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.

I think Greengrow assumes MN is thoroughly MC minipie.

What about people who worked hard and did well at school but have absolutely no talent or desire to work in finance? We need physicists and teachers as well as fund managers and lawyers. Many would say more than...

edam if people do chose jobs that don't pay particularly well then they can't be surprised when they can't live how they may wish, can they?

They can't start talking about luck.

minipie

I don't think you can change society so that it gives fair chances for absolutely every single eventuality.

Some things are unfortunate, and there are examples of people being able to rise from the ashes...

edam you do realise how much teachers earn? Two mid level teachers have a household income of about £100k.

Word, you keep saying if people work hard at school they will earn lots of money. My point is that's not true - even if you aim for the senior professional jobs. They are no longer a passport to an upper MC lifestyle.

The MC didn't care about vast increases in inequality when it was affecting the working classes, maybe they will start to shout now it is hitting them...

are you talking primary or secondary?

For fucks sake, this site for me is just becoming a window into how the other half live. I know literally nobody who earns that kind of money, and I went to private school.

Edamsavestheday - If you earn £99,999.00 you pay £35,000 in tax and NI contributions.

It's also worth pointing out that employers pay higher employer NI contributions for their higher earners, as well as paying them higher salaries which their employees then pay more tax on.

People should stop bashing high earners. The top 25% of earners pay 75% of all income tax. You don't want the it to become any more dramatic than that or else we'll end up sclerotic and irrelevant like France.

Secondary but secondary teachers earn on average about £3000 more than primary so the difference isn't enormous. Anything with an SN element attracts a higher salary.

Headteachers can earn over £100k

Polonium, that's precisely the problem! Wealth is being concentrated into fewer and fewer hands. That means an ever smaller group of people has most of the money and therefore in theory has to pay a greater share of taxes.

My nephew and his girlfriend earn £98,000 between them. And they get a key worker flat.

People should stop bashing high earners.

I don't think they are being 'bashed' are they?

Or is anything short of agreeing that '£100k is nothing', bashing?

edam - why is that then? We don't have a massive unemployment problem. And we do have a minimum wage.

btw my nephew and his girlfriend are teachers.

Good Lord I need to teach with some of your schools. I'm top of the basic pay scale and would get about 31 if I returned to teaching. I don't know many couples where they manage both working full time, so more common would be 1.5. Many (most?) are earning less than 31!!

I used to be in the "squeezed middle" by that definition and then life happened and I realised that I had been deluding myself.

There is a long, long way to fall from an income of £100,000 in this country before you hit rock bottom.

I was at a grammar school, ex oxbridge. Most of my friends earn similar if working (teachers, OTs, admin). Of course I do have friends and fb friends of fellow students that flew much higher, but most of us m/c with professions are not earning anywhere near 100grand. Many can't afford for both partners to work unless family are doing childcare.

You don't know many couples where both manage to work full time? Really? A massive number of families in the UK have two full time working parents.

My DSis and her husband are on over £100k between them. They are both secondary teachers, he is a head of department.

My friend is a head teacher and is on £109k

But as Thomas Pickety has so rightly pointed out, income is not tightly linked to wealth and the concentration of wealth is what is actually causing the inequality of incomes

I don't personally think a household income of £100K is an outrageous sum.

And I have to say I've never met anyone who earns a lot of money who isn't talented, extremely bright or hardworking.

But Edam is right, bad things can happen to anyone: even talented, bright and hardworking people. Sometimes illness or misfortune sneaks up and bites you on the arse.

HTs who earn over £100k are not the norm. They're usually in charge of very large secondary academies in London. A primary HT is much more likely to be on half of that (or even less). And most teachers are not HTs.

It's like basing a discussion about what civil servants get paid based on the salaries of a small number of top senior civil servants in London (and ignoring all the people on very ordinary salaries indeed).

Have just checked the teaching pay scale - there can't be many mid range teachers earning £50k. You really need to be on the leadership scale - ie. in senior management positions - to have a salary in that region.

It might be possible if you're at the very top of the pay scale AND with significant middle management responsibilities - or some kind of Advanced Skills teacher, or whatever the heck they're called nowadays - but the only secondary teachers I know on pre-tax salaries of £50k + are all on their schools' leadership teams & certainly not "mid range".

atticus - in a state school? That must be incredibly rare - have a look at the payscales.

And no, thinking about it I think I only know one couple who both work full time and she is dropping because of coordinating out of school care. Most either both work 4 days or one works part time. Of course we don't live in London amongst people who think 100grand is peanuts and can afford nannys...

Teachers' pay scales:

In London £50K isn't difficult at al for a teacher to earn.

www.naht.org.uk/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=36206