... 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.

Maybe put it differently then - to be abble to afford a holiday abroad, a nice car, a typical house etcv etc you'll need to be earning X.

The nice stuff doesn't just happen for most you have a path of starting small and then being able to add (hopefully).

Problem is lots of children see the mega bucks earned by the 'celebs' and think you don't need to do anything to get those sort of rewards - there is a tiny number earning super super money (tv presenters, sports etc etc). It does also send out the wrong message that all you need to be is talent spotted and you'll be set-up for life . DW works with 2ndry in an EDB school and either they are going on the dole for a career or wil be talent spotted / be a WAG etc

But SDD - it could all change. Has changed. We should really be educating for resilience.

Malorie Blackman, the writer, says that there is nothing more depressing that going into schools and hearing what children want to do with their lives...be famous, is common.

Agreed - I doubt many careers in future are with one Company or one niche. I do agree a broader education is vital but we should stop some of the mickey mouse degrees (meeja studies ) and be more realistic a degree doesn't automatically mean a better job / higher pay.

"Malorie Blackman, the writer, says that there is nothing more depressing that going into schools and hearing what children want to do with their lives...be famous, is common."

That is depressing. I'm with Debbie Harry on this-

"I'll take the money, you can have the fame"

X factor and the like don't exactly help either - but it shows thousands apply and a tiny few get noticed / anywhere.

Yes - and they need to know that talent is in no way enough.

Partly because you can be as talented as you like, but if you can't cope with the insecurity of the creative industries, if you can't take the kind of insane decisions that are made in these industries, you won't make it.

And partly because there is also a huge amount of luck involved. DCs have grown up surrounded by creative people; some very poor, some doing ok, some extremely well off. They've also seen some of the extremely well off ones go through tough patches, etc. They also know that the extremely well off ones are not more talented than the struggling ones. Nor do they work harder. They work hard - and they got lucky breaks that let them keep working hard for big remuneration.

sigh I type too slowly

My DC know that DH earns quite a lot and that most people don't earn that much. We have also told them many times that he earns that much because he spent many years at school and training and he is very good at what he does. I used to do the same job and earnt a lot less. They know that big salaries don't come easily - well at least that is what we have told them but they are 10 and 7 so it is all just talk to them.

My supercar test driver DS mentioned below has also been told that if he wants to be a mechanic too he won't earn enough to buy the supercar for himself. Probably why he isn't so keen on that idea now. He is aware that jobs that use your brain seem to pay more than jobs that are more manual on the whole.

We have stopped short in telling him exactly how much our income is because (like a lot of adults on this thread actually) he seems to think it buys you anything you want which it doesn't - we aren't talking 6 figure salaries here. He needs to understand that you have to make choices about what you spend your money on and that you can't have everything - that isn't easy when as UQD says, they think £1k is a fortune at their age.

Bonsoir a lot of my girlfreinds agree with you.

They feel that their dream of having it all, was just that:a dream. Thst they would have been better to choose careers they could have continued with.

But to go from that, to actively discouraging their DDs from certain career paths feels wrong.

And let's not forget that most of these women wouldn't be married to their high flying husbands who can now support them, if they hadn't have been following their particular trajectory. Unpalatable but true.

I don't think that anyone earning over 70K is living in a bubble and I think it's quite rude to suggest that.

I am not living in a bubble of any kind. I work very hard, I have had to make huge sacrifices in my life to end up in the position I am now in. I moved 200 miles away from my family and then DP to progress my career. I have had to travel all over the world and live in different countries alone for months at a time. Some of it has been enjoyable and some of it has been extremely stressful and lonely - having said that, it has all been my choice. Almost every one of my friends that earn a lot less than me always say to me 'I couldn't do what you do'. I accept that it's not for everyone but I do think a lot of my life/career has been about hard work and personal choices.

However, I have also lived hand to mouth and had very little money - that was the drive I needed to improve things and I swore that I would never live like that again if I could avoid it.

I am very aware that a lot of people have a lot less income to live on and know that they struggle to get by. I have a parent living off a state pension and support them every month, we also fund my DP's parents who are in a similar position. I am grateful that I can do this and make life a little easier for them. I admire people that do manage to live on low incomes, I know it can't be easy and it must be stressful to live like that. Having said all that, it is wrong to make sweeping statements about high earners. The country needs the higher earners. What would happen if these people were not paying the tax that they do? The benefits and help we give to those in need would be massively cut.

