To think people on middle incomes are forgotten about?

[Squeezedout]

I am so upset tonight and just need to vent. I have always worked, as has my partner. We have 2 children who we could provide for until my industry pretty much collapsed and I had to find a less well paid job.

The cost of childcare and rent (south east) is absolutely crazy and I can’t keep up. I put in an application for universal credit that said we’d be entitled to a few hundred a month so have jumped through every single hoop, taken unpaid days off work to attend a job centre (the irony!)

Only to find out now (6 weeks after the initial claim) that we are entitled to roughly £4.50 a month.

On paper maybe we have decent salaries, combined with the rent and childcare we can’t even break even each month. I know we are not alone.

It seems in this country that if you are the poorest of society, you are helped (in terms of council properties with decent rent, council tax help, 2 year funding and everyday benefits as well as lots of media attention to the problem) to ensure you have enough to live on. If you’re the richest in society, you obviously don’t need help but the squeezed middle are just completely forgotten about.

I am NOT benefit bashing at all but It really doesn’t pay to work sometimes. I’ve calculated how much better off I’d be as a single mum not working in a council house and tbh I cannot keep taking out loans and am starting to think this is the only option to keep my kids fed.

AIBU to think the ‘squeezed middle’ are completely forgotten about in this country? And that it is fucked up that I can’t feed my kids on an average wage?

“move closer to work and save on transport costs” - love it how simple people life is.
close to work for us would be either

• london, zone 1 or 2
• virginia water

Both are well known for the cheap property (IRONY) or move further away for cheap property

• kids are already in childcare 7:30 to 6. we can’t add to that

ask granny to do childcare: granny is almost 80 and lives hundreds of miles away

change jobs: sorry, loads of jobs only exist in metropolitan areas. unemploymed in a cheap area won’t be much better

Its crap to be trapped in the middle

It's shit. Wages have stayed flat for the last decade but house prices in my area have doubled. Without the insane cost of housing we'd be able to do so much more. I hate the feeling of just keeping our heads above water. I'm raging at successive governments for not addressing the housing crisis. I live in the SE so we could move but it's very sad to lose our roots for a cheaper mortgage. More could have been done to cool demand and boost supply.

I love how people are like "well move somewhere else then". Sure I'll just uproot my entire life to move 3hrs drive away from all my friends and family, change my DCs school oh and try to find a new job just because rent is half the price in Cardiff compared to Tunbridge Wells.

OP YANBU but realistically your best bet is for one of you to increase your earnings, either through promotion or taking a second job.

If you're already servicing debts then have a look on the moneysavingexpert forums, they can be really helpful.

I personally think your thread ought to be retitled "Blight of the South East". I'm from Liverpool but have lived in Gtr London for 25 years. Moving around, a roof, eating are five-fold anywhere else due monopoly and supply/demand. If you feel this deeply unhappy with your lot, and you clearly do, I would strongly consider the feasibility of moving away, possibly to the north. I have teenagers. We haven't even considered the London Unis. Instead they are looking at Sheffield, Norwich, Birmingham etc. The quality of life to be had in these towns v London is amazing. SHeffield - you can go anywhere public transport for £1! Roast dinner £6.50. 10 mins drive from city your in the Peaks for walking. Nice flat £250k. All in all.....so much better. Move somewhere like that and your combined incomes would be super duper. You rent, if you can start job hunting, research schools and run for the hills.

I agree with you OP, I work 40 hours per week and DH does nights, mainly at weekends too to minimise childcare costs.

We are middle earners (in London too) so are entitled to nothing, other than child benefit. Eldest is at school so thankfully childcare costs have dropped there and MIL does 1.5 days per week (very lucky in that regard).

Yes we could move I guess but all our family is in the south, I would struggle to find a job.

When both were in childcare, we were something like 2k better of per year after bills. Ok better than nothing but by the time you add in unplanned expenses (car repairs etc and I needed urgent dental work) you are pretty much living pay day to pay day.

