To wonder what it's like to earn £200k per year?!

[ABCD1000]

Friend's husband earns just over £200k per year, with an annual £150k bonus for the last few years! No jealousy (much!) just wonder what life would be like?!

I don't think we do demonise higher earners.
The poor and those on benefits have been systematically demonised by the government and media for about 15 years.

There are a couple of unfair posts on this thread but most of the eye rolling has been fairly good natured and in response to those trying to tell us that they don't notice the difference an income 10 x mine makes to them. Some even feel a bit skint.

No one wants to hear someone with a great deal of money tell them they are skint and their lives are hard because of it.

Yet its only pretty recently that horrendous benefit bashing threads have been almost universally challenged.
They are still started on a regular basis and there are still plenty of people who agree with the OPs of them.

Beachcomber - that's a rather simplistic way to look at how "all" high earners must think. Remember that some of these people are responsible for the jobs of hundreds of others, or are performing hours of surgery on a fellow human being that could be kill or cure. Others are responsible for millions and millions of pounds, often large pension funds on which thousands will be dependent one day, or setting levels of insurance on which many people will depend if there is a tragedy.

There is a reason why some skill sets attract a high wage - it's because they are for very difficult and demanding jobs that most people couldn't do. My ex was an actuary and he earned about £250k; having seen how hard he worked and having seen the literally mind blowing stuff he had to calculate - not surprising the UK only has about 9,000 people who can do it! It's daft to think that nobody is worth their salary and deep down they all know that. If they weren't worth it, they wouldn't get paid it. They get what the market deems their skills are worth. If you think that it's morally wrong, as I certainly do when it goes as far as footballers earning £300k a week, well, that's a different question!

There are many completely different types of stress. If you haven't experienced one, denigrating or denying its existence is a bit short sighted IMO.

My dad was a high earner (retired now) and I agree it doesn't stop bad stuff happening, but does help. It didn't stop my mum from dying, but it did make her passing gentler (lots of support, private hospitals, probably an extra year or so of life with treatment not available on the NHS). It didn't stop my stepmother from being in the aaccident that left her disabled but paid for therapy, a house it was easy to navigate, the right wheelchair (not available on the NHS) and meant she wasn't worrying about not being able to work.

It didn't stop me becoming mentally unwell, but I am pretty sure meant I survived the process - I couldn't work for years due to being in and out of hospital. He paid for me to retrain, helped me with living expenses while looking for a job I could do, helped me and DH get a flat when no one would rent to us with DH a student and me unwell.

These days DH and I have said figure household income and while it doesn't solve everything again (I'm currently nursing MiL through her final illness. I was up at 4 am dealing with fecal vomit), I do feel very lucky. Mostly, I think it removes so many of the smaller fears and anxieties in life and leaves us with so much more cope to deal with the big things. Like - our boiler broke last week which was annoying, but once I would have had an actual breakdown over that. Now I just know it's a blip in our savings, adjust some mental maths and at worst cut out some non essentials. I know we are staggeringly lucky to be in that situation.

I'd also say that while DH does have a very high stress job, its a different and easier stress than the shitty minimum wage jobs he did years back.

No one barks at him if he's five minutes late. When he hurt his knee recently, he worked from home for a week and that was fine and his work's only response was to send a card and ask if he needed help. We both got compassionate leave for his mum's sickness this week. That wouldn't happen in a low paid job and I feel lucky for that.

(Sorry if this sounds like gloating. I am trying to be honest and thankful)

I think a lot of high earners know deep down that what they actually accomplish in a days work doesn't justify their being paid so much. Hence all the special pleading about stress, responsibility, hard work, outgoings, etc.

Total bollocks. My dh can and has saved the companis he has worked for his salary anount multiple times over in single meetings. So his salary is justified entirely.

Don’t think we are disagreeing on much - I don’t agree with benefits bashing and lazy tropes about claimants and I don’t agree with moral disapproval of high earning individuals.

I’m sure the vast majority of higher earners know they’ve had luck as well as other things to get where they are.

I think a lot of high earners know deep down that what they actually accomplish in a days work doesn't justify their being paid so much.

It all depends on how you 'justify' a salary. Morally, probably not. But in terms of the money they make/generate/save for a company then maybe.

I saw an interesting programme a couple of weeks ago that pointed out in the late 60s/early 70s, a GP a senior teacher and a banker were all in the same salary bracket. Today obviously the banker has vastly overtaken them both.

Apparently it's because the 80s is when economists started developing formulas for taking increased risks on the stock market, and that changed everything. Jobs related to making money on the financial markets today are now exponentially better paid than most others

You shoulder big risks in that type of job, yes, but also there's just more money to be made in that field than by being a doctor who also shoulders huge risk, or a nuclear plant manager or whatever.

senior teachers earn less than GPs these days, don't they? Academics and teaching salaries are sectors where decent growth hasn't happened.

