To think that on higher incomes, having no money left often comes down to spending choices?

[ThatGoldZebra]

Sometimes when I hear what people are earning, I’m surprised when they say they have no money left at the end of the month.
I understand that everyone’s circumstances are different but at a certain income level it feels like spending choices and lifestyle play a big role. AIBU to think that?

Isn’t this just stating the obvious?

We have a good joint income and we have a large mortgage because we chose to use our income to buy a nice house in a popular area. If we bought a two bed flat in a less popular area we’d have more disposable income.

Whats the point in earning more if you aren’t going to use it to give yourself a nice place to live, or nice stuff you want, or nice holidays?

I’m not sure high earners stopping spending is good for anybody.

If this thread is about people moaning about being skint in 1.2 million homes then yes, deluded is this happening anywhere?

Yup. I bought my first property in a fairly central part of Edinburgh in the early 2000’s when I was on about 16k a year. That got me on the property ladder which enabled me to later buy a family home. No way someone on my earnings would ever be able to do that now.

Yes, but sometimes choices are limited if, for example, you have to live close to your partner's job or children.

Food and clothes and commuting costs also

So something that brings you joy.... helps maintains your mental wellbeing... is a luxury?

I said people are buying bigger houses than they need then moaning about being skint. Even if they paid 700k rather than 350k they've caused it themselves

I don't agree with your definition of a 'luxury' item.

Definition: "an inessential, desirable item which is expensive or difficult to obtain".

Netflix is not expensive or difficult to obtain.

Your definition doesn’t include the comfort aspect of luxurious.

Many luxuries there though. If family is same size no need for one having far higher mortgage than the other
This is about explaining how a high earning family can end up with no left overs at the end of the month, not whether they should or shouldn't have luxuries.

A couple earning half might enjoy the same luxuries, but have a smaller mortgage because they bought at a better time/received help from family, and have no childcare costs because grandma looks after the kids.

Not expensive to you.

For others it would be and it would be unobtainable because they simply can't afford it every month.

Drs get forced to work in London as trainees despite being in the kent surrey sussex region on paper. They've cut back claims so much that I was given a grand total of 27p a day towards my £32/day train ticket

The post was about choices. Therefore the family who could buy the 4 bed at a stretch rather than buying the 3 bed but having plenty of leeway is a CHOICE.

Now mortgages and utilities have gone up the smaller house is more likely to stay affordable leaving money for the luxuries. It's fairly simple

What kind of logic is that, bought your 3 bedroom 10 years ago to accomodate your family, it is now worth £750,00 but mortgage rates are currently high, living expenses, energy bills are through the roof but stagnant wage growth leaves you not many choices. It's definitely not about too many coffees and visits to the Opera!

Please read the post above. I'm talking about people choosing between 2 houses in the same town AT THE SAME TIME. If they'd bought the cheaper house that still accommodated the family there would be less of a stretch now

I mean it's shocking that 6 pcm is a luxury. It's ridiculous.

So not the current 'well off' just those who are starting out. I wonder how many people that is truly a problem for- " shall we choose the £1.2 million property or the £320000, after all, think how many subscriptions and coffees we could buy with the change If we opt for the cheaper house."

Lots of people on mumsnet, there's been countless threads from people on high wages wondering why they have no money (it's because they spend it all)
I know zone 6 isn't central, that's not what I said. I didn't want to move away either but we literally had a choice between this and our kids sharing a box room. I had to get a new job in the process. There's always an element of choice involved. My parents had normal jobs on average wages, but houses in their street go for close to £1m now. Things have changed, we've been priced out. It's sad but it is what it is.

It's not even just the well off. In fact anyone who bought property at silly low interest rates should've though if they could pay 5 times as much as they were never going to be stuck at 1 or 2%

Those who could afford that at the time didn't look ahead and many bought bigger properties than they would've done if the rates were higher

Years ago I was given a mortgage offer of 55k. Did I buy a property at that price? No I didn't I bought one at 35k. That was a choice and the interest rates were about 6% then. However I remember the 15% rates so made sure I could still afford to pay if it went to that again( although I would've been skint)

That's the kind of choices that have come back to bite people on the bum

And how likely is it, in the demographic we're discussing, that their only unnecessary expense each month is Netflix? Because I think we all know it's pretty unlikely.

Is Netflix on its own a luxury? Probably not, but when tied up with multiple other things I mentioned, which are all wants and not needs it does all add up.

If someone is really that skint why wouldn't they stop their 6 a mth Netflix? If someone who was on benefits said they were struggling then refused to give up their £6 a mth Netflix because it's only £6 and it's not a luxury they'd be ragged on here. So it feels a bit double standards to me.

I'm not sure it's that straight forward.

Having working in debt recovery years ago, I think there are just some people who are really bad with money. It doesn't matter what salary they have, they'll still struggle.

Similarly, there are people who are good with money with manage even of they take significant pay cuts, they adapt quickly, make hard calls, take addition jobs etc.

Often the best money manahers are those on low income, as they've never had a choice to be otherwise.

What is unfair though is the low income people who are good with money would do such much better with the opportunities some of the higher earners squander.

There were also two professions that stuck out as bad money managers (prob wrong to name them as just my own observations rather than actually facts but they aren't ones you would expect).

We live near Birmingham and it doesn’t go far at all. Mortgage on a 3 bed semi is £1.6k a month, two in nursery at £75 a day after the tax free reduction. I know nursery fees will end but in the moment it is difficult!

We are going on Sun £9.50 holidays and buying second hand on Vinted, not what you imagine a six figure household income gets you!

Often the best money manahers are those on low income, as they've never had a choice to be otherwise

Oh yes... I know a couple who are both disabled and on benefits. They keep some fabulous spreadsheets on every single penny that goes in and out. They could probably run a masterclass on budgeting 😁

Well exactly.

Apparently commuting costs are a luxury, as you could have chosen a job that didn’t involve commuting…