On the other hand I grew up with a single mum who did receive benefits so I can see the need to support the most vulnerable. I certainty would not have the career today if it wasn't for the extra financial support.

My husband makes just enough to mean we don't get any help with any childcare until the standard 3 year old funding.

What's the threshold for this, Goodenough06. Genuine question, I'm after a specific number. I'm not asking your DH's salary, I'm interested in knowing how much you need to earn before this childcare help becomes unavailable.

Unfortunately, it's inevitable that, if very many people want to live in one small area of a country, that will drive up the cost of housing, childcare etc. There's nothing 'artificial' about that - it's basic supply and demand.

There's nothing artificial about what you describe, but it doesn't even come close to being a comprehensive description of the housing situation in the UK in the last few years.

For a long time our housing market was boom and bust. After the 08 crash, significant economic policy has been directed to preventing the arse falling out of the housing market. Interest rates have been kept artificially low, prices high. There have been policies like Help to Buy, which continue to shore up prices, yet are presented as a positive for FTBs.

There are all kinds of reasons for this, but it certainly isn't simply a consequence of people choosing to live in the south east. We know this because high housing costs in relation to incomes aren't just a problem there. I'm northern, and my still modestly priced house is about 1.5 times what it would've been 20 years ago factoring in inflation. And I do not live in any kind of property hotspot. The creation of this situation was artificial.

BTW don't ever think about dropping one of your jobs and "claiming". For a start you won't get anything for at least 3 months after starting a claim in which you "intentionally left your job" and secondly you will be treated like scum if you're on JSA. You would have a more rewarding and self-respectful life doing blowjobs for a tenner round the back of Asda on a Friday night.

I’m not poor, i earn a decent enough amount, I’m single,my private rent and bills take up a vast proportion of my salary, I live month to month, have no holidays, I’m entitled to nothing as is right, benefits were set up as a safety net not for people to ‘live a bit’, I’d love to have holidays and got out for dinner with friends but the truth is I can’t afford it, that’s life

I don't agree, HorridHenry. My niece and nephew have just bought a two-bed house in a half-decent area of Manchester for £80k. My parents' semi in Cardiff is worth less than £100k. The latter has risen comparatively little in value (in absolute terms) since they bought it for around £30k in 1992. Both of these are decent places to live with no major work shortages.

Yes, if you want to live in London or Oxford or Guildford, it's going to cost more than this, but again, I don't see anything artificial about this.

I don't see any problem with interest rates being low. Inflation is bad.

you could try working over time op.
that is what i had to do

More could have been done to cool demand and boost supply. [in the south east]

What are you proposing to 'cool demand'? Some kind of cull?

Its not only childcare, wait another 15 years when your DC wants to go to university, then you depress yourself at Government funding (or lack of it) for those children of middle incomes

Yep, we are very low middle income and actually wore off after we pay for medical/dental/full price everything else than high end low income people.

It pisses me off too. A sliding scale is needed and not this ridiculous cut off point between income brackets.

it is tough op, but there it is, no are better off than lots, and not as well off as others. such is life.

thedancingbear

Link below tells you the criteria for getting free childcare for 2 year olds, and if you scroll down the same link talks about the different rules for free hours for 3 and 4 year olds as well

www.gov.uk/help-with-childcare-costs/free-childcare-2-year-olds

do something about it instead of whinging

It's not like this everywhere. In France, I paid 800 euros a month for childcare for my two D.C.'s, but was te- imbursed 550 euros, We still found it hard going, but nothing like the astronomical amounts here. Women work, although many take off the first two years ( used to be three) and everything is done to make that possible including a wrap around care after 3.
Life in the U.K is very difficult for young parents.

