The average salary in the UK?

[Banoffeepiefan]

It struck me that I have no idea what this is, in terms of (if I'm right with this) the modal average - the mean, I think, is about £26,000, but that is not a good reflection on what most people or families live on. Are there any stats to show what this is across the UK?

Interested because I'm job hunting at the moment, trying to plan ahead, and also because of the surge of threads on Mumsnet about how many people are struggling, and that number who are struggling seems to be climbling steadily this last few years whether it's to buy a house or to buy food. I wonder is the average (whatever it might be) enough to be comfortable on, and are the people who are really struggling (apart from crises such as health or debt etc) those who earn significantly less?

IIRC, It's more like £19K in the NE.

My area is really cheap to live in though

£400 for two bedroom apartment in town centre
£250 shopping for the month
£50 phone bills
£30 internet
£37.50 water
£78 electric (no gas)
£160 council tax
£150 petrol
= £1155.50

If we earned £100k we would be rolling in it.

Curious, statements like that are really, really fucking offensive to those of us who scrape by from one payday to the next with no savings as a safety net, no benefits to save us.

To those of us who can only afford to eat meat twice a month, to those of us who never, ever eat out, to those of us who are scared to run a bath or switch the heating on.

To those of us who never go to the cinema/theatre/National Trust properties etc. Because although we'd love to, we can't afford it.

To those of us who spent less than £10 on our son's Christmas present last year, and nothing on our DH. Because there was no money left.

And you know what? I am not the poorest person I know, not by a long way. Because although we eat eggs or beans or cheese on toast for tea more nights than I'd like, at least I can afford to feed my son without resorting to food banks.

You honestly have no clue how people live. Give it dome thought next time you're in the supermarket putting what you'd like in the trolley without having to add it up on a calculator as you go.

Scarlet

A nanny doesn't always work out cheaper than a parent though even taking loss of income into account.
So if you weren't career minded and were looking at it from a purely financial pov you would take a different path.

I think we all have our own idea of how we want our life to be, what sort of lifestyle we would ideally like.
If you can achieve this sometime in life you are lucky, however this has come about.

We live in London, zone 4. Have 1 salary of 34k for a family of 3 and live quite comfortably. Most people round this area earn similar too. Guess my idea of comfortable must differ from many other Londoners from looking at this thread.
London is cheap for travel esp buses and has so many free places to take kids too.

But you might have to live in an area like ours to get 100k...

Grumpy, I think about every single thing I buy. I find that offensive actually and you're totally missing the 'its all relative' point.

curious but I might not. I'd still be relatively well of if I earned 60k, even 50k.

It's partly about lifestyle choices. People who say they have no money left over when they're on quite a good wage can often downsize in LOTS of ways, ways that people on minimum or similar wage can't.

and I'm the one who said it's all relative, so I do understand. The more you earn, the more your outgoings end up.

According to that guardian data it was £19k for Newcastle North and west, and £17k for Newcastle East. Westminster North was the highest earning constituency at nearly £40k, and Blackpool South was the lowest at c.£15k.

Morethan, I was answering Kim who said posters talking about nannies etc were in a different world.

I was just pointing out that a nanny can work out cheaper than childcare for those wanting to stay in work.

Tarantula where do you live? How do you afford to rent a flat big enough for the three of you even in zone 4? That's a two bedroom flat I'm guessing? Wherever it is I am moving there. You earn pretty much what I do (a little bit more), but there is no way I could afford a two bedroom flat.

It being the median salary.

Scarlet

I realise this.
I can't remember how old I was when I realised that however thousands or millions are being talked about they are just phone numbers, just zeros.
They mean nothing out of context.
I hear some people talking on here about lifestyles I couldn't imagine, but I wish them no ill feeling. It isn't what I'd choose, but neither would they choose mine.
Its interesting hearing how others do things.

I'm sorry but £2700 after housing is a lot. If the £2700 was to cover rent/mortgage in an expensive area then I could possibly see your point but if that's what's left after I'm sorry but I struggle to have sympathy. It's more than 2.5 times what we have *before housing and more than 5 times what we have after. We have to pay council tax, utility bills, commuting costs and we even have to eat. Granted we don't pay school fees but private schooling will never be an option for us. We'll never have a mortgage either as saving is difficult and we'd never meet affordability criteria. I don't go to Starbucks, cafes, nights out etc either btw (this isn't a complaint just a statement of fact in anticipation of "oh but you must waste money on....).

Kim
This is us, not much income but mc lifestyle how we got here, but glad and very lucky we did.

25 years, much of which was spent saying "It will be better when",

Software developers might be earning £60K+ in London, but senior developers are earning £30-40K in the NE unless they take the risk of contract work. That said, the £500K terrace in parts of London can be had for 1/5 of that in some parts of the area, without compromising on feeling safe where you live or having a bit of garden. The local coffee shop might only sell Nescafe instant, though.

100k won't go far if you're trying to keep up a middle class lifestyle with 2 kids in an affluent London suburb. But people who do that have chosen that lifestyle, have chosen to have those children, have chosen to live in London and can't (and hopefully don't) expect much sympathy if they cry 'woe is me, we have no money'.

