Cost of living in the UK v the birth rate

[Potterpot]

I was reading an article where a young couple living in an expensive part of the country said they wouldn’t be able to afford having kids so they’ve made peace with that decision. I can understand why, especially after seeing on another thread that some people’s full time nursery bill costs £1600 a month for one child. The UK average property price at current rates is £1300 a month. That’s £3000 gone, before you’ve even thought about council tax, utility bills, food shopping, travel, saving, disposable income.

I understand being able to make the short term sacrifice financially to afford one child.

Unless one parent can be a SAHP or have significant family help, how are people affording two? Do you have to be high earners for this lifestyle now?

I posted about this recently, we can't afford to have children at the moment and we're early 30s. We did get some helpful advice on my post, but also a lot of comments saying we should just earn more money (as if that hadn't occurred to us). At the moment, the only way we could afford it would be to go into thousands of pounds of debt.
We've put a pin in it and will see where we are in a few years but have ultimately come to terms with the fact that it may not happen for us. We have lots of friends choosing not to have children too, mostly for financial and practical reasons.
We also have some friends that have had 1 child and know that they can't stretch to 2 so are having vasectomies to prevent any further pregnancy too.

What people really mean is they can't afford the lifestyle they currently enjoy and have children. It's perfectly possible to live on one salary while children are nursery age and have a stay at home parent. Many people don't want to do that which is their choice but don't pretend it isn't anything but a choice.

I agree

Housing costs are SO high I don't agree with this.

But

£1300 mortgage (240k property, which is small in many parts of the country)
£800/900 ish for all bills and food - minimum

That’s already over £2000. Someone on 30k takes home £2k a month ish.

So the single household earner would need to earn much much higher than the average income to even be able to afford clothes, birthday presents and emergency savings for their family.

Not to mention: why should one parent have to stay at home? It doesn’t solve the problem of how employable that person becomes when the children grow up, or what they do for their pension, or having their own financial independence. It’s not the 1950s anymore.

I think I remember your thread. It’s crazy that two working adults should have to think like this.

That isn't really just a lifestyle choice though is it? It's about having a career that you've worked hard for going down the pan after 5+ years out of the workforce, a massive reduction in your workplace pension , trying to get a mortgage on one salary or trying to pay rent for 2 people on one salary. Not to mention, some people do quite like their jobs. Let's not pretend we are talking about men here. Its women who are the ones expected to put up with all these disadvantages. Many women are deciding they'd rather not.

One average salary doesn't cover the mortgage on our small mid terrace house, our utility bills and council tax. That's not taking into account food, commuting costs, saving for any emergencies, or any luxuries. It would have a few years ago, but not since interest rates shot up and our energy bills quadrupled.

I didn't say they should have to I said it's a choice. It's also a choice to live somewhere that's costs £1300 a month. People choose what they want to spend their money on.

Where is cheaper than £240k?

It feels crazy, it never occurred to us growing up that we would have to calculate whether we could afford children. We both always assumed we would have two or three quite close together and one of us (me) would stay off work until they were in school, as that was very much the norm for us growing up.

For us nursery monthly fees will be £2.7k and the financial cost is definitely one of the reasons why we are leaning towards stopping at 1 child.

It would be achievable if one of us wanted to be a SAHP but neither of us do and I’d rather stop at 1 child than have to give up my career.

I think the way most people afford 2 is by one parent staying at home, at least for the nursery period, or going into debt or having a high combined salary/generational wealth.

Not if the monthly mortgage or rent payment takes up all or the vast majority of one salary. If both partners are bringing home between £2000 and £2500 a month, and rent/mortgage is £1500 (which it is in many parts of the country - ours was even higher than this) you would struggle to pay all bills, food, clothes for 3+ people out of what is left from just one of those salaries. Maybe for a bit, yes, but not longterm. If you move somewhere a bit cheaper you then incur higher transport costs to get to work or have to run a car. And you damage career prospects in the meantime as it's so difficult to return to work after a gap, so longterm it doesn't pay off.

We managed to afford to have one child by temporarily switching our mortgage to interest only during the peak childcare costs period. It was costing £1400 a month for 3 days a week in childcare. That was a short term measure and we managed it,
but we couldn't afford childcare costs for more than one child or could justify longer not making full repayments.

You can just about get a studio within 10 miles of here for £240. I am here because I can earn well in the City. if everyone moved to where you can a property for £240k that can house a family the prices would sky rocket.

Plenty of places have houses cheaper than 240k.

Parts of Newcastle, most of Preston, lots of Lancashire, the unfashionable parts of the Lake District, rural Norfolk, etc, etc.

I'm not saying they are well connected or close to London but there are places where 240k will get you a decent sized house.

I think that the people who can square this circle easily still live in families that haven't been completely atomised and who can lean on informal childcare arrangements.

Anywhere that has homes that you can buy for less than £250k is unlikely to have the types of jobs available that pay enough to to pay a mortgage, or even to raise the 10% deposit. So you would have to add commuting costs onto that. It's very difficult, and I don't think I would have been able to afford a child if I was starting out now.

Its a moot point. You probably wouldn’t get a decent job in rural Norfolk or an unfashionable part of Cumbria. People need to live where the work is, and those places are more expensive.

And how many jobs are available in those areas that aren't minimum
wage and/or seasonal and/or involve incurring high commuting costs to get to somewhere with more employment?

I grew up in a rural area with very low housing costs and left because there simply weren't jobs available. Unless you wanted seasonal farm work.

@DramaLlamaBangBang

My parents home town is Preston.

Plenty of houses for under 240 eg this one.

A big university, a big hospital, and lots of engineering and science jobs at British aerospace.

www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/146034317

And if everyone tries to move there, how long will house prices stay low, and how long until there are no jobs left?

The “just move somewhere cheaper” posters are utterly blindfolded to reality.

And in addition to commuting costs, you have the practical issues of nursery too. My commute is over an hour as we moved to a cheaper area (my mortgage is £1300 a month now though.. Dread to think what it would be if we'd stretched ourselves to buy in the city but I digress).
I have the dilemma of would I put a baby in nursery near home and risk not getting back from work in time for pick ups if I hit traffic, or a nursery near work and have to pay extra fuel costs to take baby to nursery on my WFH days, or go half way which falls in a very expensive area and pay the extra nursery fees.
Lots of people suggested we move to an even cheaper area, which would exacerbate the issue as we haven't found anywhere cheaper to move to where we'll both have work!

I am a lone widowed parent and l raised two children on less than 18,000 a year for 11 yrs, until they became young adults, and l still had a mortgage. It can be done,
The problem is a holiday, fancy home, and car is now seen as a necessity. I had none of those, and still survived. You just become very resourceful, l had zero help either regarding childcare.

We are sticking to one not just because of direct costs like childcare, but because of the shoddy state of healthcare and education.

In order to provide him with the same level of care we enjoyed as children, we need more money. Ergo no second.

(Before you even get to my woeful maternity experience...)

I think it used to be possible of if you chose you locations well - but yes I do wonder how now.

I think family help, inheritance or high paying careers -or being in a lower cost housing area with decent job such area are rapidly diminishing. We couldn't afford where we are now - and we already couldn't afford cities DH actually worked in so he faced long commute - no idea what we'd do now.