To be confused by other people's finances...

[Haudyerwheesht]

I know it's none of my business obviously but still....I want to know!

For example how does my neighbour who only has one adult working in an averagely paid job afford to go to Florida and do Disney / universal etc twice in 6 months?

How does another person I know live in an enormous house and wear designer clothes and have lovely holidays etc when they're 24, with 3 kids and don't work (husband does). I kind of know the answer to this as they're both from wealthy families....but I want to know the ins and outs because I'm nosy!

Why does my friend rent for 1.2k a month and fritter money away when they could ft a mortgage much cheaper if they had a deposit?

How can my sister moan about money when she has no mortgage or housing costs, no council tax and her and her husband both work full time??

Obviously aibu to be so nosey but I'm not the only one am I?

dontcallmethatyoucunt - tax payers have always paid for their parents state pensions, never their own. Its always been how the system works. There are many women in early 60s who thought they were paying in for state pension at 60, only to find the age has been increased, at very short notice. Not all baby boomers are wealthy.

Whilst auto enrolment is relatively new, most people in days gone by did automatically enrol into schemes anyway, I always did.

Not everyone has gilt-edged public sector pensions either, DH and I don't. I have a couple of small final salary pensions from years ago. One will pay the grand sum of £500/year. DH has been a Contractor so has a couple of money purchase pensions, but mainly we are planning to use our savings (which Elle thinks we should give away for re-distribution!) to help fund our retirements.

We are also paying into pensions for our DC, so they will hopefully have a better choice of when to retire than we will have.

Elle
I worked in the NHS so have seen the changes first hand myself. I currently work in social services, I seemed to make a habit of working for services that paid badly and struggle. What I was talking about earlier was the Orange Wednesday Tourists, that's the name given to people who arrive at the airport on a Wednesday and head straight to A&E for treatment. It's the hospital staff who gave them that name. I have no objection to workers we need being here and using the services but not those who don't have a job and home lined up. Even the wealthy who turn up should be allowed in provided they're prepared to self fund their needs whilst they are here. (But we still have to display compassion for genuine refugees.) We can't afford economic migrant/tourists who come to claim benefits when we can't afford to look after our own. We have to run this country like we do our homes, we have to accept that we can't have or afford everything we'd like and in the nature of the original post we have to decide on our priorities, save and spend accordingly, not frivolously. Ultimately we all want the same things. My generation may own half the wealth now but I can't do much about that at the moment, I have to live somewhere as well, when we've gone on it will be the next generation who will take our places. I hope they're ready for the blame game from the next lot down lol. I'm certainly prepared to fund my own care from my equity and my children are unlikely to inherit much from it. But we may be allowed to keep 100k to pass on if we're lucky. Next week's vote will tell all.

Small final salary pensions were paid for mainly by the employer, employers that are often STILL funding them, in other words paying for EX-employees, leaving less for current employees.

Final salary pensions were one of the biggest miscalculations of modern times. The promise was too great and has now crippled future employee pensions.

If you look at the capital cost of supplying even a small final salary pot I think you'd be staggered at the value.

@Kath

I don’t have it in for older people. In fact, I hope to become one myself one day.

Nor am I going after pensioners with modest savings or arguing that older people should be unfairly burdened. But at the moment, I believe they are unfairly cushioned - protected in a way that low income families, children, young people and disabled people are not. How did we get to a point where it has become more politically palatable to make cuts to women’s refuges or take away respite cover from someone caring for a disabled relative than it is to even talk about under-delivering on promised pensions?

The elderly should not be left vulnerable, but nor should they be immune to austerity - particularly when they are the only group whose disposable household income has actually risen in real terms since 1979 (while it has fallen for younger people).

I am not arguing that all of your savings should be redistributed - not at all. I am saying that as a society, we need to look at the facts as we figure out how to deal with our financial crisis, pay the pension deficit and keep our NHS and schools functioning. We need to ask: who is comfortable and who is not? Who can afford to pay a bit more? I would fall into this category - I earn a high salary and I could afford to pay more tax. I should therefore be forced to pay more tax. And although politicians are afraid to go there due to voting demographics, another major group that can afford to pay a bit more is wealthy pensioners.

