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.

Hmm. My feeling is that a lot of people are finding it hard - even those on £100k. And most people on £100k in London won't be able to afford private schools.
I think a lot of it is mortgages or rent - which are both a cunning way of funnelling seemingly high wages off to the richer people - and the banks .
We need a mass exodus to the North - of people and jobs . And an end to all the tax breaks thst make London housing an atractive haven for international capital.

The point is surely not to mock but to listen and think. These threads always go to shit because posters get angry about wealth inequality a(fair dos, really) - but there really is some truth in posters coming on and saying that there are a lot of people suffering.

We should be asking why. And who benefits.

I would also like to point out that we now pay for things thst used to bd free.

And I agree - there are degrees of struggling - for far too many, life is do unpleasant, we should actually be ashamed . But that doesn't lessen ghe point that a lot of people are suffering more than we should accept. In fact, it just says that our boundaries of what is acceptable in a civilised society have been fucked up.

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.

Yes, so do I Primary, but there are still more options for such people to balance the books (to downsize, relocate, release equity, choose state ed etc) than the average 'squeezed' person has.

I would also like to point out that we now pay for things thst used to bd free

Like what thecat?

You can burn through £100k without much to show for it.

E.g., 3-bedroom council house in Murder Mile, £27,300/year: www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-48465629.html

Two kids at private day schools: £35k/year

That's £62,300, on nothing tangible whatsoever. Gross that up and you have spent £100k/year, and you've not even paid the gas bill, bought food, etc., yet

The catfromjapan I agree housing costs are causing many people to feel like they aren't doing as well as they might like. It is a real problem, however the whole concept of the squeezed middle is that you are in the middle. I agree that if even the very well off are feeling poor then we are in trouble. Sometimes though, I think the very well off (family income of 100k plus are in my opinion) do need some perspective on those people who really worry about putting food in the table rather than can I pay my school fees. That's not to undermine their anxieties.

Yes, so do I Primary, but there are still more options for such people to balance the books (to downsize, relocate, release equity, choose state ed etc) than the average 'squeezed' person has.

Easier said than done if you have to live in a certain area for schools and employment.

But why would you Aga?

"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."

This is hilarious!

If money was tight, you would not be able to send your DCs to private school. Not having money means not having those kind of choices. How can you not understand that?

I agree that if even the very well off are feeling poor then we are in trouble. Sometimes though, I think the very well off (family income of 100k plus are in my opinion) do need some perspective on those people who really worry about putting food in the table rather than can I pay my school fees. That's not to undermine their anxieties.

Yes. Clearly the squeezed uppers have their own problems. I don't see that it is a reason to pretend they are 'middles' though.

Er, I don't know? Perhaps you had some sort of hipsterish attachment to living in Murder Mile, for your creative meeja job innit? And then had kids, and were scared of the local schools? It's plausible enough I think.

And while you can go without the private schooling, the ridiculous rents for quite ordinary houses in rather rough areas, aren't as easy to avoid (yes you can go and work for half the pay in Lancashire and probably have a better standard of living, but that's not really a likely scenario for most people is it? They see they are earning £100k in London, and I guess they have certain expectations, which might well include private schools and living in an area not mostly populated by gang bangers).

And were averse to eating?

Expectations are at the heart of this, I think.

Well it is never a good idea to stretch to the maximum.

If you are on a low income you might have to, you cant stop eating or paying your basic bills and this might be eating all your income.
But if you are on a high income surely you could eat, heat your house, pay the mortgage and still have something on the side.
If you overstrech then it is silly and risky. I mean if you earn 100K it is not compulsary that you plan your life in such way that you spend it all. !!

Actually i think that if you have a high salary it is even more essential to keep savings as a highly paid job is harder to replace if you lost your job. So...erm just dont overspend.

And yes i live n london (but not in zone 2).

dh and I lived in London and earned between us about 100k. We felt pretty wealthy. It was six years ago but I'm not sure that things have changed that radically have they? We were thinking of private school for our two children going into secondary school, and now I've checked the cost of fees (16k a year each) that would certainly have made a fairly huge dent in our family funds - I can see why it's only an option for such a small proportion of people.

