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!

not really, it's capped at 2 children.

It's better not to have kids young imo.

But I'm in my 30s and I chose having money over kids. Built a business with my partner that's worth a few million that we both really enjoy (and wouldn't have been possible if we'd had kids). It's not the money that's the biggest benefit to me, although it's nice not to worry, it's all the millions of other things. Like being able to have a lie in, things are where we left them, only need to do 2 loads of laundry a week, can go out whenever we want, can see friends at short notice, can go for holidays outside of school holidays, don't have conversations about poop or pee, no arguments about pointless things, no anxiety about a million kid related things, not falling into exhaustion, being able to learn new things and have fun hobbies, just randomly being able to go out for lunch or dinner if we feel like it, not having to carry around a million things, not having to leave things partway through or only see part of them, not always being sick from nursery or school bugs, the list is endless really.

This is exactly it.

You cut your cloth if you become young parents and there's no lifestyle to maintain.

I presumed sarcasm?!

Who knows tho, odd article and thread

The Daily mail which tells everyone that believes them, that people on Job seekers allowance are living in luxury on £4kpa. This couple are in the top 20% of household income in the UK. What do median and minimum earners do? The Daily mail of course, don't give a crap about them.

True but housing costs for the absolute vast majority preclude having kids early unless by accident.

Realistically their fertility is running out. It starts to deplete in early 30s so if they want kids - go for it, if not, wait and pursue other dreams first.
Sometimes having children spaced futher apart is a cost savings. depending on whether you will use paid childcare.

And yet when it is by accident they somehow manage. How is that?

@Rosindub well they just get on with it and save up for the deposit sharpish.

Myself and my friends/family, the ones who had children young and who always had home ownership in their life plans, have managed it...whatever age they were when they had their first child.

If they wanted a family they can cut their cloth accordingly. Like many of us have to do. I have four DC and we manage fine on a fraction of that salary!

If you can't afford to have children on £100k it proves that anyone on a lower wage does need support to raise a family. Housing costs need to reduce in this country as a matter of urgency as this is the biggest outgoing for most people.

I already had two children and running a home by 24yr. My daughter is 24 this year and can't even afford to move out on one full time wage into a studio flat because of how expensive it is.

And what year were you born..?

What is your monthly income though, including any government help? It would be interesting to see if it's really a fraction of the gross figure.

Not revealing these details about monthly income but do receive UC, CB and Scottish Child Payment for three out of four children. We don't struggle.

Mine is £2k per month including all government help, single parent of one child and I don't struggle. I pay all rent and bills out of that £2k. No childcare costs however.

I was born 1985

To add, i was 21 when eldest born and a homeowner the month after I turned 25.

Well you have to admit you get a lot of help? You say your salary is 'a fraction' of what this couple takes home. Is your monthly take home the same fraction of theirs? No, it'll be a much larger fraction due to higher pension contributions, student loan repayments, tax, NI etc for the higher earner, and income from the state for the lower earner. The gross figures aren't necessarily helpful. We're getting to the point where it doesn't make sense to get a good job if you plan to have kids, because in real terms you're probably in the same boat whether you earn 20k or 40k.

Definitely get state help here, it allows me to study part time whilst DH works full time. I have five more years to go before rejoining the workforce.

We don't live hand to mouth, but are not rolling in it either. We live comfortably on a fraction of £100k.

I had my first two children in my 20s so have never been wealthy so nothing to lose by having them young. I would imagine if you have been used to earning well it must be a huge shock having to cut your cloth accordingly. I didn't mind packing in my career as I was already at the bottom of the ladder anyway. I might have felt differently if I had earned a huge salary about giving it all up though. Who knows.

But what I'm saying is, the couple in the article also live on a fraction of 100k. They don't actually take home 100k.

Also, as someone who has 'done everything right' (gone to uni, got a good job, met a partner, got married, had a few promotions - in that order), can you see how it's annoying that I fund your state support but if I were to have a child I'd get nothing/very little? This isn't personal, it's the system that's the problem.

@innerdesign my understanding is there's plenty of families where 2 people have "done everything right" before having kids and they're still claiming childcare costs from the government tho.

(I might be wrong about that tho because I don't know a thing about the childcare system.)

Yes I understand and sympathise with those who work for years and get promotions, do well, and yet they have to think very carefully about costs relating to starting a family. It is something going wrong with state support.

I can assure you, you are not the only one upset about it. My DBro is late thirties, single and he works full time. He doesn't get any support, not wealthy, he gets pissed off with those getting every benefit under the sun. He has to watch every penny. It's unfair.

Totally. It's one of the many reasons we didn't have children: because we didn't want to go from living comfortably to just 'managing' with another person to consider. For me, personally, that just seemed odd. I appreciate others feel differently.

Maybe they do, but so what? The fact that mumsnetters don't approve of it doesn't mean anything. Millions of people have children in rented homes. There's a certain amount of insecurity in renting, particularly in the UK, but lots of people make it work.