It’s like a parallel universe

[Imustbemad00]

Inspired by a few threads recently about money. Specifically money in London. I’m shocked at how many people seem to think you need to be rich to live in London (£100k per year is rich to me) and how many people think £100k is not a lot in London.
Why is this specific to London?Other than house prices?
Just to put it into perspective, I’m a single parent with 2 children living in zone 1 London. I take home £22000.
Admittedly, cheap rent at £650pcm. But we manage. Obviously we’re not well off, can’t afford fancy holidays, buying clothes for summer at the moment is a struggle, have no savings, can’t afford to decorate. But we have what we need, the occasional treat, short break
Most people I know locally are in similar positions. But I suppose people have a tendency to mix with their own kind.
I just find this ‘other london’ bizarre. The London where you need 100k to barely get by

What I was trying to say is that in many areas of London - SW3, SW7, SW1, W8, to name just a few, most of the housing stock is the stucco terraces or Victorian properties arranged over 4, 5 or 6 floors. Obviously some if these are flats, but these are the typical 4-5 bed houses in these areas - streets upon streets of them and even unmodernised they will be 5 million and above, A tiny studio flat can easily be £500 k. This is before you even get into the likes of Knightsbridge, Mayfair or the West End. Even going out into Fulham and as far as Richmond, a Victorian semi will easily be £3 million and again, there are streets upon streets of this kind of housing throughout London. All full with families. Obviously, unless you’re an oligarch or the property has been handed down to you / purchased through “family money”, many many people will have mortgages into the millions. So not as much disposable cash as you would assume. You can have people living in houses worth £3 million plus who are asset rich but cash poor. Obviously nobody is forced to live in such areas, but hundreds of thousands do and they don’t have the luxury holidays etc you might assume, especially if there’s school fees in the mix. Again optional, but more optional in some places than others.

Thing is, if being on 100k is such a struggle, why not come and join us down here. Apparently we get a shit load of top ups and comparable incomes based on outgoings. Why work all those extra hours and pay all that childcare and have a huge mortgage to contend with, if you’re not better off than lower earners. It’s a puzzle.

Charley 50 is talking sense.

All I can say is divide and conquer, thank you current government for allowing this country to become like this.

@Fiveredbricks the one my kid doesn’t.... those fees are in addition, and they are more than £8K per year. I don’t actually know any private schools in my area that include wrap around & holiday club in the fees, clearly it’s area dependant.

@gluteustothemaximus never said it’s a struggle. An £100K salary is a very very comfortable life. Just not quite as ‘rich’ as many on this thread seem to think. That’s all I was trying to illustrate with my example.

Thing is, if being on 100k is such a struggle, why not come and join us down here.
I lost two highly qualified women from my team last year exactly through this route. Not on 100K, but close to 90K.
Very similar scenarios - spent their 20s getting letters after their name, paying off debts and building careers, then had two or three children with short gaps in their 30s. Then could not afford singlehandedly childcare after the divorce / separation, and - surprisingly - found out they are better off on welfare. One is working now part-time in the charity sector, another became a full-time student in her hobby area (with a MSc in a different field already).
I met with one of them recently for a coffee, she has absolutely no intention to return to the office rat race, and I am very tempted myself.

£22k means about £1550 a month. Minus £650 rent leaves £900. But if we say a realistic rent is £2k then you would need to have £2900 coming in a month after tax to leave that £900. Chucking numbers into a tax calculator that would be an annual salary of £46k.
I've not included any tax credits etc here, but you can see that your low rent is making you effectively much richer than your salary appears.

@Tango9pm but there are actual stats on this. In the entirety of London there are under 500,000 houses worth more than £1m. Your property worth £5m is in a tiny minority - it's just that living among such a minority, you see many others like you. But mortgages in the millions number among the tens of thousands - and more to the point, are far far beyond the reach of even the well off £100k earner discussed here, so completely pointless on this thread.

I'm fortunate to be well off, though not on your scale (and I've come from being very poor) - but feel a bit despairing at how incredibly out of touch so many other high earners are, based on these types of comments.

Flying, I do get where you're going. I hope you get there soon. How nasty do you want to be? completely unnecessary. Bye.

Stuck - I accept your point of course, that there’s “only” 500,000 homes worth over £1m in the UK. I would hazard a guess that most of these properties are in London though. Also, given that everyone knows you can’t get a tiny studio flat for under £500k in zone 1,2 and possibly 3, it follows that all housing is between £500k to £1 million, with the majority pushing the million mark.

The OP asked, where is this “other London?” Well, you only have to walk around for 2 minutes to see that multi-million pound houses are on the same streets as council estates or other kinds of subsidised housing. You may not live in other types of housing, but it can hardly be a mystery that it exists. Huge swathes if it - right on your doorstep.

The problem in central London is that there are no affordable semis or new builds to bridge this gap as this kind of housing stock doesn’t exist and a tiny terrace or cottage is considered a “period property” and will be over £1 million easily. Look at the mews houses and see how much they go for. Even when I go back to East London now to where we lived in the 90s, it’s transformed with multimillion apartment blocks built adjacent to the estates.