You realize the focus on personal taxation is partly because nobody can find a solution to get global companies to pay their fair share?

Job tenure is another important factor driving salaries - the tenure of CEOs/Executives/Directors in jobs is much shorter than it has ever been. If you expect to get the sack within 3 years, it makes the salary look a little different.

Depending on whether they are part of the senior leadership team. A headteacher or deputy head may well earn more than a GP depending on how senior the GP is and whether they are an employee or a partner in the practice.

perhaps at a secondary school - we'd need proper stats to be able to say anything categoric here about the wages of different groups. My friend is head of early years at a primary school and she's not earning even a GP starting salary outside of London.

Salaried GP is £56525- £85298

Teacher in state schools £22467 - £109366

I think private or state must also make a difference. I seem to remember my university boyfriend's father, who was the headmaster at one of the really big old public schools, earned about £100k and that was in the late 90's, so about £140k these days. Plus he got a massive house included with the job, which meant they were able to buy a lovely house in Hampstead where the rent had paid off the mortgage long before he retired.

More in free schools/academies/independent schools

surely you're comparing the average salary for job categories? Average teachers don't earn £109k...

headmasters of big public schools are going to be statistically negligible in any debate about what teachers typically earn. If you're talking about the best case scenario for a teacher's salary/prospects, then it's relevant.

I'm sure it's broadly true that teacher and GP salaries are no longer comparable, but also, training periods for teachers aren't as lengthy so perhaps they should never have been similar?

No, top of the main pay range (lowest) is just over 33k plus potentially TLR payments which can be in their thousands. But then there are other groups such as the upper pay range, lead practitioners pay range and leadership group.

can you imagine a life where most teachers earned £109k - the queue is this way --> that'd be nice!

whereas the lowest pay range for teachers is a lot less than £33k, and there are no options of overtime payments. Teachers should be paid overtime imo, wouldn't it be nice if they were?

Personally I would argue that GPs ought to be paid more than teachers. On average, I suspect they are but the earning potential (at salaried level) is greater in teaching as part of the leadership team.

Clearly partners in GP practices are likely to be paid more. A very high proportion of GPs work part time though.

Unless said GP also runs a private practice. Mine is £75 for a 20 min slot!

That GP is also likely to be a partner. All doctors can potentially earn a lot once they reach a certain level as long as their specialism is in the right area. I know a number of two consultant families with household incomes comparable to those we are discussing on this thread.

DH is totally worth the money he is paid. Between him and his boss they manage $300 million in sales just for the US. Those sales don't just land in their lap. When it came to making layoffs DH told mgmt to let him run the Canadian market to see if he could generate sales for the production teams. In 3 months he had built an order book of $45 million when previously they had sales of $5-10 milliom. Mgmt were going to shut down a production facility and didn't. Today DH has built it up to $75 million.

He isn't a maverick, it's a lot of relationship and brand management. It's very long hours plus having a total dedication to what he is doing. When he built up the Canadian market it was a big challenge to set up the processes to manage it. He was negotiating contracts to set up distribution while simultaneously negotiating sales contracts.

yeah I don't get your point newt - on average teachers earn less than GPs, and any doctors working part-time are choosing to earn less as the value of their leisure/time with kids is worth more to them. That's hardly a boohoo situation.

The earning potential is greater as part of a leadership team in teaching? This doesn't seem borne out by the stats on the 000s of teachers draining out of teaching.

GPs surgeries are typically smaller in staff numbers than the number of teachers in schools, I'd reckon your chances of advancing as a GP were better than as a teacher just looking at the ratios.

I know 2 GPs well and both have made lots of extra cash through overtime payments, doing out of hours clinics at hospitals/other special clinics - teachers don't have these options.

My OH and I earn bit more than that between us and as someone up thread mentioned, it just comes with a different set of pressures and priorities. Not least because we give half of it away to the tax man.
We still feel broke most of the time (I know it's all relative), once the huge mortgage, the two cars, the childcare, the bills etc, the expensive holidays etc are paid for. And the threat of redundancy is never far from the fore. In fact I constantly worry about money. In London £200k among most of the people I know is probably just about average.
That said, I can't imagine what it's like to be in debt, (apart from a mortgage) or not buy what I want when I want it and don't think twice about a £300 haircut or a £200 dinner.
So yes, I guess you're pretty well off at £200k but don't assume that that you'd never feel poor again. You would most likely just adjust your standard of living and spend more.
__

I'm gasping.

If you ever do accidentally think twice about spending hundreds of pounds on beauty pampering or elegant cuisine, please come back and let us know - I know I'd love to hear the penny drop.