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

The tax payer is subsidising you by a minimum of £1000 a month for your social housing if your zone 1 rent is £650.

So even if you are not receiving anything else from the state, that pushes you from £22,000 per year (take home £1500 per month) to at least £41,000 per year (take home £2500 per month) so immediately your example isnt accurate.

At a guess child tax credit, council tax discounts and other benefits probably have a minimum value of £500 per month.
So that then ups your comparable salary to £50,000 a year (take home £3000 per month).

So your income is the equivalent of someone on AT LEAST £50k. And you have said that clothes for summer at the moment is a struggle and you have no savings and can’t afford to decorate.

So surely it isn't unreasonable to see that it isn't actually that much money.

On a side note, I feel its a parallel universe where a £22k salary is topped up to more than £50k by a benefits system. That's insane.

Absolutely Gin and Glutus. I have friends who live in big houses, build loft and kitchen extensions, send DC to private school, go on a long haul holiday, but then moan they're poor. It really winds me up. This thread is like that. Such a lack of awareness of their privileged position.

OP said she was thankful for what she has. People are so begrudging.

We live in a country suburb of London and are struggling on an income of 38 k mortgages and some debt, 3 kids under 6, only one hot holiday in the past and a few weekends here and there. We can’t afford luxuries really but kids don’t go with out, family support us too.
I desperately need summer clothes and kids need a few bits.

Tax credits and housing benefit are what is propping up low wages and over-inflated house prices and rent. The actual 'winners' of these systems are the companies paying low wages and the landlords. This is what is allowing the rich to get ever richer, day by day.

The tax payer is subsidising you by a minimum of £1000 a month for your social housing if your zone 1 rent is £650

For the millionth time, it doesn’t work that way

You always get this on any thread mentioning SH. The rent is £650, there is no “top up” necessary. Private rents are ridiculously inflated.

Thank you @Charley50 , put it better than I could/did

£100k puts you in a position to make lovely choices for yourself and family. It doesn’t put you in a position to belittle everyone else’s choices .

It also doesn’t mean you work “harder” because you earn more. I sit in an air conditioned office in the City, subsidied canteen, choice of amazing eateries, healthcare etc... I have horrible pressure and deadlines yes, but £100k+ doesn’t mean I work “harder” than a person who works but needs social housing to stay near to their work in Zone 1.

I am a huge and passionate supporter of social housing and good luck to you OP hope you and your family continue to thrive

Earning more does give you more choice but it also gives you less time and time is something none of us get back.
I'm not sure if the op has kids, but maybe she's chosen to have less choices in her life but more time with her kids when they're young or more time with an ill family member.
Each choice is perfectly valid to whoever is doing the choosing, when people sneer at others for not picking their choice they come across badly

£650 rent in London? I'd take that. It's cheaper than my rent for a 2 bed flat in Canterbury

15 years ago you could rent a good sized 4-bed house in London for around £500 a month. Young people and students could afford to live with their friends and still have a life (go out and spend money - boost the economy). Now young people have to stay at home with their parents as it's unaffordable to rent. This is all due to shitty government policy using inflated house prices (and therefore rents) to prop up an economy that would probably collapse otherwise.

OP: I'm happy on my lower wage in London. I don't think you need 100k to live in London.

Everyone on 100k: How very fucking dare you. You're so lucky with your cheap rent, that I no doubt subsidised, and your tax credit top ups, which I no doubt subsidised.

Coming off well guys, coming off well 👏

Redsuitcase, you are totally wrong.

Social housing is not subsidised housing. Do some reading, it is housing at the cost that it is to supply it and keep it maintained plus a small profit for the housing provider not the vast profits available on the open housing market.

And benefits are very low and subject to a benefit cap.
With no childcare costs the cut off to receive in work benefits is around 23k. So the op would not be receiving benefits except child benefit which someone with a family income of 100k can also receive.

The only extra benefits would be disability benefits like pip or old dla which someone earning 100k could also receive because they are for illness and disability and not linked to income or working.

You really need to go away and educate yourself as do a lot of people on this thread.

Even with her lower rent of 650, if the person on 100k had rent or mortgage of 1650 or 2650 they still have more income than the op, that's the point she is making.

100k is a good income, people are living up to their income and spending their income, making choices that that level of income provides them with. Their choices make them skint but in no universe is 100k skint or inadequate.

Flirty girl, most people don't want to educate themselves, they prefer to keep the blinkers on and their heads up their arse

This threads just shows how privileged some higher earners are.
But instead of checking their privilege, they are making excuses as to how they choose to spend it. That fine and everyone has a budget and makes choices accordingly.

