Young couple cannot afford a family on 100k per year!

[dottiedodah]

All subjective of course.Young couple feel they are unable to afford a family ,With lots of expenses .YABU they should just save and keep going .YANBU if they want children then they would have to cut back .Apologies DM link!

They chose the house over having children. Their choice to make but that is the reality

As a side point. When did the daily mail start charging? They are the last newspaper I would pay a subscription for. Re the OP they are just smug and if they wanted kids they would work it out.

Nobody admits to reading it and yet its average circulation for January was 735,857, making it one of the widest read national dailies. It's got a market, and it's aimed squarely at middle class, middle aged women which is, funnily enough, MN's main demographic too.

https://pressgazette.co.uk/media-audience-and-business-data/media_metrics/most-popular-newspapers-uk-abc-monthly-circulation-figures-2/

Some people can't have children and still want a nice project house, segwaying away from the topic. It's not pointless, don't be horrible.

@NonPlayerCharacter fair enough! I must be lower class then 🤣

If you really want dc you make it work. You can't always have the lifestyle you want plus dc.

I have many friends with one dc who say they simply can't afford more. They renovate almost yearly - they do something at least yearly, several are saving for a buy to let property and many of their dc go to private school. None of these things are wrong, they have a truly lovely dc and they are lovely and kind people. It is disingenuous to say they can't afford another dc, they can't afford the lifestyle they want AND more dc.

I suppose we could say that this is a 'side effect' of people tending to have children in their 30s and 40s rather than 20s?
What I mean is that (broadly speaking) in your twenties the level of material success you have achieved is lower (compared in your 30s or 40s) so you have not become accustomed to a higher standard of living which you then are reluctant to relinquish.

No way is she 33 ...45 with lots of fillers and botox more like!

Of course they can. People manage on a lot less.

Absolute nonsense, what they mean is they can’t afford the lifestyle they actually want.
Both times I have bought, I have bought in less desirable areas, because that’s what I could afford. Most of the other parents in my kids class live in houses worth twice ours but i am just grateful I have a house at all. Oh and we have one kid because that’s what we can afford. Joint income of 50k which is the highest we’ve earned between us for 8 years.

Have just one child. Makes the world of difference.

She's 33. That is roughly now the age of the average first time mother in the UK. As for 'the couple knew this all along', assuming they're degree-educated professionals they've probably never relied on any benefits or state support so it's sort of not on your radar? You're raised to think you're clever, you'll get a good job, you'll buy a property/meet a partner/get married in whatever order and you'll be able to afford a good standard of living to raise a child.

People are acting like 100k is a huge amount - it is not really in today's world. We are two non-medic HCPs with similar take-home pay. Not particularly high earners, just normal. But we wouldn't qualify for any help, no child benefit etc. We're in Scotland so no funded hours until 3 years. And as for people saying 100k in Scotland goes a lot further, our house prices are high too, and our tax thresholds are lower. It's not really the case, not in cities and central belt suburbia anyway. Could we afford to have a child? Yes, but we'd have to accept a similar standard of living to my parents who were non-degree educated and in lower level jobs, and I don't want to. We were raised to think if we worked hard, a 100k household income would be comfortable, and it's not. Also, not being cheeky but someone earlier in the thread said they're getting 2k a week. This shows a total lack of understanding of take home pay. It'll be more like 5.5/6k a month depending on pensions etc. I'd love to know what some of the people saying they raised kids on 2p a year were also getting in housing benefits, child benefit etc.

exactly. not everyone can have it all. priorities

This really, in a nutshell. Plus the costs of the cottage renovation are likely crippling. Not a wise choice when paying out nursery fees on top.

They are living above their means. It would be nice to live in a large bungalow down south in England but we would have had to give up too much to be able to afford it.
We decided not to live close to a busy city in England and up and moved to northern Ireland. We're living quite comfortably on less than half of that, in a 3 bed house with a large garden. It's in a nice village next to the sea and we have our 2nd child on the way. We all have choices. I personally couldn't go back to living close to a city, travelling loads and not being able to spend time with my family.

We happily lived in a one bedroom flat for years to afford having our child. It was a sacrifice that was well worth it for me. £100k is a big income no matter where you live. They just need to cut their cloth differently.

I’ve no sympathy for people who can’t live on £100,000 a year! Buy a smaller house , a smaller car , buy less expensive clothes , many people are living on much much less and work just as hard for a smaller income and have children.

@innerdesign
She's 33. That is roughly now the age of the average first time mother in the UK. As for 'the couple knew this all along', assuming they're degree-educated professionals they've probably never relied on any benefits or state support so it's sort of not on your radar? You're raised to think you're clever, you'll get a good job, you'll buy a property/meet a partner/get married in whatever order and you'll be able to afford a good standard of living to raise a child.

The article comes across as very disingenuous though, they said "year after year we've had to put off our dream" but they went and bought a house that needed loads of work doing to it only at the start of last year

They said buying that house immediately doubled their outgoings in relation to mortgage, council tax etc. and they're also spending £160 a week between them on commuting because they don't live near where they work.

If they'd made different choices at the start of last year they probably would have been able to afford to have a baby now.

Of course they could afford it. But they’d have to prioritise the children when it came to use of income. If they do t want to, fair enough. But they definitely can afford it.

I haven't read the full article as it's behind a paywall, but it's the Daily Mail - of course it's worded to sound as dramatic as possible. The point still stands that a couple with a good income should be able to afford a baby and a decent lifestyle, but it's very difficult nowadays.

It amazed me that people say they can't afford to raise a child on a joint income of £100k.
I was a lone parent, worked, so had to pay childcare, had a mortgage, and still only earned about £19k.
No, it wasn't in the last few years, but it was only about 11 years ago. So, with inflation, that would still only be a salary of about £22-23k.

I can see it on my laptop?
Is it just people who are trying to use a mobile who are getting the paywall?

Well yes they should be able to have a decent lifestyle and a baby and they would be able to if they had bought elsewhere.

I'm in Ireland and would be able to afford a better lifestyle in some counties than I would in others. It's not rocket science.

Obviously one of them doesn't want children and is using finances as an excuse. If they both really wanted children then they would have started trying years ago.

After I had my first child, I was surprised how little I could get by on. My income (which was nowhere near £100Kpa!) halved when I went part-time, but so did my meals out in restaurants, cinema trips, foreign holidays, etc. Yes it is tough sometimes, but if people manage on £25K, I'm sure they could make it work on £100K

It makes me very sad that they can't have a child yet all these single mothers can have as many as they want supported by the taxpayer.

I was a lone parent, worked, so had to pay childcare, had a mortgage, and still only earned about £19k.

And no help from the government?