“100k isn’t a big salary”

[cadburyegg]

I’ve just logged onto instagram and YET AGAIN a post comes up headed “100k isn’t a big salary, here’s why”. I’m so sick of seeing it. Most of us earn nowhere near 100k. I don’t spend my time moaning on instagram about how hard done by I am and there aren’t news articles about it. I don’t even feel like I AM hard done by. I feel lucky to be earning less than half that and to have a reasonable flexible job. I’m not going to the press saying poor me poor me because I don’t feel sorry for myself. Yet there seems to be shitloads of “awareness” posts about how shit it is for high earners and how it’s so sad they don’t have free childcare. I know people can have high expenses and I know it’s all relative and I’m probably overreacting but I seriously do not care anymore. It doesn’t mean the salary isn’t high. I’m so sick of seeing these out of touch posts. 🤯

I agree OP posts like these are unhelpful, smug and bragging.
I just sigh and delete or move on.
I'm assuming that the individuals posting this crap have sad and empty lives. 🤔

So why did you bother to rely at all @fetchacloth ?I I usually assume posters have a point to make, but you don't appear to have anything to add to the discussion.

To be a net tax contributor you need to be earning minimum 17k per family member - that’s so that you are covering the things you are taking from public services: hospitals, schools, and any other service you can think of - all of whom are currently hideously underfunded. You could say because of families of net recipients, who are objectively taking more than they put back.

If you can't input the exact figures and get the same amounts, then there's not really a much anyone can do about that. If you've used London, you should come out even better off on benefits than the postcode I used in my calcs.

I use the calculator to assist people as part of my job. I haven't somehow got it wrong.

Thank you. People seem to forget that and think we all get UC

Also absolutely true.

The assumption is that if you are not impaired in any sense, and have no dependents, you should be able to work sufficiently to support yourself. If that's only on NMW or £300k depends on the individual.

I don’t think anyone thinks that. It’s literally part of the whole conversation. The majority are say 100k is a decent salary for a single person but not a huge amount to raise a young family on anymore, which is why the universal credit low earners with children is relevant.

Fucksake
Hadn't realised how privileged I am, reading this thread.
In my late 50s, Family income of around £50k (dh works long hours, I work in a school for 30 hrs) 3 kids, Child benefit, but no universal credit. 1 child gets DLA.
We bought our first house 5 years ago, 3 bed, cheapest we could find (ie... a work in progress and a squash and a squeeze!) in an expensive area.
But at least I'm not earning £100k, sounds like hell.

Most of the people commenting that they earn £xxx,xxx a year are probably living a fantasy & and waiting for their benefits to hit the bank early doors.
I don't see the context in which it is relevant for them to mention their apparent salaries other than to make themselves feel better and the OP and other previous commenters to feel like shit.

Live within your means

Oh right, so what's holding back the rest of us who have lots of experience, are eager to work all hours of the day and weekends, and have the best of academic records, but still can't get past the average salary?

I guess we're just lazy and don't work hard enough... even though I just said we are high academic achievers, we are prepared to work all hours of the day, and we have lots of previous experience... ... ...

This. People on 100k are paying about 45% tax

What do you think is holding you back? What roles are you applying for?

Between £100-125k you actually pay 60% tax.

If you have two in nursery, less tax and loss of benefits, it’s an effective 100% tax rate between £100-145k.

To be a net contributor tax wise you need to pay circa 17k of tax a year. The government on average spends around 17k per person.

People are over 100k may be paying a lot of tax but they still end up with a lot of money

woudlbyou rather pay 50% on 100k or 20% on 30k?

I stand corrected, so that means you need to make circa 67k per family member?

1. Depends where you live.
2. That’s before tax NI etc

Jesus I’m not sure what people aren’t getting here - it’s not that it isn’t a great salary it’s the fact that 100k doesn’t go as far as you think if you live in a high COL city because nursery fees, energy and groceries inflation, rents, mortgage rates bite us all.

i stand by I don’t think 100k makes you well off let alone rich, unless you have no kids / childcare, or are DINKS.

if you have 850/month to cover all costs after a (very modest) roof over your head and utility bills paid for you and one child you are still going to be shopping in Tesco, buying clothes occasionally at Next, a takeaway once a month, one cheap holiday every other year - just like many people earning half your salary. One new boiler and you’d be fucked, just like everyone else.

the difference is that your salary should rise in line with the qualifications/ experience that got you the job in the first place and I do not deny that someone hitting 150k+ starts to feel very comfortable and that brings a whole new lifestyle potentially but it doesn’t change the fact that - for now - 100k is NOT going to have you shopping in John Lewis, waitress, or dining out once a week.

The OP started this thread not those on a good salary. Don’t read this thread if it makes you feel bad. People who earn well shouldn’t feel guilty for it

Boohoo never said those who earn less are lazy. Don’t put words in their mouth.

We have a household income of £170k and can’t afford a second child. We don’t live near our family which is the problem as it means we need to pay for full time childcare at a cost of £1912.50 per month (£90pd). On top of a mortgage and bills etc (we live in a completely normal new build not some sprawling palace), to pay £3825 for two kids is obscene, we would simply have nothing left. The only way to do it would be for one of us to go part time or wait until child starts school. I grew up in a big family house with 4 kids and 1 parent working. My father had a professional job but wasn’t wealthy by any stretch. To think that dh and I are earning £170k and can’t match what I grew up with absolutely staggers me, growing up, that was money that dreams were made off, but it’s quite simply the cost of childcare. Day to day, we don’t have any financial worries, we don’t live a lavish life but we have everything we could need but it’s unbelievable that we can’t afford a second child right now without one of us giving up work.

This thread has just become one long brag for those on £100k+ to gush about how well off they are. Whilst people like me (& many, many others reading this) are struggling to feed our kids. I’m severely disabled so will never be able to earn properly. How do you think this bragging makes mums like us feel? It’s certainly not my fault I’m in this situation

I have to disagree with you there. I haven’t seen anyone bragging about it and as I said above those who earn well shouldn’t feel guilty for it.

Maybe I haven't. I'm certainly not bothered.