As I said higher up the thread, I don’t expect people (myself included) to make a stand alone and give it all to charity. But I think that as a society, we should all be forced to give a bit more if we can. Yes - I think that when I sold my flat, I should have been made to pay a really significant portion of its increased value to the exchequer - that’s not money that I “earned”, it’s a windfall gain due to exceptional economic factors. And when you sell your house or your children sell it, I believe that you or they should be forced to do the same - because houses are not commodities on which we have some sort of “right” to make money, as if we are trading in stocks and shares. If my property is worth a lot more than yours, then my contribution would be a lot bigger. That is fair.

until it becomes the norm for wealth to be redistributed, and everyone to do it, including you, then I will save mine for my kids and grandkids.
Yes - as above, this is exactly what I am arguing for. That we should ALL be forced to redistribute a lot more of our wealth than we currently are - that this should be the norm.

I never have money for treats and luxuries and yet I earn a very decent salary . Yes after funding a sahp , 2 kids and the mortgage I am fairly tight

Yet people poorer than me seem to have more !

yanbu

Because my wealth didn't, it has all come from earnings, so has already been taxed once.

If that's the case kath, you are unusual amongst people with wealth because most of them, especially of your generation, have the majority of their wealth through house price inflation. Which is unearned and obviously untaxed.

Some great posts here by elle, whether people like to hear it or not.

Yanbu op. I would love to know the details of people's finances for no reason than pure nosiness.

I know a family that goes to Florida every year, with a family of 5, costing £8k +. Kids are always in designer gear, multiple short breaks away, two spanking new cars, talk of the new kitchen and the extension etc. Money just never an object basically.

They've been this way for years and they both work in Asda...both supervisory roles but nowhere near the kind of salary I'd calculate would be needed to maintain their lifestyle. I also know both of their parents and am pretty certain they're not well off. Makes me so curious!

If they govt have decided that "wealthy" parents with an income over £50k don't need child benefits, then they should likewise decide that "wealthy" pensioners with an income over £50k don't need state benefits such as state pension, winter fuel allowance, bus passes, etc. It's only fair!!!

Could be the parents MEWing to give to the kids secret. I used to work in a role where I saw a lot of people's debts and finances. That's more common than you'd think, and bear in mind that, as a lot of people have pointed out, there are hundreds of thousands of families who've only ever earned modestly but who are effectively sitting on lottery wins because they happened to buy their poky terraces in dodgy areas of Zones 1 and 2 a few decades ago. You get people using their homes as cashpoints not just for themselves but for other family members too.

Could also be debt. I'm not saying it is, but equally, people are often able to borrow pretty eye watering amounts and as long as they keep paying off the minimum amount, it's not a problem. Especially if they are savvy about moving things around to 0% balances. If they ever lose jobs and/or have to start paying more off on the cards, they're in trouble. But some people have sort of made a decision that they're going to have a much more expensive lifestyle than they could otherwise afford for the low price of a few hundred a month on the cards and not worry about ever paying the whole amount back. As a gamble, it's not a bad one actually. I couldn't sleep at night, not least because of my professional experience when it does go wrong. But, if you want expensive things, it's possible to get them for a few hundred a month as long as you don't mind the risk and being in hock forever.

And holidays are a notoriously bad way to judge people's income anyway. There is huge variation in what has to be paid. Clothes too.

I could care less about what people do with their money. It's theirs not mine. Too worried about how to double mine.

There loads of professionals on six figures salaries or close to, with affordable mortgages and children in private schools.

Wear nice clothes, eat out occasionally, have decent parties and go on lovely holidays.

Without help from bank of mum and dad, or credit card, or fraud or anything seen as negative.

Just decently educated, lovely jobs and smartly took advantage of the opportunities that came their way.
Such is life.

Not everyone just sits on a regular 9 5 job. Some do business on the side or have really rare skills that are in high demand and worth a fortune.

Badbadbunny you cannot say pensioners over £50k should get state pension when they have being paying NI in their lives which means they will receive a state pension. Grossly unfair to take it away from them.

I always wondered how a lot of friends could afford things then I found out most of them had thousands on their credit cards. They'd put a holiday on there, pay it off then by the time it was done put the next one on. Same for clothes and treats. So yeah, debt!

Me and my DH are always wondering too. I have loads of acquaintances and neighbours who have average jobs and yet can afford massive extensions, loft conversions, etc that we can't afford and yet we must earn similar.

Cool.