Poor life planning..

[pocketpairs]

With the upcoming budget seen many "poor me" posts, particularly from high/middle earners. I find it frustrating that rather than blame themselves for thier life (& financial planning) choices, they blame some arbitrary government policy changes, such as upcoming introduction of new council tax bands.

Example: Sister & hubby earn £14k net p/m. But their choice to buy a nearly £x.xm house in SE & send DCs to private school means they have £3k (approx) to spend on everything else. They could have taken different choices...£1m houses &/or move to grammar school areas.

Clearly this is an extreme example, but I really don't understand why a family can't survive on £4-6k p/m, especially outside of London. Up until recently, I survived on much less and managed to put myself a firmer financial footing in 40s.

Sure this means some sacrifices, but it seems everyone wants to 'have their cake and eat it'.

I disagree with the sentiment that the 40/45% tax rate is a progressive tax system, on the contrary, in my opinion it’s a punitive tax system and it makes many high earners rethink their positions ( such as myself) and the reality is many have other options and whilst not everyone will take those options (thankfully for the uk) many will.

You also talk about “the reality is that a few ££ per month can be easily absorbed” - whilst this may be true for some - can you not understand their discontent? Where they pay the most tax (more and more and more) and they see no benefits for themselves? The reality is also that someone earning 150k in London is not a huge amount of money these days. And yes I’m aware it’s way above average - but in my opinion the idea of wealth in the UK is very heavily skewed. The high earners are upset, the middle earners and low income are upset (albeit for different reasons) we are pitted against each other and the reality is the real wealth isn’t taxed at these levels because they are no longer employees but employers.

With regards to your sister, I obviously don’t know her so wouldn’t be able to comment - however I can understand the sentiment as you get older you want to have more disposable income because you’ve worked hard and not less and not have to turn any dials down. In a society such as the UK it shouldn’t be a race to the bottom.

People become high achievers when they believe in themselves and believe they have a chance.

Our education system is set up for middle-class children so when working-class children enter the system they are already at a disadvantage.
By age 11-12 nearly 25% of school-kids have already given up on themselves because the entire system tells them they are stupid from day one.

It's like starting a foreign language course where everyone else in the class has already completed 1-2 years of classes and you are made to feel stupid because you don't know as much as the others in your class.

The government needs to invest in early years education to make the biggest difference to outcomes in the future. The human brain develops more and faster during the first five years than at any other point in our lives.

I’ve raised three children (now adults). Feeding the 2 boys was a phenomenal expense, they were unfillable! And as for the cost of their clothes/footwear. I can remember having to buy new school trousers every term because they grew so fast. My youngest was 6ft 3 when he was 16. They went to grammar school and the sports kits alone - gym/athletics, rugby kit and boots, full set of cricket whites, tracksuit and trainers was hundreds of pounds even 20 years ago. I was working in a good job and I struggled. I don’t know how any mother on benefits would manage it.

Would you rather all the higher earners buy smaller houses just in case this sort of thing happens? Surely that then pushes the prices up if smaller houses and affects lowers earners trying to get on the ladder?

I don't mind being taxed to help others. I do mind that as a lone parent in a detached house (ex council and not at all fancy) I pay the same council tax as my 2 neighbours (even after the 25% discount) who have semi detached houses that have been extended and are bigger than mine. Each has 4 adults living there ( 2 parents and 2 adult kids) they run 4 cars each. I mind that i have to pay my Gp to get a referral letter to be treated on my private healthcare scheme even to save the NHS time and money. I mind that I get shamed for earning a decent wage but no one blinks their eyes when a 2 adult household earns more take home and qualifies for child tax care scheme.
It's not black or white. We aren't all good or bad. We haven't all been high earners for years. Everyone should be a little bit kinder to each other.

I raised my first on benefits and I was only 16 and if you know under 25s get a LOT less benefits than over 25s even if you have kids and responsibilities . Still managed better than most these grown woman who don’t seem as good at budgeting. And I didn’t have my other two till I sorted myself out financially and found the jump from two to three financially not bad at all they had all their older siblings hand me downs, yeah extra food too obviously but that cost a lot less than £300 a month.

Sure most middle earners may not be able to afford 3+ children, but the reason high earners (£200k gross) can't is because of the choices they make - large hous AND private school, rather than OR.

except "managing" it not fair on the child, is it?
Of course parents wants to provide the best lifestyle they can to their child. Why having children if you prevent them from doing the spots they want, the hobbies they want and don't give them the best opportunities.