I think it depends on where you live, thedancingbear, and it's not as clear cut as earning under or over a certain amount. It's also tied into whether you are receiving other benefits and also things like if your child has any SEN. (I probably could have worded my first post better). This is a link you might find useful:

www.workingfamilies.org.uk/articles/free-childcare-for-children-aged-two-three-and-four/

I completely agree OP.
We earn around £50k between us, which sounds like a lot. But to get there, we ended up in a shit tone of debt. My pregnancy was a complete surprise (on the pill and no symptoms until 12 weeks) and then DS was premature so I was only knowingly pregnant for a very small window so didn't have long to save. Ended up on stat mat too which after I paid my share of rent and bills, left me with about £50 a month so hardly any baby classes and clubs for DS and no social life for DH and I. Burned through our savings
DHs industry took a huge hit after the Brexit vote and his wage dropped around £4k. I had to take a £4k drop in salary when I returned to work (different company but the only one which would allow me the hours we needed).
We've slowly upped our earning but are still crippled by debt with no way out. Unless we come into a big (and I mean big) chunk of money, we won't recover from this.
In our situation, we get nothing. We can't even take out loans anymore. Each month we just about scrape by. If DS needs new shoes, that comes out of our food budget.

I don't agree, HorridHenry. My niece and nephew have just bought a two-bed house in a half-decent area of Manchester for £80k. My parents' semi in Cardiff is worth less than £100k. The latter has risen comparatively little in value (in absolute terms) since they bought it for around £30k in 1992. Both of these are decent places to live with no major work shortages.

Yes, if you want to live in London or Oxford or Guildford, it's going to cost more than this, but again, I don't see anything artificial about this.

I don't see any problem with interest rates being low. Inflation is bad.

I live in Manchester and am extremely familiar with the housing market here. Pointing out that there is cheap property in the city (and I'd be interested to know the area as all of the City of Manchester is dearer than 20 years ago) isn't a refutation to my point that the housing market has been artificially propped up over the last decade. While there are places in the UK where this isn't so, it's a fact that property being more expensive in real terms than 20 years ago is not confined to the south east. As for low interest rates being a good thing, you can still think that whilst understanding that economic policy has been aimed at keeping them low in recent years.

The things I've said aren't a matter of opinion: this situation is not something that developed organically. You can think it's a good or a bad thing, but it is a thing. On an individual level I'm very much an advocate of people on low and middle incomes thinking of leaving the south east for a better lifestyle where possible, not just in this thread either, but this is a societal issue.

Therefore I believe it's the middle earners who prop up the "system".

That's well known. The "tipping point" is earnings of around £28k - below which you are a net "taker" from the state, above which you're a net "giver" on average.

Despite all the howls of anguish about low pay, the lowest earners have done well in recent years (yes even under the evil Tories) due to the ever increasing minimum wage and tax free personal allowance - more and more "low" earners don't pay income tax anymore, if they have a couple of part time jobs, they'll probably pay no NIC either, nor student loan repayments, nor workplace pensions.

Trouble with increasing benefits (especially Gordon Brown;s ludicrously lavish tax credits and housing benefits) was that due to basic supply and demand, it pushed up prices, stoking inflation and particularly housing costs, so it ended up making people worse off rather than better off. (Experts told GB but he stuck his fingers in his ears and chanted la la la because he was blinded by the thought of making voters beholden to the Labour party - that worked well!!).

I don't see any problem with interest rates being low.

People with savings have bought buy to lets to get a better long term return on their money. That's fed through to shortage of homes for the lower paid and stoked rent and house price inflation. That's one hell of a big problem. People have done that to do better with their savings than the paltry 1% bank interest. If interest had been more realistic, huge numbers of people wouldn't have invested in buy to lets.

^worse off not wore off sorry^

A sliding scale is needed and not this ridiculous cut off point between income brackets.

Fully agree - far too many cliff edges in the tax and benefits systems. The "tapering away" of child benefit and of the personal allowance at £50k and £100k should also be much wider - it's an insane system where you can have "marginal" tax rates/benefit loss rates of 60/70/80% (and there's a case where it's over 100%!). Sheer lunacy. The policy makers over the last 20+ years need their heads examining as they've not had a clue about the consequences of their decisions.