Page 20 | To think the problem with wealth inequality is that rich people don't know how rich they are?

Neeroy · 2025-11-17T09:04:06+00:00

Article in the Times today saying that people earning six figures 'don't feel rich'. Because they are surrounded by six figure earning peers they are comparing themselves to people who have more rather than the 90% of the population that have far less. This is why the budget is poorly received in the news, because rich people think they already shoulder too high a burden when in fact compared to everyone else they still have far more disposable income. Even if they have to cut down on the number of holidays they go on. They aren't sitting in the dark under a blanket. Or only making food that doesn't require turning on the oven. I don't think they realise how so many people have to live. https://www.thetimes.com/article/1fb46414-8f65-436f-8f95-451d69626148?shareToken=8061d939633164c0dfbd805240c8e008

Starconundrum · 18/11/2025 00:23

Is anyone still donkey kicking the barn cos those poor people got over £2000 to support the UK economy?

Nope?

I wait while the bots Google.

SquareEyedSue · 18/11/2025 00:29

hamstersarse · 17/11/2025 23:42

It’s just envy you are experiencing

Show quote history

How do you know?

Starconundrum · 18/11/2025 00:29

Does anyone want to look at the stats during COVID and see where the economy picked up? Or didn't collapse? Or any ideas on what might have contributed to that?
Cough. £20 uplift. Cough.

Starconundrum · 18/11/2025 00:32

Wasnt the rich putting back in suddenly, if you want a clue.

Hugest financial scam in the last 20 years at least

Starconundrum · 18/11/2025 00:35

The UK economy was saved by uplifting the rate given to poorest in society.

tamade · 18/11/2025 00:37

If someone is on a six figure salary or five or seven they are being paid by some one or something to create value greater than that salary, for the owner. And it is that owner (or owners) who is wealthy and probably does not contribute to society in any meaningful way and doubtless avoids taxes etc.

My point is that people on six figures may be in a better position than you and many others but they are not the enemy (if that is what you are looking for). They are just slightly more successful pawns in the system.

and most of them probably can relate to those less well off, because they came from normal origins

Starconundrum · 18/11/2025 00:39

tamade · 18/11/2025 00:37

If someone is on a six figure salary or five or seven they are being paid by some one or something to create value greater than that salary, for the owner. And it is that owner (or owners) who is wealthy and probably does not contribute to society in any meaningful way and doubtless avoids taxes etc.

My point is that people on six figures may be in a better position than you and many others but they are not the enemy (if that is what you are looking for). They are just slightly more successful pawns in the system.

and most of them probably can relate to those less well off, because they came from normal origins

Edited

I agree.

Look up.

SquareEyedSue · 18/11/2025 01:01

Ahfiddlesticks · 17/11/2025 23:59

Great if you can get a childminder. They're like rocking horse poo around here and about £50 a month less than nursery when you can get one.

And family members looking after kids are great if you have them.

So a lot of luck there.

Show quote history

People often don’t count the freebies as part of their assets. If you get free childcare you might be as wealthy as someone who has to pay for it.

CheeseIsMyIdol · 18/11/2025 01:44

AlastheDaffodils · 17/11/2025 09:26

A few things going on here:

OP your title refers to wealth inequality but your post talks about incomes. They are very different things. A retired teacher couple in a mortgage free house will be much wealthier and have a better standard of living than a 25 year old banker on £120k living in a London flatshare - but the banker obviously has the higher income, and pays much more tax.
you talk about high income people feeling they shoulder more of the burden but still having more disposable income than poorer people. This is true but not a contradiction. Our 25 y.o. banker will be paying £53k in tax and student loan, which is probably five times as much as the teachers in a much bigger paid off house. Obviously she’s not on the breadline and can take a holiday or two. But if she feels she’s shouldering a disproportionate burden of tax, then she’s correct.
you frame this in a UK only context - rich people don’t realise how rich they are, other people are on much less. This is true - surveys consistently show rich/high income people mostly underestimate how unusual their situation is. But in a global context even the poorest quartile of UK households are much, much wealthier than the global norm - especially if they are UK citizens and so get access to free healthcare and education, and even more so if they are in low cost social housing. You might as well say “The problem is UK low and middle income households don’t realise how lucky they are.” This is simplistic, but just as true as your initial proposition.