We chose no kids and a modest home and lifestyle so we can save thousands a month for a house deposit. It wouldn't be possible otherwise. Lots of people on much lower salaries will never get the chance. They're not in the same boat as people who can't afford a house because they made other lifestyle choices. If you're struggling on a six figure salary, even in London, you're not struggling with getting food on the table, more like paying optional school fees, or struggling to afford another child ie deciding between luxuries. Totally different situation from those who eat toast for three meals a day.

Oh, good, is this my chance to be an economic statistics bore?

• Median equivalised net household income in 2011/12 was £367 per week, After Housing Costs (AHC).
• Income inequality remained reasonably level between 2010/11 and 2011/12. This is because the income of households fell by broadly similar amounts.

• But households in the lowest quintiles fell by more than those in the highest quintiles.
• The higher falls in the bottom quintiles' AHC income are driven by Housing support not rising in line with housing costs.

• Around two-thirds of individuals had an equivalised household income that was less than the national mean.
• The presence of substantial numbers of individuals with relatively high incomes results in a skewed distribution and a large difference between the overall mean and the median.

Translation:

• Two out of five UK households have less than the national average to live on after housing costs.
• The poorest households are suffering greater losses than any others; this is because housing support has been reduced.
• 300,000 people have less than £100 a week to live on.

^Source: www.gov.uk/government/publications/households-below-average-income-hbai-199495-to-201112^

The situation is getting rapidly worse since those figures were done. Housing support has failed to keep pace with rent increases, various other benefits have been cut, numbers of welfare dependents are increasing and the wealth gap is increasing.

The charts show income from all sources, net per week. First one is before housing costs; second one is after housing but before all other expenses.

The government is re-defining poverty (out of line with world standards) to make it look as if fewer people - particularly children - are living in absolute poverty. The horrific new workfare scheme is being pushed forwards to hide the continuing surge in unemployment.

Average household salary figures: www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/uk-average-salary-26500-figures-3002995

I think some people, however much they earn, will struggle to accept they are well off.

"Out of a population of 60 million people in the UK, only 300,000 earn more than £100k per year."

opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2013/09/pay-the-painful-truth/#sthash.rtoNiz6W.dpuf

I realise we are well off, but I don't think there is anything wrong with acknowledging that this is not what I thought well off would look like.

When I graduated in 2000, I took home £814 pcm in London. I crossed my fingers every time I tried to withdraw cash from the ATM.

If I had imagined earning what I earned now I'd have thought mansion, luxury cars, designer wardrobe etc. the reality is quite different.

I understand we have choices and for that I am extraordinarily grateful but outside of the freedoms there are significant and non negotiable financial cost attached to working: when I worked regular hours I could use a nursery, but now with 3DC and a demanding job I have a nanny. To pay her £33k salary I need to earn £48k. Without her I couldn't work.

I'm not sure what my point is except for sometimes wondering if it's actually worth it...

Many people cant afford to work and chose the sahm option, for better or worse. Im a graduate but childcare was a choice we couldnt afford.

I cant conceive how someone on 100 grand or someone who can afford school fees, does not realise they are incredibly privilidged beyond most of the population.

It does seem there's a lot of ignorance. 2700 after housing! It's more than most people have before housing!!

Our household income is about £50k and we feel really comfortable (cheap mortgage in the north and no DCs). But as I pay pension contributions, we have about £3100 per month to pay for everything, but we do manage to save quite a lot and have two foreign holidays per year.

The poster who has 'only' £2700 after bills need to realise that they are much richer than average. One thing that really irritates me is people that are much richer than average complaining about how hard done by they are. Most of the people I work with are much more well off than me, but you wouldn't think so, listening to them complaining.

However, posters are starting to touch on the reason why very well off people don't feel rich. One of the reasons why we feel so comfortable is that we lead a compartively modest lifestyle.

We eat or drink out maybe only once per month, mainly because I am a reasonably good cook and therefore I find the standard of food provided, particularly at chain restaurants, quite poor, to the extent that I do not want to pay nearly £50 for the pair of us to have a meal out. We don't have many good independants near to us either.

There are lots of things that are actually luxuries that have become normalised, so people do them without thinking, and can spend hundreds of pounds per month on, without realising, as they are simply just doing what 'everyone' does or buying what 'everyone' has. I mean things like:

latest smartphone contracts
lots of redecorating and refurbishing houses
regular beauty treatments
coffees and lunches out
regular meals out
whatever food you want from the supermarket and wine several times per week at home
prime cuts of meat (steak, chicken breast, fresh fish)
out of season fruit from Waitrose
new/nearly new cars
regular purchasing of new clothes
children's activities and days out to theme parks etc

I'm not saying that people shouldn't have the above, but its perfectly possible for a couple to spend hundreds if not £1k+ on things like these, without thinking that they have an extravagent lifestyle or room to cut back, when in reality they do.

Anyone on average and below average salaries won't be able to have these things all the time without getting into debt and will need to pick and choose to only do a few of them and then only occasionally.