... to think that most MNers live in a bubble?

[frgr]

Seriously, the amount of times I read on here about "oh we earn 70k a year but we're really struggle to provide for little Jacob's polo lessons this year" (or some other such shite).

In real life, the average income of my family and friends is probably circa the national average. I know for a fact that my BIL is on around £6/hr and works 42 hours a week, I know that my best friend's total family income is about 22k because she was talking about mortgages a month ago... I'm talking about hard working people who go out come rain or shine and do their day's work, to provide for their families.... and then I log on here and find out MNers are posting trivial shit about being unable to afford XYZ and feeling hard done by on their incomes of "only" 3x the national average.

I don't know if I've become more sensitive to this crap since starting re-posting on here last year (after a break of about 3 years), but it seems to me that certain members of MN are totally and utterly oblivious as to what the average family is having to endure during this recession.

It's fucking unbelievable, it really is.

In your opinion, why are so many MNers out of touch with reality? Does this site cater to a different class than me? Are avg MNers just generally deluded - do I even belong here any more, with our 21k combined income, worrying about where the next school trip fee is coming from despite the fact that both of us work?

Christ.

Why would someone be paying both rent and a mortgage?

4k a month is a SERIOUS amount of money in my world.

If I said they had I didn't mean it.

I was working out £3900 net, £2k childcare, then you take off mortgage etc. In other words childcare more than mortgage is a huge n ecessity to enable you to earn the £70k or £4k pcm net.

So you haev to take the childcare off which you don't have if you're unemployed or living off male earnings.

That takes half your net pay, Then you have your travel to wrok which housewives and the unemployed don't have which even in outer London can be qutie a bit and you probably need clothes suitable for work which housewives don't need so we're already well down well under half that before paying a penny for housing costs.

I haven't read ALL the posts, but I read the first say 40.

If people are on 70k+ and struggling then it could be for a number of reasons; one in particular, a higher mortgage, a better car, living a more expensive city/place, private schooling, and bang their money is gone at the end of the month and they may very well struggle to meet the standard of life they've become accustomed to. I don't begrudge people this, if they're earning 70k+ then they must be working damned hard for it, and good on them. I'm of the opinion that if you want more money, either get a different job or become better educated to get a better job.

And I don't think it's fair to moan about a calibre of pay bracket when it's really down to envy. Good on them I say.

YABU

My lifestyle would change dramatically if I earned £70k. You cannot imagine.

Xenia, sorry, I misread your other post.

But is it all about working hard and life choices LoftheM.

I do think some of this depends where you live. 70k in London isn't silly money and doesn't go that far but 70k in York, or Cardiff, or even the South Coast is a different matter altogether.

Yes, you need to look at the net pay after tax and childcare costs which for £70k brings you down to about £2k a month and then take off housing, travel and work clothes costs. My piont is that your £70k might not end up as a net sum that much more than someone who has a lot of state help with childcare costs and pays no rent as they get housing benefit etc etc. In other words the gap narrows, whereas if you earn say £250k then that certainly woudlnt' apply even if 52% of what you earn is chopped off most of what you earn to fund the low paid and wars abroad.

People no low incomes do forget the cost of not getting any housing benefits, no tax credits and 52% or 42% or whatever upper tax.NI rates.

And of course there are distortions at the lower end which are even worse where if you earn a tiny bit you lose a load of benefits adn even higher marginal rates than 52%.

I earn £70k but struggle financially. I take home approx £4k each month. Of this, I pay £1,500 mortgage (modest 3 bed terrace on outskirts of London), £800 childcare, £400 car payments (leased because we could not afford to buy), £200 tube fares, £172 Council Tax etc etc. I have relatives living on benefits who have far more disposable cash than I do.

£400 would BUY you a whole car if you weren't fussy about what you drove. £400 a month to rent one? Now THAT's more money than sense - especially when you say £200 on the tube as well!!!!!

I'm with tyzer, £400 a month on car payments is silly.. I assume it's a brand new one?

£400 to lease 2 small cars. We need some way to do the nursery drop-off and pick-up and get to the station. I'm not asking for sympathy - I choose how to spend my money and am happy with the choices I've made, but simply wanted to show how £70k can disappear on day-to-day living and does not necessarily mean a life of luxury.

I didnt realise the tube was so expensive!

You're missing the point that renting two cars to do school and station runs IS the life of luxury.

Fair enough - I accept it's all relative.

You could just buy a cheap banger. Mine cost about £1200 as a one off payment.

DH works 45-50hrs a week. He leaves the house at 7am every morning to get to work. I am paid to work 16 hours a week, plus do about another 4-5 hours a week on top of that preparing things for work. I also do 4-5 hours a week voluntary work.

Our household income is less than £25k.

I don't understand the idea that people on high incomes work harder than those who are on low incomes. Surely there are slackers and hard workers in every income bracket?

The tube is terrily expensive, my student children find it one of the biggest expenses. The car thing - well their cars cost about £800 each so £200 a month on car lease costs does seem not necessary but even if you ignore that from the £70k you get down to £3900 a month after tax and take off her other travel, mortgaeg and child care etc that's down to £1328 a month left for food clothes etc which is £306 a week. Whereas someoen on benefits who has no rent or travel to pay as they don't work nor child care with 2 children they might get - totally guessing here on the basis without a child might be £40? I don't know someone tell me.....

We are comparing a £70k a year single working parent and a non working benefits claimant in terms of net income left after housing council tax, tax and childcare is paid for.

We got down to £306 a week for the £70ker.

london0hull4, what's to stop one of you cycling to the tube? or even all the way to work, if it's not too far? A Brompton folding bike (which you can take on the tube) would pay for itself in a couple of months. It's hard to imagine that leasing 2 cars is really the only viable way of getting to nursery and the station.

I'm sure I could cycle to the station if I was looking to save money. I choose to spend a portion of my salary on a car instead. I'm not moaning or asking for money saving tips - but thanks anyway.

hmm if you are struggeling to pay your huge mortgage why dont you just sell up and buy a smaller house in a cheaper area? stop sending your kids to private school. its not rocket science. the difference is someone on 70k has room to make significant alterations too make their financial situation more bareable. The likely hood is someone on 15k a year cant make anymore cut backs.

Londonhull, I think when you earn £70k but choose to spend it in a way that doesn't make sense to a lot of people, you DO sound like you are moaning when you say "I earn £70k but struggle financially".

I was comparing £70k and unemployed poor. Working poor is a different calculation and can be worse off than unworking poor which is awful.

I just wanted people to realise that £70k means about £300 a week after tax, mortgage on modest smallish house and childcare costs.

I don't think the 70ker is asking for sympathy. I just think the poor think £70k means 70k cash whereas it means you pay a massive sum to keep the unempoyed and fund working tax credits for others and fund the army and all that and you keep at teh upper end 48% of what you ean only so more than half is chopped off even before you start looking at housing and childcare costs.