Wigglylines - she said if money was tight not almost gone. Obviously it's impossible to pay it if you don't have it

DH and I live in London with an income of about £140k between us. We live in a one bed flat (baby arriving any day now but we can't afford the £100 extra per week to jump to a two bed flat). Outgoings on rent, packed lunches/food (we rarely eat out and if we do, it's the Thai across the road) , transport/Oyster cards and essential bills is about £2.5k per month. We are managing to save some for a house deposit (about £500 per month) but we Aren't frivolous, have mainly second hand things for the baby and I spend £2 (that's TWO POUNDS) every fortnight getting my eyebrows done. Nor do we take expensive holidays. Oh and we don't have a car either. And neither of us spend loads on clothing.

If we had to spend money on school fees, fancy holidays and overpriced bags on top, we would really struggle. I have no idea how those couples afforded the fancy cars and the luxury wardrobe. On £100k?!

I should add that most of my family and friends live out in the regions/North, own their own 3-4 bedroom homes, take foreign holidays and have (what appear to be) awesome lives. Their joint income is probably £50-60k a year. And their jobs are way less stressful than ours AND they are usually home for 6pm to put their kids to bed.

I once reviewed one of Dorling's papers & was very annoyed at the final publication revisions (didn't do at all what I wanted them to).

Academic studies misrepresented by the media? You don't say...

How Becca?

You must have a net joint income of £6-7k pcm, but you only mention outgoings (inc deposit savings) of £3k pcm.

You don't have to answer (obviously) but I can't make sense of that at all.

give up the private education, downsize the house, have less holidays, sell things you don't use/need on ebay - problem solved

We lived easily in London on 35k and saved money. Move to a cheaper area if your rent is that high. People who spend spend spend and then say they have no money annoy me. Do without all the luxuries and save like the rest of us.

We have friends who one commented he didn't want to live like us, as in watching our money, as he was living at his wife's parents house. We bought our own with money we saved and then bought a rental. They are still spending everything they earn waiting on a handout from her parents.
The couples in that dm article need to stop spending more than they earn.

ArsenicFaceCream: Expectations are at the heart of this, I think.

Expectations are at the heart of pretty much every AIBU thread. But, yes, particularly this topic.

Exactly Arsenic -

DH and I spend almost the same as Becca on travel, bills (incl childcare) and day to day food as that and our joint income is £60K - AND we have a DC! (And we still manage to save)

Admittedly we are not in London but living costs here are v similar...

I'm missing the point of this thread. The article refers to 'upper middle'. Its not trying to suggest it's average incomes.

The problem here is the expectation of being able to live a certain lifestyle without actually having the income to back it up. That would be equally true if they were earning £20k or £500k a year.

No-one needs private schooling, designer clothes or a 5 bedroom house if they've got only 2 kids. If someone chooses to try to have these things without the income to back it up because they are desperate to have some kind of aspirational lifestyle then tbh I don't have a massive amount of sympathy if it unravels. Most people I know manage to budget to a certain extent and live with the fact that they can't buy whatever they want whenever they feel they need it.

I will never have sympathy for anyone saying they are struggling financially while their dc are at private school. It actually makes me really cross. And I say that as someone who went to private school.

It is a choice. A lifestyle choice. It isn't a necessity. No matter what the state schools are like there is always a choice, relocating if someone is absolutely desperate not to send their children to the local one.

We are a very low income family for various reasons and having gone through redundancy twice from very high earning jobs I am very wary about living up to our means.

If these on £100k are stupid enough to make these choices then fuck them.

Perhaps they could have some.sympathy for those on a third of their incomes who don't want to live in shit holes and move to the arse end of nowhere to meet ends meet.

My friend is on a salary of nearly £80k, his wife is on £50k and he regularly complains about being poor due to school fees and living in a very nice part of London.

If he could pull his head out of his arse and realise that most schools are not like a warzone and he could love somewhere just as nice but a little further out (zone 4 instead of 2, for example), then he wouldn't be living on beans on toast some weeks.

Idiots.