So no, many parents could NOT have had more than they had, and afford the childcare they needed, and offer the kids a decent life.

what's so hard to understand

I honestly believe that some MC people have no idea about how little many people/families manage on due to the yawning gap between expectations of what constitutes a decent life.

I agree. We are a high earning family. In the US but earn around £250k gross with lower taxes (take home around £15k after tax and healthcare and before pensions). We have deliberately made choices that mean we have financial flexibility. Drive one old car, stayed in a cheaper house. My brother in contrast has a similar household income but has 3x the mortgage, 2 newer cars and frequently complains about feeling trapped in his job. It is hard to have sympathy when it’s clear how his choices have got him there.

There is really solid evidence from the US that giving families in poverty more cash doesn’t actually improve outcomes for their children. I would prefer the money to be spent on things that are actually known to work, like Sure Start and education.

Not an issue. Just an observation that the people (I know) in that income bracket (£10k+ p/m) seem to talk about so much about costs and not being able to afford xyz (HENRY is the term I heard), probably more than those on much less income. My comment is simply some on less income really don't have options available that HENRYs do..and this is simply a result of the choices you've made.

I agree. The average salary in the UK is £38,000. The child benefit cap is £60,000.

hmmm..couldn't we have predicted the trajectory of inflation following massive worldwide QE during covid, and the corresponding impact on interest rates. Even if we couldn't make that link interest rates were only going in one direction from 0.5%. Similarly taxes were always going up this parliament, as they'll be cut before the next.

Clearly this is an extreme example, but I really don't understand why a family can't survive on £4-6k p/m, especially outside of London. Up until recently, I survived on much less and managed to put myself a firmer financial footing in 40s

It’s this kind of attitude which is pathetic. Who are you to dictate what people should be happy to “survive” on? What if want to LIVE, not merely “survive”?

I have a colleague who earns £40k and her husband earns £120k. 2 teenage children. She claims they are “the squeezed middle”!

Exactly!

I'll refer you to the poster who said it more eloquently than I could:

Happyhappyday · Today 18:45
I agree. We are a high earning family. In the US but earn around £250k gross with lower taxes (take home around £15k after tax and healthcare and before pensions). We have deliberately made choices that mean we have financial flexibility. Drive one old car, stayed in a cheaper house. My brother in contrast has a similar household income but has 3x the mortgage, 2 newer cars and frequently complains about feeling trapped in his job. It is hard to have sympathy when it’s clear how his choices have got him there.

What does that have to do with you saying people should be happy to “survive” on £4-6k a month?

£15k a month is substantially more than “surviving on £4-6k a month”.

It’s not just benefit fraud. There are also thise who make poor life choices who then have to rely on benefits.

They are living within their means quite a big difference between complaining you could do more if the government would not take so much and complaining that you want the government to fund your lifestyle

Why assume they are relying on a state pension?

Yes imagine feeling entitled to your own money.

Absolutely agree with the OP and the post talking about financial dysmorphia. It’s so refreshing to read posts like this after so much negativity and complaining. So many people who appear to be so dissatisfied with their lot when they actually have great incomes but are constantly “stretching themselves’ then blame everyone else when something snaps.

so many people seem to prioritise having the best of everything over financial security. There is nothing wrong with a slightly smaller house or older car and adding more to the savings.

I think I am a middle/highish earner (£44k), dh earns less than me. So we have a decent but not massive income (and live in an expensive part of the country and couldn’t afford to buy a house for a long time so have a big mortgage.) We will be affected a bit by the budget (especially the pension changes- currently increasing contributions now our children are teenagers so we aren’t paying child care.) But I feel happy and proud that I’ve been fortunate enough to earn enough that I can contribute to society. I am careful not to stretch myself too much so there is room in my personal budget to absorb changes. I’m saving my sympathy for those who are genuinely struggling like disabled people/parents caring for children with additional needs, many of whom are unable to work to improve their financial situation. Those of us who are able to work and strive to further our careers are in such a privileged position.

Not everybody wants to merely “survive”.

I think that is bullshit. Just because some people are not capable of getting decent jobs and have no money doesn't we all have to plan a life of misery.

Of course its annoying when you plan a life you can fund yourself and the government keeps coming to take more and more to give to those who can' t be arsed/aren't bright enough to provide for themselves.

Aspiration should be encouraged in the country not stamped out.