But the steering and inaccuracies on this th read show the true attitude of many high earners.

Earning more does not make a person better. It's just that some job have a higher wage than others and its not fair how some jobs are valued more than others anyway.

It has no correlation to how hard the individual works when they are at work. It often has no correlation to education either because why are scientists so poorly paid and teachers and those in academia???

The higher earners though as alot on this thread, have shown a real disdain for those on lower incomes. All workers pay tax and in this country and with vat the poorest pay the highest proportion of their Income. It may be a lower amount overall but they have less to start with and so pay a higher proportion overall.

Everything costs more when poorer as you have less options to begin with. Structural unfairness like higher gas and electricity for instance as more likely to have a key meter.

So all you high earners please check your privilege as some of you are showing such ignorance on this thread.

Yes ssd it's sad.

Well said flirtygirl

Apparently the OP should count herself lucky regarding her rent, but the 100k earners, poor things, are actually having a tougher time and shouldn't count themselves lucky at all

Any nicer 100k earners out there?

OP asked - ‘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?’

I can only speak for London having lived here all my life but it is a big city and some areas are simply much cheaper to live than others. Take where I live now, regarded as one of London’s villages, full of artisan coffee shops, bakeries and pizza parlours where a pizza costs £15, independent shops, local cinema is either an Everyman or Picturehouse so costs approx £15 an adult ticket, kids haircut is £20, ladis cut and blow dry £50, ice cream parlour £4 for a cone, no local Lidl or Aldi only Waitrose and tiny Sainsbury’s local, lunch in the local park would be £6-8 for a jacket potato, high water rates, residents parkings so yes with children you’d not be able to do all this stuff whenever you wanted and go on holidays abroad but then there is another side to London, the one which I grew up in where there are no indepent shops, just chains like Greggs and the local cinema is a multiplex and costs £8, no residents parking or fancy coffee in your local park, there are cheap markets to shop in and lidls so the cost of living day to day is much cheaper. So you definitely can live comfortably on £100k in London with a family but it won’t be in an affluent area in a 4 bed house with the trappings you’d expect that money to afford. Areas like Wandsworth, Chiswick or Muswell Hill.

With no childcare costs the cut off to receive in work benefits is around 23k. So the op would not be receiving benefits except child benefit which someone with a family income of 100k can also receive

The entitled to website says different based on the same rent/number of children. It says CTC, CB and HB would all be claimable at around £7.5 k. Possibly council tax benefit too dependent on postcode and childcare help if applicable . Child support isn't taken into account either.

Someone described their 2 bed semi as 'affordable' it was worth £450k! Not affordable in my book!

Take where I live now, regarded as one of London’s villages, full of artisan coffee shops, bakeries and pizza parlours where a pizza costs £15, independent shops, local cinema is either an Everyman or Picturehouse so costs approx £15 an adult ticket, kids haircut is £20, ladis cut and blow dry £50, ice cream parlour £4 for a cone, no local Lidl or Aldi only Waitrose and tiny Sainsbury’s local, lunch in the local park would be £6-8 for a jacket potato,

TBH that sound no different to where I live. Wiltshire, not an expensive area, houses much much cheaper than London, wages much much lower. But our cinema is £14 a ticket, so we don't go. Haircuts on average £40-£50. I haven't had a haircut for years. Pizza, easily £15. I make pizza at home. etc etc So I don't see the difference? Although we do have a Lidl, lucky us

OP’s post is rather disingenuous. Her housing costs do not reflect what the vast majority of people living and working in London have to pay. Cheapest rents in zone 1 for a 2-bedroom flat would be more than the actual salary per year, and that is without any other bills, let alone food or anything else.

@redsuitcase

On a side note, I feel its a parallel universe where a £22k salary is topped up to more than £50k by a benefits system. That's insane.

Yes this.

Completely beside the point but get Meerkat Movies! 241 tickets including at PictureHouse Cinemas on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Some of the higher earners posting here are so disingenuous. What they fail to understand is that what their higher salary buys is choice, access to opportunities and the ability to invest in their future.

All this talk about 'having to' pay for high mortgages, private schools etc etc. All these costs are investments in future quality of life that those on lower incomes can't afford.

And tbh I live near Muswell Hill. There's loads of places to get a cheap lunch and there's a Poundland and there's always Wood Green down the road for Lidl. And as a PP said, no-one HAS to go eat a £15 pizza.

Well said @flirtygirl