Resentment at 100k

[Arseholeneighbours]

Theres a lot of vitriol spilt towards people being “high earners” at 100k and over. As net contributors, and most likely having made sacrifices, stresses and difficult life decisions, there’s many judgements about life choices , expectations and living within one’s means. What is the motivation to push forward in a career and to try and be as successful as one can if there’s no personal gain? It’s all well and good saying those with the broadest shoulders should take on the most - but to what end?

I definitely want to earn more to have nicer things. I really don’t see the problem with earning more to get those nicer things

They can afford luxuries. Approximately £3.5k a month more in luxuries than a person on £35k.

They shouldn't moan that it's not £5.5, as it would be if all their income was untaxed. Because that's ungrateful, selfish and greedy.

You actually don’t know that they can. And if they can why is that greedy or selfish? Yous do it in their position

😧 Jesus. I've said for a while now that people hate the working class. All of us are viewed as scum, and your post shows this.

I do know that they can because I know that people are paying for the essentials out of much less. So either they are setting fire to rolls of bank notes, or they are spending it on things that other people can't afford.

97% of parents are eligible for childcare help - why exclude 3% of people?

And again, and as with many posters, you seem to completely miss the bizarre incentives it has created.

I lose £22,000 the second I earn a penny over £100k due to loss of childcare. To earn that £22,000 net, I need to earn £50,000 gross (over £100k). That leaves me breaking even with a £99,999 salary plus claiming childcare.

That is the current tax and benefit system in the UK. It incentivises people to salary sacrifice to claim the hours (government loses money) or work part time to claim (government loses money). It’s utterly irrational.

So as an example on £99k you take home £65k after tax plus £22k childcare: £85k net

On £202k you take home £66k after tax, with no childcare.

Would you just accept that?

And no, I wouldn't. I want to live in a society, which means I am happy to pay tax and to be a net contributor to society. I'm grateful for the advantages that have enabled me to get here. I care more about children not growing up in poverty than I do about being able to spend more on things that I don't actually need.

You simply do not know everyone’s financial life or outgoings. Also it’s their money, they’ve earned it so they can spend it as they like. It’s not their fault that others don’t have the same spending power.

Of course you would. I would and so would the majority of people. It’s so easy to say without being in that position

At some point, the childcare will decrease in cost, mortgage starts reducing, maybe downsize house (you know, live within their means like everyone else?), meanwhile pension pot still increasing nicely.

They could spit their dummy out i guess and decide there's no incentive because its not necessarily instant. Not the sort of decision making capabilities id associate with someone who must be intelligent to earn that much though tbh.

I'd agree that the person on £100k with a big mortgage, childcare costs etc has a better deal than someone on benefits. They are free to do as they please with their money. It won't be cut off if they save up, or scrutinised. They can inherit property without having to sell. They have a pension plan and will own their home in old age. The person with eleven millionty kids and a flat screen TV on UC can't build for the future and has nothing but an impoverished old age moving forward.

I am feeling this at the moment. I don't resent paying taxes, and I definitely don't resent welfare or benefits. I DO resent having an enormous chunk of my money taken from me through PAYE after working bloody hard, while huge corporations, and lots of genuinely wealthy individuals avoid paying tax altogether.
I earn £110k and have just had an incredible bonus due to making a lot of money for my employer last year but it's pushed me into the next tax bracket. I don't live a wealthy lifestyle. My husband and I have 4 kids between us, we shop at Aldi, we buy clothes off vinted or Shein. My bonus could have been life changing but I lost 45% of it instantly. I can't put any more into my pension because of tapering. If I bank it I'll lose 45% of all of the interest. It's not a 'woe is me' tale, I'm fortunate - but I've worked my arse off for 25 years, paid myself through university etc (never had a single penny off anyone, apart from my nanna buying me a car for 500 quid when I was 18).

My salary definitely doesn't class me as 'wealthy', and yes I'm resentful about giving up half my bonus money and I'm resentful about losing my personal allowance, and also losing my personal savings allowance. I can't afford financial advisors to tell me how to exploit loopholes. It's the middle earners getting squeezed unfortunately

A lot of people in sectors which are much less well paid than yours already do this - regular unpaid overtime is pretty much the norm for many staff in the education sector, social work, senior roles in the voluntary sector etc. Many of whom wouldn't get paid anything like 6 figures for doing what they do. They choose to do the extra unpaid work simply because they care.

