100k+ salary, is it worth it?

[Goingtogetslated]

For the record…Not trying to be insensitive…

partner and I both earn approx 150k each. Working long and unpredictable hours with high levels of stress and responsibility.

Yet here we are living in a 3 bed terrace in the east end of london, a basic car, neither of us into high end expenses/dining out/clothes. We used to holiday a lot pre children, I guess would classify as our major expenditure in the past.

But is it actually worth it? A decent 4/5 bed house (with kerb appeal I admit) in the commuter belt seems to be coming in at 1.5 million minimum. Add the commuting costs/ extended nursery hours, paid help required theres barely anything left - relatively speaking.

Would we not be better off sacking it all in, moving to the countryside and earning enough to pay the bills?

We appear to be stuck in this middle ground where we earn too much to have any allowances from the state, contribute a lot to the government yet not enough for any real benefits in lifestyle

@Goingtogetslated - how long does it take you to get to the office, and how much of your work could be done remotely?

She can move a little out of London, there are loads of places close enough to commute, and that would halve the cost of living in the centre

no need to move further, there are lots of properties in SW London within her budget,
staying closer means paying less on daily commute to London for 2,

moving further imo is great if you work part time or have a flexible job arrangement like working from home and only being in office a couple of times a week,

Will you be posting this helpful tip on all the low income / benefit threads or would that be considered unpractical and patronising?

The comments on this post have really wound me up. OP obviously works incredibly hard and contributes a huge amount of cash to the Government. She's not asking for any help. She's simply asking, for the lifestyle I am able to afford in London, is my stressful job worth it?

Yes, she's in a privileged position, but I think she knows this.

It's a very difficult question to answer OP as you can't possibly know if a slower pace of life would suit you or not until you make that change.

For my own part I know I thrive on the stress (and the salary although I like you it doesn't go as far as anyone would imagine once mortgage and childcare are factored in) and wouldn't have it any other way.

The very best of luck, whatever decision you make🤞

Her wage is good, but not that stellar in London . She’ll see or know others who out earn her

Just because you are in a bubble with other high earners, does not mean you aren't on a 'stellar' wage.

Its in the top 2% nationally and £150,000 per year IS Stellar even by London standards.

Every single bunch of statistics on this demonstrates this.

This is one of the clearest illustrations I could find from
http://www.salaryexplorer.com/salary-survey.php?loc=3285&loctype=3

It shows that she is still in the top 7 or 8 % for an individual income.

But she is in a household with TWO incomes this large. Thats even more unusual and as a household would almost certainly put her in the top 3 or 4% of household income for London (if not higher).

Its staggering that anyone even tries to argue differently with any level of understanding of wage percentiles. Its abject nonsense and financial illiteracy to suggest it isn't a 'stella wage' by London standards or that they don't have a 'stella' household income.

I've had a quick Google, but am yet to find any 'official bodies' that have done a comparison. Only living wage.
However IMO rent and transport can be used as reasonable proxies as those are the two main differentiators. Council tax varies massively by borough. Food and utilities are similar.
Eating out is the same, you can find options at various price points chains etc are the same. Things like theatre tickets are cheaper with the touring musicals up here but I wouldn't include that in a living wage calculation.

Maybe enough to cover an X% rise in bills, with Y amount left for treats a month would be a reasonable basis of calculation.

@Confused19831983

Working incredibly hard and contributes a huge amount really depends on what she does.

People on far lower wages work incredibly hard too and can't afford million pound properties and excellent pensions

There are loads of pages like this, all with different figures, with no inkling of where they've come from.
If you scroll down it says that the average salary in Manchester is 84K... I'm no statistician but that doesn't seem right.

Also as PP said time of house buying and family help matter more than income.

Feel free to do so yourself. No charge for the valuable advice. 😊

@RedToothBrush

That poster is right - their salaries are good but not “stellar” for London and it’s also true that they will know people on much higher salaries.

When NHS GPS earn 100k pa and NHS consultants 100-180k then 150 isn’t stratospheric.

(Not that I wouldn’t be delighted with it)

@Botw1 No, it does not depend on the nature of her work. How much CASH she contributes to the state is dependant on her salary. How much she contributes to society in her role is impossible to quantify. If high earners like her didn't exist how do you think we would have the money to pay for schools, benefits, the NHS?

@Confused19831983

If higher earners didn't exist the money could be spread out more equally. So more people could contribute more

Higher earners should contribute the most and take the least. They help create the need for others to need support

What’s your job OP? Can you not do something similar in Hull?
I’ve heard that people have jobs outside of London but don’t quote me on that

Can you explain this? It doesn't make any sense.

Wrong.
Do not confuse high earners on PAYE with the mega rich/corporations.
It's the latter that hold the majority of the wealth, but pay very little taxes with clever accounting. Capital gains is taxed much less than earned income.
'Higher earners' OTOH contribute the majority of income tax already.

You cannot keep squeezing the same small group of people to pay for an increasing pool of takers. Sooner or later you will get things like people going self-employed, consultants dropping their NHS hours to go private for more money and less tax. You're not going to increase the tax take. You'll force people out.

We are already getting into a situation of higher earners 'contributing the most and taking the least' by stealth, via people opting for private school and private healthcare. Does that make the NHS and schools better? Nope. All that happens is that higher earners get demonised for opting out.

The causes of wealth inequality are complex, but it's the asset owners, with wealth that hoard it. not those on high 'incomes'.

I'll use my sibling as an example. Works as a surgeon. Lives within 10 mins walk of the hospital in London as often on call. Works abnormally long hours. 100+ a week.

High rent due to living in central London.

When your child has a life of death accident, would you be happy for her to commute from Hull to perform an urgent surgery?

I’m simply saying her wage isn’t stellar or pass remarkable for some in London. She’ll have colleague’s who are out earning her
i agree the op is statistically in a small minority of high earners however she’ll not be living like a Kardashian
for reference I know people who get a bonus exceeding £300k and it’s expected and comparatively normal in their field

i will say again I’ve never seen a mn male partner berated or held to same level of scrutiny for earning £150k, poster breezily post about their six figure salary husband/partner and nowt is said. Nadda. Op is berated for profligacy for her six figure salary.

mn is never great with high earning women who work full time

Huh??

I think they have surgeons in Hull. And possibly hospitals? Again this could be rumours and hearsay

So if all the surgeons move out of London for cheaper houses, to say Hull, who is going to treat your child when they have an accident in London?

@Botw1 Are you a communist?

"We appear to be stuck in this middle ground where we earn too much to have any allowances from the state, contribute a lot to the government yet not enough for any real benefits in lifestyle"

I feel for you @Goingtogetslated , I really do. Just throw in both jobs, sell the house and move to an inner city area and get minimum wage jobs and apply for benefits to top up. It's so much easier. You won't have ANY stress at all in a minimum wage boring slog slog job. Enjoy .

Hull is not a world centre for health, it’s not the hub everyone in health wants to work in and it doesn’t accommodate all specialism at all level. Might as well advise op to live in Blackpool if we are randomly picking cheap uk towns. I work nhs and I’m specifically in London because it accommodates my specialty and the experts are here, they are not in Hull. I imagine op need to be London not hull

Hull isn’t a financial or commercial centre that multinationals routinely post staff to.

You must have a chunk of equity in your 3 bed terrace in the east end of london (esp as the east end is highly desirable!).

What are you looking for here? Your stressful and unpredictable jobs sound like the issue.

So children in London should just die then?