Very well stated!

Barnbrack · 18/11/2025 03:11

Starconundrum · 18/11/2025 00:18

Do you all remember in COVID when people got col payments?

You know why they got them right?

To prevent widespread riots and to kickstart the economy and make our stats look better.

Poor people put every single penny they have back in the economy. Middle class people too.

Rich people don't. They remove it.

So look at when the poorest in society got their col payments. And it baffles me why this very obvious financial play has never been called out.

Just before Christmas. Just before Easter. At the start of the summer holidays.

To put the money back into the economy to kick start it.

But the same people telling you these poor people are starving you of wealth are the same people that used them to kick start the economy.

Bit of a financial dissonance isn't it?!

Look up.

Why are you so keen to discount tall of thus

Thatsalineallright · 18/11/2025 03:17

Neeroy · 17/11/2025 23:11

A quick post fired off whilst eating breakfast has certainly taken off!

In my haste to post and go to work I don't think I worded my OP necessarily how I would have with more thought.

Wealth inequality means people cannot fathom how others are living. I do agree with the distinction between rich and mega rich. But it's interesting that people are caught up on the disposable income part. Giving examples of £3k mortgage and £2k childcare and that's where the £100k goes. Without any awareness that if you don't have the money for a deposit and don't even earn £3k a month that 'only' having e.g. £900/month left as disposable income seems a privilege only afforded to 'rich' people.

It is obscene the amount of power billions can buy. E.g. Elon Musk and generations of family wealth who never need to work and live off their investments. And that is mega rich. But honestly, earning £100k year means you then expand your lifestyle to fit your earnings. And fair play to you. You do what you want with your hard earned money. But you are considerably richer than c.90% of the population.

Try using this calculator. £100k household income. 2 adults. 2 children aged 0-13. £300/month council tax. Your income is higher than 89% of the population. Even when you add in £3k housing costs you're still richer than 71% of the population.

2 adults earning £40k each and you're still in the top 69%. Rich is relative.

ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/where_do_you_fit_in#tool-results-section

There are also calculators to compare on a global level. If you earn 30000 pounds (so almost 40000 dollars) you are richer than 90 percent of the world's population. https://glowcalculator.com/world-wealth-calculator/

World Wealth Calculator - Glow Calculator

Calculate your wealth rank globally with the World Wealth Calculator. Discover your percentile, income tier, and where you stand financially.

https://glowcalculator.com/world-wealth-calculator/

Daisymay8 · 18/11/2025 04:26

I read recently or heard, someone explaining the divide started in the 70s when the bosses started earning much more than the workers.

Boohoo76 · 18/11/2025 04:37

Neeroy · 17/11/2025 23:45

Reading more of the thread, people saying e.g. £2k on nursery fees and e.g. £400 on car finance. I couldn't afford £2k of nursery fees so I had to use a cheaper childminder and get help one day a week from a family member. Thank goodness I had that because essentially it was double pay that day. I have also NEVER had car finance. I can't afford that per month! I bought a car when I got my first job and then saved immediately for the new one. So when the old one needed fixing I used the car savings to fund it. When it got to the end of its life and became costly to fix I would part ex it for a new one. I've only ever bought and driven what I could afford. My car is currently 11 years old and because it's a boringly reliable brand it'll last me a good few years more. Is it desperately dull? Yes. Would I love a shinier, newer one? Yes. But when you don't earn £100k you don't get to make the nice choices.

Someone called it lifestyle creep. The more you earn, the more you spend. So then the credit or outgoings obligations feel like a millstone around your neck. But if you lived in my house, drove my car and used my childminder you'd have a lot more money to spend!

Well you are very lucky that you can use a family member. Many people that I know don’t live near family so they have no choice but to pay for childcare and £2000 per month is the “cheap” childcare where I live.