This is an anonymous forum so “bragging” is irrelevant really. Clearly there are a high proportion people on over £100k in central London and no, most of them would not feel super wealthy. If it’s a family, they’re probably just about scraping their mortgage payments to be honest. This is why most families are forced out into the suburbs or beyond in order to survive. I understand there are wealth discrepancies, as in any other major city. I’m not sure why anyone should be mystified as to where “these people” are, that’s all. They’re probably just over the road.

Thing is, if being on 100k is such a struggle, why not come and join us down here
I know more and more people who've done that too and none regret it. Because its not until you've been in one of those high paid job that you realise that it isn't just a job. Most of those jobs require full commitment that take over yiyr life. You breathe and sweat it at all time and it takes over until you forget how to enjoy any aspect of your life whatever money you have.

I think there are parallel universe’s running next to each other, I’ve been thinking about this and realised that my work colleague and I fit both sides of this.

DH and I bring in 100k gross, live in zone 6, own our home (£400k not £1m), 1 child at school so wrap around/holiday care only.

My colleague earns about £20-odd grand gross (gets some top ups but don’t know what, not my business), single mum no help from dad, lives in zone 2 (previously zone 1 but recently moved to an adaptated home) subsidised social housing, has 2 DC, 1 severely disabled. Her family provide her childcare as they mostly do not work/have their own issues/care for other family members. She gets other ‘perks’ too that enable her lifestyle but they all come at the cost of her child’s disability.

Whilst on the surface we seem to live similar lifestyles even though she earns a quarter of what DH and I bring in, I would not swap with her for a second because a large proportion of what she ‘has’ comes at a cost. She has had the same job for 20+ years as it fits with her other responsibilities so no career progression, she can’t choose where she lives etc etc.

However it would be disingenuous to suggest that because she can live in central London for £20-odd grand a year, that it’s unimaginable that DH and I couldn’t manage the same life on 100k. Some of the things that she needs to make her life manageable we just couldn’t afford to pay for. As an example her home is worth just over £1m and she pays a similar rent to the OP, slightly less actually.

given that everyone knows you can’t get a tiny studio flat for under £500k in zone 1,2 and possibly 3, it follows that all housing is between £500k to £1 million, with the majority pushing the million mark.

Except that isn't actually true. There are areas where that is the case - those you mentioned below - but there are also large areas of London which aren't contained within those postcodes which aren't anything like that expensive.

'Living in London' means many different things.

Massive difference between Mayfair and Catford for example

LBO -possibly you might get a cheaper 1 bed flat flat in some Zone 2 areas of NE or SE London? Not in one if the regenerated “trendy” areas though. Not in Canary Wharf, Shoreditch, etc. Not in Zone 2 West or SW London. Hampstead, St Johns Wood etc very expensive and spread into Kilburn prices as demand increases, as is often the case in Zone 2 South London as Clapham prices spread into Balham, Earlsfield, etc. I lived in Brixton in my early 20s, I doubt I could afford the rent there now with the salary I was on at that time. Anywhere with good tube access and a few parks is at a premium these days it seems. Children brought up in these areas can’t expect to buy there as young adults anymore, not without financial help.

OH MY GOD I have just realised I can't afford a full time nanny and private school fees!!
Life cannot go on.

never said it’s a struggle. An £100K salary is a very very comfortable life. Just not quite as ‘rich’ as many on this thread seem to think.

That is literally all I wanted to hear. I don't think 100k is rich. But it is very comfortable and that is all I wanted, is that acknowledgement

Most of those jobs require full commitment that take over yiyr life. You breathe and sweat it at all time and it takes over until you forget how to enjoy any aspect of your life whatever money you have.

I get that. However, I also do this with my job, and don't earn that sort of money. Have been self employed for 17 years, and I live, eat and breath work. But I don't get 100k though.

excellent, another 2 posts listing outgoings when you're on £100k :)

“excellent, another 2 posts listing outgoings when you're on £100k”

Well is that not the whole point what the thread is asking - referring to such people as living in a “parallel universe?”

So what is deemed the permissable income range on MN within which it’s acceptable to give a perspective?

Clearly this is the internet and you will get people from all walks of life, cultures and areas of the UK giving their perspectives and that’s exactly how it should be.

I don't know what you're getting at

Well I have only skim read the thread so apologies if I’ve missed something, but why shouldn’t people on £100 k or above be able to list their outgoings? The thread is aimed at them surely? They are trying to explain that they’re not in a parallel universe necessarily - I would argue at all. Different choices; different lifestyle habits, yes, but surely this is obvious. It’s all relative and largely dependent on the size of your family and where you happen to live.

just saying there's multiple posts listing nannies and parking expenditure. And room for more, no?

Not just London. I’m NW and earn this but more would make me feel rich and not worry about mortgage, cars, bills and travel expenses. Plus all the add-ons to make life easier with the hours worked. For instance we need cleaners, clothes ironed, food prepped, nursery fees and wrap around plus swimming etc.

We have a normal house, we are very comfortable and don’t have to worry, but definitely not rich. There’s a difference!

“just saying there's multiple posts listing nannies and parking expenditure. And room for more, no?”

Well some people do hire nannies - hardly a shocker, is it? I never did personally because I didn’t want / need to, but so what?

It should hardly come as a surprise that people adjust their spending patterns to their income. This happens at all income levels and why on earth would it not?