People live to their means no matter what they earn. My mortgage is almost 2k a month alone. My fuel bill is almost 1K. No, I don't need a house the size it is and I could live in a smaller one, I could drive an older car but why should I? I earn enough to pay for it, I can afford my car, I can afford holidays. What do the lower earners want me to do? Hand over my salary to them so they can afford another car/holiday/house? I paid 48K in tax alone last year - surely I am contributing to help the lower earners or people who need benefits?

I just don't understand this resentment towards people who earn more than others. I don't resent any of the tax I pay towards helping others but it seems when its the other way round people can't do the same. I am not smug at all about my income or lifestyle, I am thankful everyday that I am able to do what I do and feel very fortunate to not have to struggle. I am also glad that I can contribute towards helping people that genuinely need it.

SDD oh how we laugh about degrees in our house.

I have four.

DH has none.

He earns more than I do.

(Yes, DCs know this).

Obviously I am keen on education. But I think DCs will have to be very selective, critical and shrewd when choosing whether/what/at what level to study.

OK. I didn't grow up thinking I could have it all. My mother, bless her, was proud of me (for the most part) whatever I did. I could've done with more of a push tbh - which isn't to blame her for not being pushy enough - I just don't think she realised how important education (or rather, bits of paper) would become.

I still don't think the onus should be on girls to seek out a family friendly career. A good work/life balance benefits everyone, regardless of gender, age or indeed whether you have children.

4 is just plain greedy - a good one should be OK and possibly doing a higher / 2ndry one is acceptable too .

"And let's not forget that most of these women wouldn't be married to their high flying husbands who can now support them, if they hadn't have been following their particular trajectory. Unpalatable but true."

I don't really buy this. I know plenty of women who didn't do the lawyer/banker/MBA thing who ended up married to men from those career paths. The one thing that I think all my SAHM/PT working women-married-to-high-earning friends and acquaintances have in common are big brains/bags of talent, huge amounts of self-assurance and strong, vibrant personalities with which they lead their families. High-earning men don't want uneducated or stupid wives, but they aren't particularly fussed about precisely which talents their wives are qualified in.

I do think many people live in bubbles, focusing on issues that are relevent to them and their current lifestyle, and not really considering other people.

It doesn't matter if you are earning 20k, 70k or 200k - most people in all walks of life focus on themselves and what issues are mst pressing for them.

I don't think people on higher incomes are any more likely to be ignorant to the issues faced by others though.

There are igorant selfish people in all walks of life, in all income bands.

And inverse snobbery is as nasty as snobbery itself too.

I am now fortunate enough to have a hosuehold income of far higher than average. Some people on here would consider our household income to make us rich. But we are not rich. We are very comfortably off and nowhere near living day to day worrying about money. But of course we still have things that concern us - for example, we found a crack int he shower tray today - means it'll need replacing, a plumber in, etc. We have other things to spend our money on this month, and yes, we'd rather not have had this expense, and it'll mean changing our plans for the month. But it is not a major issue, but annoying and inconvenient. But surely I should still be able to have a gente whinge about it? I am not saying we should go on about it and make ridiculous statements, but everyone sis entitled to an off day r a whinge every now and again!

And I am not living in some deluded iolated bubble. I can imagine what it is ike to live on a much lower income. I am not stupid, nor am I ignorant, selfish or insensitive.

I told my daughter how much I earned a couple of years ago. She did a quick mental sum and looked at me wide eyed and said 'mummy that means you have £x a month spending money'

I then told her about tax. And bills.

The first 2 were mistakes...

"I just don't understand this resentment towards people who earn more than others."

It's a particularly British problem - it's like a national version of tall poppy syndrome. And it's VERY annoying.

"I have suggested they use their mathematical ability to do accountancy. ds1 wont, ds2 is considering it."

Riven- dont know how old DS2 is but there was an article the other day about KPMG and how they are setting up their own degree courses so that people who want to be accountants do 4 years at Uni then 2 years with them and they qualify as a CA. That would be instead of the current system which is an unrelated degree and then 3 years on the job training . Anyway, the really interesting thing was that these students would be salaried all the way trough Uni as opposed to having to pay to go to Uni

Thought I'd mention it as I remember you saying on the Uni fees thread that you were concerned about funding degrees for your DS's.

Riven - you really don't need much mathematical ability to be an accountant. Most accoutants I know, including me, don't have any maths higher than an O level

If you want to use mathematical ability in an office job with a big salary (eventually) becoming an actuary is a better choice.