To think that after COL change expectations have to change

[EuclidianGeometryFan]

If you are a couple in "professional" or middle-to-highish income jobs, say between £70k to £100k joint family income, is it now unreasonable to expect to raise two children in a middle-class lifestyle in the south?

Example of a couple with a 3 bed house, run one car, two children in primary, so still need after-school and holiday childcare, have a dog.
Would you expect to afford a few coffees each week, a couple of meals out or takeaways each month, a couple of TV subscriptions, a nice holiday abroad, or perhaps a better car instead of the holiday - and not to have to count the pennies when shopping or turn the heating off to save money?

Or is this too much to expect?

Would it be more reasonable nowadays to not afford the coffees and meals, not afford the dog, only cheap camping holidays in UK, old car, no TV subscriptions?
Even when the children are in secondary and no longer need childcare, you then have to worry about helping them afford uni or house deposit or driving lessons.

(On the plus side, at least you own your own house into retirement.)

I think our idea of what a "professional middle-class" lifestyle should be like has to permanently change. With the cost of childcare and housing, we just can't live at the standard we used to.

@Covertcollie - you are speaking for a minority of that generation. Most do not have multiple holidays a year and are not living it up. Most are turning the heating down, not having take away coffees or meals out. No one can choose when they are born. This constant attempt to divide and blame the generations for what they had/have or didn't have is so destructive. No doubt when the younger generations inherit from their parents they will want to give it away because it came to them without them having to work for it.

@Toastandbutterand
I agree. People's expectations are very high now and social media and property programs on tv has fed that expectation.

Because it doesn't necessarily? Things rise and fall, constant improvement is not a given. It would be nice if it happened just like it would be nice if I could shit rainbows and sparkles.

Not sure what milkman's have to do with anything? I completely understand the frustration of people who can't afford to rent or mortgage even a small place but I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the ones that grew up pampered and expect life to be a constant pamper party, you haven't been on Mumsnet very long if you haven't seen all the posters who moan about how hard life is because they can't send their kids to boarding school?

1500 three bedroom properties within 20 miles of London for under £375000

We’ve paid over £1k a month in nursery fees for the last 4 years and still have another 3 to go. One Dc is in school, one in nursery. We have wrap around costs for DC at school too. We have never had full time nursery, we do 4 days a week, which is very common where I am in the south east. 5 days a week would be a lot more.

@Scrubberdubber but when has society not progressed? Empires rising and falling doesn't mean society isn't progressing.

you haven't been on Mumsnet very long if you haven't seen all the posters who moan about how hard life is because they can't send their kids to boarding school?

I've been here a fair few years and have never seen a thread where someone is moaning about not being able to afford boarding school. Can you link any?

I cannot link because I don't keep an inventory of every Mumsnet thread I read. But going by the amount of people liking my comments a lot of users know exactly what I mean.

New things being invented does not mean society is constantly improving regarding the financial situation for the average citizen which is what is being discussed here. Like I said empires rised and fell, economically things are always rising and falling life was ok before the great depression then went to shit then became good again. I should be asking you why you think history is some ever increasing barchart of improvement

Pension credit if you paid in to the system. My mistake if I didn’t mention it. Tbh I don’t care if we give really old sick people medication or not. They can have it if they can afford to pay for it ? Perhaps we do need to abolish any form of state support then? Medical insurance and private schools only then. I couldn’t afford private education at secondary level so it would have to be some form of online tutoring for my children.

You look after your own old people . Cull them at a certain age or when they get too sick to divine with minimal treatment ?

Eventually those older people will die. It would take several generations to even things out.

You can do it pretty much anywhere in the UK except the South East. You may need to consider relocating for a better lifestyle, OP.

@wherearemypastnames I think full time nursery being uncommon vs the norm might be area dependent? I’m in London and don’t know anyone here who didn’t have their children in full time nursery, but for friends in areas where a FT wage is often less after tax than FT nursery, and where two wages aren’t required to have a home, it was far less common.

But they’re only surviving because we give them benefits and homes. There are lots and lots of people who are relying solely on the state to fund their existence and that of their children.

A lot of people with disabilities (. Some of which are hereditary) would die out and not have kids themselves if it wasn't for the NHS keeping people alive. 100 years previously it just wouldn't happen for the people with hereditary diseases to keep having kids also carrying the disease and needing care as they would've died early on

Stupid people do not necessarily have stupid children and bright people don't have bright kids ( regression towards mean might apply here ?)

And some stupid people are actually undereducated bright people who had no opportunities in life

This is incorrect but leads to an interesting discussion.

It's proven by many research projects that intelligence has significant hereditary component. Stupid and uneducated are very different things.

In the last several decades (post WWII?) people tend to have children with their intellectual equivalents, not necessarily within the same social/wealth circle. It means that chances of two high IQ parents producing a high IQ child are much higher than two stupid parents having a bright child.
Then two intelligent parents give much better opportunities for child's intellectual development, like reading, cultural capital, interesting discussions at home etc. So the cycle continues and the gap widens.

Having said this - some posts above are truly chilling. I believe this is where US are heading to.

Is it really true that it's just since WW2 that people tend to marry those of similar intellect?

I feel that in many working class areas the bright lads and lasses would tend to migrate towards each other - indeed I have seen great examples in my own family including the uneducated bright who had been written off as stupid

But in that case we would see evidence of these extra bright childen emerging and the population would be on average the same but with greater divergence - is that happening ?

What I see is bright parents -> value out of and therefore on education and money for a nice area -> better educated kids

I also suspect that a lot of troublesome teens are bright teens from a poor background who lack the right kind of stimulation

I seem to recall people saying that one reason we didn't need grammar schools and assisted places any more is that all the bright kids had been filtered through in the 50/60s and there was no benefit to looking at the lower classes any more - and that's clearly untrue.

Is it really true that it's just since WW2 that people tend to marry those of similar intellect?
My view is that with marriages aren't restricted by social class anymore people tend to gravitate to those likeminded ones when it comes to having children. We can all of course share anekdata disproving this, but statistically it's true. And I do believe that great intelligence divergence is happening. Again, education and intelligence are different things.

there was no benefit to looking at the lower classes any more - and that's clearly untrue
This absolutely is not true and I never ever said this.

I didn't say you did - I was reporting an IRL conversation- apologies if it came across wrong

I would love some data on this rather than beliefs and local observations

The number of looked after children in special schools is frightening.

My friends both have PhDs. They also have. A profoundly autistic son in a special school. Special needs doesn’t come exclusively from low IQ.

That aside your views are frankly disgusting.

Was the point not that if someone is an addict (drugs or alcohol) the children are more likely to be born with intellectual disabilities? That would be an actual fact? Those same children are more likely to go into care etc. How is this fair on those children being born? People keep going on and on about the rights of the adults, but what about the DCs? If you ask most people from dysfunctional households, of course they would have much preferred to be born into privilege. Things are so so much harder if you come from a deprived and addicted background with generations of abuse and addiction. These people need help, and often they are either careless with contraception or seeking love and get pregnant for this reason, because they crave family and love. And then the cycle repeats. It is very difficult and very sad, but I do agree that education and disincentives need to be offered to break the cycle, in a kind & compassionate way.