And yet you define whether or not people are "net contributors" purely on the basis of how much tax they pay. It's very reductive.

Are you saying that your 30 free hours is worth £22k? It's 30 hours for 38 weeks a year so that's £19ph you say you would have to pay, is that for 3 kids?

School based pre-schools typically charge around £30 a day, if you have 3 kids then surely at least the oldest one is eligible for that.

Bear in mind that anyone with a school aged child got only 1 year of 30 free hours anyway, so it would only have affected one child at a time anyway.

Yes, and until then I should accept a 6 year hiatus of earning potential without question

My net income on £101k is £22,000 less than if I earn £99k and claim childcare help.

Do you understand the issue?

I am £1,800 a month worse off earn £101k than earning £99k.

This does not make sense and incentivises certain behaviours.

I pay the company that pays them directly. Or I generate output for my employer that means they can pay for the cleaners. The delivery cost is baked into the cost of my parcel.

It's nothing about being special, it's what different employees and employers agree to. My family have good paying careers due to hard work at school, uni and being driven. And yes they looked for and chose things that had a good career path.

I would 100% agree that NHS workers and those working in care deserve enough to live off. I think the whole health + social care system needs a total reform. But don't NHS nurses make around £30k ish? Enough to live off right?

It's a totally different culture though, Brits value different things like a welfare system!

As I mentioned before I am pretty much on call full time so very aware of unpaid overtime. Then an extra imposed unpaid proportion due to the tax system.

The point of taper would need a much more nuanced reflection than 'people on 100k shouldn't be claiming benefits'. What does that even mean, and why?

Tax-free childcare was introduced in 2017, at which point the cut off was still £100k. Based on cumulative inflation, £1 in 2017 is worth around £1.35 in 2025. This implies that £100k has a purchasing power of £135k today compared to 2017. So if you earned £100k in 2017, to maintain equivalent real living standards in 2025 you’d need roughly £134k gross, all else being equal.

What gross 2025 salary would yield the same after-tax, after-inflation spending power as £100,000 did in 2017, you're looking at more like £150k.

Well I work for the NHS in a clinical role. 1st class degree and PGCert. 39, 000 pa. Must be feckless!
In all honestly though I covet a 100k job as I have come to believe that I should have gone into finance as in today's society it is better to look after yourself than contribute tosociety/ care for others etc.. I may therefore leave NHS to be more selfish.
Sad but true.

I don’t really have the sort of job where you just clock off.

I do get it. Me and DP would be better off if my earnings were a bit lower and his were a bit higher. Tax would work better for us if that were the case. We’d get child benefit, and pay lower tax.

But as it stands I’m in the 40% tax bracket and don’t get child benefit. It would be great if I didn’t get taxed so much and I got to keep more. But I still get paid more than before I hit that tax bracket. So it’s fine.

I would like to see properly funded schools, nhs, and better childcare for all. I’d be happy for my tax to go up to pay for it.

Two kids.

One the free hours are £13k and then tax-free childcare.

The older one is £5k in free hours and then £2k tax-free childcare.

All nurseries here are £100+ a day. A state school nursery running 9-3 term time only doesn’t work as I need to work - and the only local school with one is catholic (and I’m not!) so couldn’t get a place there anyway.

Nursery places are currently £2.2-2.5k a month locally.

Lower and average wages have been stagnant in order to keep tax low, its average wage and lower wages that have made sacrifices for years (and jobs that we need done to live in a workable society)

I feel resentful that my wages being kept low, having to (in the past) while working full time having to receive tax credits to get by. I now earn just above average, ten years ago I would have been living comfortable in the role i do now I am not

so now it hitting those on considerably higher wages no I do not have much empathy when it comes to them winging about how hard they have worked or sacrifices they have made as many of is have on lower wages

Perhaps you should strive due to intrinsic motivation instead of extrinsic?
Thats what people who sacrifice loads and work really hard in some sectors (education, care etc) do. They are never going to get the kind of salary you think is demotivating. Yes, I know some senior managers in both sectors I’ve suggested can, but the vast, vast majority ever do - and many of those don’t even want to. They are striving due to the motivation of a job well done that improves lives.