To think £100k pa is NOT 'the squeezed middle'?

[ArsenicFaceCream]

Link

The article is very confidently attributing the definition to Danny Dorling, but did he really name this figure?!

These women are fools.

The problem is though if you have school fees, child care costs, a huge mortgage and debt then yes I don't think 100k pa is enough.

I quickly read that article and the first couple had a rather large mortgage and no savings.

I couldn't survive on £100k per year living where I do.

But if the books aren't balancing, something has to go, surely?

Private education being an obvious candidate for cutting.

Is it 8% of the population that receive a private education? That's not the 'middle' of anything.

Nobody can have the same lifestyle for their income that they used to be able to expect.

What do you think is the squeezed middle?

Quality sad faces there

The problem is though is once you become accustomed to it then it's very hard to sacrifice it.

I privately educate my children and if I was in a position where money was shall we say tight, I wouldn't put my children into state school. I can imagine that's the same for most parents who privately educate.

I think one problem is mortgage debt, people have far too high mortgages then what they would be allowed now under the new lending rules.

I think it should probably involve a middle (mean? median?) income Behoove

The FT says 'low to middle income' in their lexicon;

lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=squeezed-middle

I don't believe a six figure income fits the definition.

Quality sad faces there

I thought the couple were particularly good BOF

The first two in that article I can see why they are 'squeezed' but the third woman Annie spends £1300 of her husbands money on facials and clothes etc. Not what I would call squeezed.

That articles as bad as the benefit bashing ones

They found the 3 most dippy couples and twisted what they said (or the couples are actually thick as mince)

First couple, the woman had no job for 16 years and their kids 'needed' private schooling for the cricket and the rugby. (bollovks , there are only a few places where you might conceivably need private schooling and the Cotswolds isn't one of them)

Next couple. - can't budget , have run up. 50 k of debt and now want to buy the enormous house they rent. (They obviously can't afford 10 rooms and don't need them - no kids)

Last couple - spend 1400 a month on shite. Stop having manicures, stop eating out - voila, you're not poor

The article is awful as of course there are real people on 100k who are actually a bit pinched and they could have interviewed them

But they didn't because dipshits make better news

Hi, yeah I'm thinking it is all relative. In the expensive SE of England I suppose that would be considered squeezed middle. Where I am (west of Scotland) that would be affluent.

I privately educate my children and if I was in a position where money was shall we say tight, I wouldn't put my children into state school. I can imagine that's the same for most parents who privately educate.

But there have to be limits to that stance? You wouldn't risk repossession for example? You wouldn't pose for sad DM photos and call yourself the 'squeezed middle'?

The fail have just taken Dorling out of context in order to make people froth at the mouth.
Dorling argues for a more equitable society and is very critical of the fact the the top 1% take 14% of the total income in the uk

The article refers to only the squeezed "upper" middle with "aristocratic aspirations". Normally known as Seriously Deluded people. They say they squeezed through their economic crisis by not paying their mortgage which ordinarily leads to repossession, so either they're telling big fibs or being married to a lawyer really helps (fibs for free!)

I couldn't survive on £1,000,000 living where I'd like to. How would I pay for the helicopter and the Westminster fees? One of the Bentleys would have to go. How could I be seen in a Merc?

However if anyone seriously believes that £100,000 is the "middle" they need to widen their horizons.

Normally known as Seriously Deluded people

I haven't read about the second couple yet, the DM sad faces were too offputting.

Treat yourself Perp the bit about the house and cars is a doozie.

My heart absolutely bleeds for them.

Imagine not being able to afford a luxury holiday. How awful.

The article is awful as of course there are real people on 100k who are actually a bit pinched and they could have interviewed them

Presumably these are 'real' people too Laurie.

The Cotswolds woman, particularly echoes people I know in RL in her remarks (although of course I don't know the details of their finances).

Although of course it is the DM and the second two case studies are verging on batshit.

I am that the estimable Mr Dorling's work is being represented like this though.

Hi, yeah I'm thinking it is all relative. In the expensive SE of England I suppose that would be considered squeezed middle. Where I am (west of Scotland) that would be affluent.

I'm in London Behoove and somehow we seem to rub along on 5 figures, as do most of London.

Some people don't seem to understand that large mortgages, private school fees x 3, late number plate 4x4s, skiing holidays etc are not actually compulsory (Hell, they're not even an option for many most people).

So much of this is competitive spending.

Or entitled spending.

Arsenic Luckily for us it wouldn't ever happened but if it did I would beg, borrow or steal to keep my children in private education.

As a PP has stated it really depends on where you live. Where I live £100k+ isn't that much but I can imagine it to be rather substantial the further north you go.

YANBU the average wage is £26.5k, so I would say the squeezed middle is a family of two parents £30-£50k or single parent £20-35k.

Whilst loads of families would love to send their children to independent schools, most choose not to because they can't afford it.

I do have sympathy for people on higher incomes who have had redundancy or income drop due to the recession so are 'locked into' certain expensive situations - big mortgage on house that has dropped in value, private school. BUT they still aren't the squeezed middle.

Superwife

If something happened (things do) you would find you could live on average earnings.

If you found you had to live on benefits, then you would know what it is to be struggling.

All it takes is an illness, injury, bankruptcy, redundancy, collapse of employer, change in business cycle.

PS I live in the South East. Most people/families I know do not earn 100k or even close. There are regional differences but I actually do think there a a percentage of well off people living under the misapprehension they are somehow average.