Seriously? This is The Times idea of an average family being squeezed for cash?

[ItchySnoof]

How fucking out of touch are these people? Given that some families literally can't feed themselves?

Genuinely thought this was a joke

@OneTimeThrowAway

Financial times has a regular weekend insert called how to spend it

That always strikes me as a bit much but again, it's who buys it

My husband buys it and it always makes me squirm.

Does anyone have a share token for the full article?

The whole thing is partially irrelevant anyway as there are not currently any au pairs due to bloody brexit.
But, things have gone up for everyone and that was the point of the piece.

@underneaththeash

The whole thing is partially irrelevant anyway as there are not currently any au pairs due to bloody brexit. But, things have gone up for everyone and that was the point of the piece.

There are still thousands of au pairs

You think all au pairs were from European countries?

One quick look on Au Pair search shows the plethora of au pairs looking from the states, Australia, LAMEX etc.

I can't read much of the article

Why are they saying they need to cut back?

I am curious as to what you would describe as a high earning salary ? @Postchristmasflab ?
The other thing is this idea of bills doubling, some are going to go up a fair bit, such as fuel bills, but most will go up a bit, Nannies aren't suddenly going to increase their rate by 40k are they ? Council tax isn't likely to double, car finance isn't suddenly going to double, neither is your mortgage unless there is a sizable interest rate hike and you aren't on a fixed rate, food will cost a bit more due to inflation, but as a high earner you are highly unlikely to have to choose between heating and eating.

The article reads fine.
If that’s their story, why the hand ringing?

The point is this family isn't fucking "squeezed" at all. They wouldn't know a squeeze if it slapped them repeatedly in the face!

Although I will admit that I thought I had seen the words "average family" within the article and was mistaken. My sincerest apologies to those who were so deeply offended by this

I am a times reader. That lifestyle bears no relation to mine. Two pensioners in sheltered housing. Everyone is going to suffer financially this year. Don't mock just because they start off better off than most of us. Her worries are real to her

Feel bad for the family having to cut back on the Hakkassan takeaways. Sad.

@ItchySnoof

The point is this family isn't fucking "squeezed" at all. They wouldn't know a squeeze if it slapped them repeatedly in the face!

Although I will admit that I thought I had seen the words "average family" within the article and was mistaken. My sincerest apologies to those who were so deeply offended by this

The issue seems to be your lack of understanding to the term 'squeezed'

Here you go -
What Is a Squeeze? The term "squeeze" is used to describe many financial and business situations, typically involving some sort of market pressure

So this family is in fact feeling the market pressure and economic downturn at the moment.

@DeepDown12

If one of them alone earns 6 figures (and if he's a hedge fund manager, he's well into that bracket), they are not eligible for free 30h childcare once child is 3. Therefore, any childcare - they have to pay - nursery, nanny, au pair - they have no other options.

Everyone gets 15 free hours at 3. It's the additional 15 that you don't get once someone in the household is above 100k. I wouldn't really consider 15 hours in school or nursery enough to switch from nanny to au pair, though.

@Insertfunnyname

It doesn’t claim they’re an average family tho

Believe it or not there are people in all pay brackets who are tightening their belts. That may look different for some families than others but doesn’t make it a less valid or true experience.

It’s 2022 not medieval Britain. Surely most people believe elitism ruins society overall, aside from enabling cool buildings/structures.

I think the thing that annoys me most is the nanny/ au pair thing. I’ve been called both although the reality was I was just a decent human being that loved working with children. I did it as my vocation not because of the money. Surely everyone knows the person comes before the price tag. A £40k nanny that your child hates is pointless.

Those who are poor tend not to read the times how do you know this?

@Theyellowflamingo

Who do you imagine reads The Times, an expensive paywalled broadsheet newspaper? People who can’t feed themselves are hardly the target demographic. I can’t read the whole thing, but I can’t see anywhere where it is claimed she’s an average or typical family in a national sense, but I bet she’s a fairly typical reader of The Times! Nor does she seem to be claiming poverty or tragedy, just describing changes she plans to make - fair enough.

I buy the Sunday Times when I can because it's good value when you count all the magazines. But yet, this article is aimed at the reader of the Times, not the average person.

I read the story this morning as a subscriber and thought the comments were pretty funny. It does read like a spoof. But equally, it made a change to hear a different perspective, and it certainly has implications for the nanny even if the family are hardly going to be destitute. There are plenty of articles about how the lowest earners are going to be hit, the point I took from this is that everyone is affected in some way, even if it they aren’t going to be struggling to make ends meet. I don’t think the article claims they are an average family by any means.

And whilst they are a tiny minority of the population, they are probably more highly represented in the readership of The Times.

I read this out to DH earlier and he looked very confused 😆 he couldn't understand how renting a Tesla for the school run would be cheaper!

"Financial times has a regular weekend insert called how to spend it

That always strikes me as a bit much but again, it's who buys it"

It's better for the rest of us that rich people spend their money so I don't have a problem with that at all.

@KittensWearingWoollyMittens

Those who are poor tend not to read the times how do you know this?

From the content and the adverts and just the price of the paper. Info on who buys which paper is easily availably to the public so you can look it up if you're doubtful.

They might not have claimed they're the average family and they might well be The Times demographic, but it's increasingly common for families to struggle to afford basic groceries or have heating on in freezing weather because they can't afford the bills.
It's insensitive and in poor taste.

Am I the only one who feels sorry for the soon to be redundant nanny?

So this family is in fact feeling the market pressure and economic downturn at the moment.

So why choose this moment to re-train as a health coach and not continue in your very succesful career as something else ? If it is all about finances, market pressures, economic downturn etc ?

@TheLovelinessOfDemons

Our income is less than they pay their au pair.

Then get a job as an au pair.

Not my area of expertise, but would employers, partners and business associates of a hedgie who can't make ends meet be less inclined to keep his company?

Firstly, I don't think they are claiming this is a representative family, just that this is how this family are having to trim costs.

Secondly, although I dislike the profoundly flawed theory of trickle down economics, when high spenders start trimming costs it does impact on others who earn far less - the nanny who now needs a new job, the fancy veg box company getting fewer orders etc.

I live in a community where a chunk of the economy is based on yachting (boatyards, caterers, sailing schools etc) and it was striking in the financial crisis in around 2009ish how many people we knew locally were very swiftly impacted by the job losses in London