And in the example that I gave far up the thread, there was no car payment, I stated £495 for a monthly train pass which is fucking outrageous when you compare it against travelling the same distance where I grew up in the north. The train cost there is half the price of the cost of my commuter train to London for the same length journey.

I don’t know where you live but where my brother lives the house prices are a third of the price when compared where I live. However, many people get paid the same (including him as a teacher as there is no London weighting). So, there’s no lifestyle creep, it’s the cost of buying a basic home.

NautilusLionfish · 18/11/2025 04:46

SalmonOnFinnCrisp · 17/11/2025 09:22

Yabu....

And falling for the rhetoric.
Susan and Doug making 130k each working 60 hour weeks and juggling like fuck trying to raise two kids isnt the problem.

This is the problem...
50 families own more more than 50% of the uks total wealth

This. So much this
Also not all six figured are the same. Two couples in same area, one on 130k another on 950k are very different six figures. Then there is the vast differences in cost of living by region. 130k is definitely good but will give you different "wealth feel" if one liked in London and the other in say Yorkshire or the Wirral.

But ultimately the issue is that in uk ( yes it's also bad and unacceptable in other countr) we have parents who ration their food so that their child eats. I read the other day if a teem skipping his meals so his pregnant mother can eat. Yet there are outcomes if there is a suggestion that millionaires pay 10p more in tax. In a world with billionaires who can spend the year on yatchs and at parties how is this acceptable? It's very sad

Daisymay8 · 18/11/2025 04:58

I would like to see stats as to why someone is in poverty- single parenthood no contribution from other parent? Lives in SE but low paid job? Mental health problems? Poorly paid jobs? 6kids? Alcohol/drugs? Retired but little pension?

SalmonOnFinnCrisp · 18/11/2025 06:54

MarvellousMable · 18/11/2025 00:00

Which 50 families? I’ve seen ZP saying this online but he hasn’t named them. I’m genuinely interested in who they are so that their tax v income/ capital gains can be compared. Happy to look into.

Show quote history

Correction to that...I was wrong here... it's more than the poorest 50% of the population but yes! i'd be very curious to know too.

I imagine it's a lot of people you've never heard of and the sunaks!

Breadandbutta · 18/11/2025 07:26

FancyBiscuitsLevel · 17/11/2025 09:22

I guess it’s because we’ve not updated our idea of what a “rich person” lifestyle looks like to allow for the much lower standards of living across the board in the last 10 years or so.

”rich lifestyle” things feel like - “having a house big enough for each child to have a bedroom plus a guest room”, “can afford overseas holiday a year”, “can run two big cars”, “buy a 2nd home in the country/at the sea.” Except 20 years ago this was more standard middle class lifestyle, not the rich.

My lifestyle is very similar to the one my parents had when they were my age/had teen dcs. Except my dad was a teacher and DH earns about double what a teacher with the same level of responsibility would earn now. Someone with DHs job in the 90s would be living in a much bigger house with a much more luxurious lifestyle. So I’m not surprised that people who are on around £150k-ish don’t feel rich- many will be living a lower lifestyle than their own parents.

This. We have six figure income and live in a house worth about half a million (200k mortgage). We have 2 cars and our lifestyle is worse than my parents. My dad never earnt more than 45k his whole life.

Elbone · 18/11/2025 07:29

FurierTransform · 17/11/2025 20:54

They aren't comparable tho, because in 1980s dual income households were very much not the norm, so everything (including houses) was priced to a lower/more easily achieved baseline...

Both working/saving to buy a house in 1980 put them very much in a position of privilege vs both working MW jobs now.
To compare to now you'd have to look more at a couple where 2 people work 3.5 jobs. Could they afford a house doing that? Probably.

Not to deny there are issues with housing and wage growth in the UK, but these historical comparisons/statements of 'they had it easy' often aren't fully grounded.

Show quote history

It is comparable.

A couple could afford to live very comfortably on two low wages. Now they can’t live comfortably on two good wages.

It’s that simple.

