.

This site has been an eye-opener for me in how invested family members are in the lives of each other, makes me glad we spent a long time abroad working and don't mix much with family because of distance! Does no-one ever tell these relatives who comment to mind their own business?

Then, as people on here are quick to say to benefits claimants, why have children you can’t afford?

Now she does but she hasn’t always. Sounds like THEY built their wealth and family together.
Strong relationships discuss future plans and make sacrifices where needed to get to where they want to be.

She is raising their joint children. She puts in as much as he does.

You were very lucky to have that option. Not everyone has local relatives nearby they are able to leave their children with.

Because someone kindly provided it for you for free, while working part-time.

Most people don’t have either of those luxuries, and particularly not today!

Guess so. Then she weirdly accused those who corrected her of pretending to be lawyers. Because apparently if we were real lawyers, we'd know that it makes total sense to call an equity partner a barrister.

Hope she's not helping him fill in his practising certificate renewal forms lol.

It is luck. You live off your husband.

That is the route for every solicitor!