CowTown · 18/11/2025 07:31

NautilusLionfish · 18/11/2025 04:46

This. So much this
Also not all six figured are the same. Two couples in same area, one on 130k another on 950k are very different six figures. Then there is the vast differences in cost of living by region. 130k is definitely good but will give you different "wealth feel" if one liked in London and the other in say Yorkshire or the Wirral.

But ultimately the issue is that in uk ( yes it's also bad and unacceptable in other countr) we have parents who ration their food so that their child eats. I read the other day if a teem skipping his meals so his pregnant mother can eat. Yet there are outcomes if there is a suggestion that millionaires pay 10p more in tax. In a world with billionaires who can spend the year on yatchs and at parties how is this acceptable? It's very sad

Show quote history

I hate to point out the obvious here, but a mother who cannot afford to feed the children that she does have, shouldn’t be pregnant/having more children that she cannot afford to feed. Birth control and condoms are free on the NHS. This is bad parenting, plain and simple.

GehenSieweiter · 18/11/2025 08:16

dottiehens · 17/11/2025 20:51

May be they can’t afford their own children and still pay for the children of people on welfare?

Show quote history

'On welfare'? We're not in the US.
They're also not doing that anyway.

Original poster

Neeroy · 18/11/2025 08:17

Another wealth related story in the Times this morning.

People with salaries over £100k more likely to benefit from the bank of Mum and Dad.

www.thetimes.com/article/e71fc7af-fbfa-4fd9-b4dd-0060b89b447f?shareToken=4f89696d810ec3f0504159090fab8f6b

OP posts:

GehenSieweiter · 18/11/2025 08:20

hamstersarse · 17/11/2025 23:42

It’s just envy you are experiencing

Show quote history

You cannot tell someone else what they're experiencing.

GehenSieweiter · 18/11/2025 08:21

hamstersarse · 17/11/2025 23:44

Sounds pretty resentful to me

Why do you care where people send their kids to school?

Show quote history

Answering a question with a correct answer isn't being resentful.

Boohoo76 · 18/11/2025 08:33

Neeroy · 18/11/2025 08:17

Another wealth related story in the Times this morning.

People with salaries over £100k more likely to benefit from the bank of Mum and Dad.

www.thetimes.com/article/e71fc7af-fbfa-4fd9-b4dd-0060b89b447f?shareToken=4f89696d810ec3f0504159090fab8f6b

So what? Why does it bother you? I earn £100k + but I had free school meals and it’s me that has given financial help to my parents. But I am really not bothered about anyone who does get help, good for them.

Tiramisutully · 18/11/2025 08:39

Neeroy · 17/11/2025 23:11

A quick post fired off whilst eating breakfast has certainly taken off!

In my haste to post and go to work I don't think I worded my OP necessarily how I would have with more thought.

Wealth inequality means people cannot fathom how others are living. I do agree with the distinction between rich and mega rich. But it's interesting that people are caught up on the disposable income part. Giving examples of £3k mortgage and £2k childcare and that's where the £100k goes. Without any awareness that if you don't have the money for a deposit and don't even earn £3k a month that 'only' having e.g. £900/month left as disposable income seems a privilege only afforded to 'rich' people.

It is obscene the amount of power billions can buy. E.g. Elon Musk and generations of family wealth who never need to work and live off their investments. And that is mega rich. But honestly, earning £100k year means you then expand your lifestyle to fit your earnings. And fair play to you. You do what you want with your hard earned money. But you are considerably richer than c.90% of the population.

Try using this calculator. £100k household income. 2 adults. 2 children aged 0-13. £300/month council tax. Your income is higher than 89% of the population. Even when you add in £3k housing costs you're still richer than 71% of the population.

2 adults earning £40k each and you're still in the top 69%. Rich is relative.

ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/where_do_you_fit_in#tool-results-section

I can fathom how the other half live thanks. I grew up in poverty, didn’t want that for my kids, studies hard from a very early age and both my husband and I earn well.

This option was open to any and all of my classmates at school - the majority of which found it more fun to mess around at school and many of whom are on minimum wage jobs or are on out of work benefits.

You cannot whine about having little to live off if you haven’t taken all opportunities offered to you and worked hard.