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?

True, but I would still class it as a luxury. The idea that people must spend money in order to be entertained is still relatively new.

WTF?! Where did I say that?!

I agree. A luxury. Maybe good value if you can afford it - that's a choice. But definitely a luxury. It isn't necessary. It isn't even deprivation not to have it.

Even my teenage daughter isn't bothered that we don't have NF

what a null question
does not matter if your income is £10 or £1M
how you spend it determines your lifestyle and how much is left of your money

I posted 'a' definition of the word, 'Luxury' for those who are confused : "an inessential, desirable item which is expensive or difficult to obtain".

Netflix is not a desirable item and it is not expensive or difficult to obtain. It is not a luxury.

A takeaway 'is' expensive. A takeaway has become a luxury if you're referencing your own tastes i.e. our favourite takeaway has now become a monthly purchase as for a family is around £60.

I usually spend £12-15 for myself and DD.

It isn't expensive compared to £6 Netflix.

But if we do that once a week it is £50-60 per month.

Hmm... but maybe you're actually on to something there. Maybe it's the creep of lots and lots of little spends together that suddenly add up that individually are insignificant.

A couple of takeaways here. A lunch or two out there...

Our weekly chinese suddenly turned into 2 grand a year.

Possibly, but of course the fact that there are more people indoors in their own private homes now makes a difference to how we think about entertainment. We're less likely now to have access to other people, something that human beings do actually need, without paying to be in a space.

A lot of this thread is talking about families with children. Rewind a few decades, and many more parents were able to outsource the entertainment of their kids to the ones living in the vicinity. That happens much less now. There are fewer children, less space for them to play safely because of cars and so playing out has greatly lessened. I'm a millennial, the TV and computer games age was very much established in my childhood, but there were still kids who played out on the road who my parents had the option of telling us to knock on for if we were bored. Which was just as well, since we were low income. And there was less of that in the 90s than in previous generations. So if you want to argue that this is luxury, the gradual withdrawal of one of the main forms of immediately available, free entertainment and the impact that has on the poorest is something that needs to be factored in.

Exactly.

£6 Netflix, maybe similar for Disney+/another. Amazon Prime. A takeaway a week, a couple of coffees a week, a couple of Meal Deals for lunch.

None in themselves particularly expensive, but they add up.

I find on some threads when people talk about money left, they mean no money left at the end of the month because they've spent it, not no money left after their obligations have been met.

Maybe the focus should be discretionary spending rather luxuries. Netflix is discretionary. But some people consider it a necessity.

What kind of a race to the bottom are we talking about here with the whole Netflex debate. Its turning into the Yorkshire men sketch. "Disney plus? Paradise!" The fact that anyone discussing whether two working parents should be looking at whether or not to spend £6 per month is crazy. Its the older generations "you could buy a house if it weren't for avocados".

Tax is too high particularly for higher earners, property prices are too high, inflation is still being felt mainly down to disastrous lockdowns and 15 years of cheap debt. Earners are being squeezed from all sides to fund an out of control welfare state and can't keep up with inflation. Its not netflix or avocados.

I think there's nothing wrong with that though, why shouldn't you.

DH is a at a senior level in Architecture, me in Data, info sec, I don't think it is much to expect - Nteflix and a takeaway.

I mean I don't think you have to spend money. I read lots of books, the cost is higher than Netflix. I enjoy walking and my DH enjoys running both of which are free but the social contract is dead, we are in equivalent status jobs to our parents, higher in DH's case and yet live in a small house and can't afford most of my parents lifestyle. We are mid 40s so not the windfall generation for property purchases like my oldest Gen x sibling.

Obviously OP - if you have an income that is higher than the average after tax, and average people are able to survive, then for you to have run out of money by the end of the month, you must have spent more than the average household, which will be down to choices you have made. This is obviously true.

The question is, how have we got to the point where people who have an income that on paper compared to the average, should mean they are “rich” can only just afford a lifestyle that looks “average”?

If you started another thread and said “what sort of lifestyle should you be able to afford if you are rich, even if you don’t choose to live like that?” Along with answers like “super yacht” and “private jet”, you’d get th lower level rich answers like “private school for dcs” “horse riding lessons/own a horse”, “dcs have a bedroom each and a guest room in a nice area”, “cleaner and gardener” “skiing at winter and summer sun holiday”, even “be able to walk round the supermarket buying whatever you fancy without thinking about the cost”. And these low level rich lifestyle things are no longer affordable for many who’s income should put them in the rich category.

It’s not in anyone’s interests for people with disposable income not to spend some of it. Don’t get a takeaway, eventually the takeaway closes. People out of work, no income, another empty shop. Stop subscribing to Netflix, they stop making programmes in the same volume, start laying people off. What we need are people who have disposable income to spend some of it in the economy.

glad your family finances can afford it.
For others it most certainly is not an affordable "essential" non "luxury"

Debt has a lot to answer for. When folk come on here with good incomes yet can't manage. Pets are a big expense for some folk. It's choices. When you're poor you don't have so much choice. Even if you're well off you still have to budget and make choices.

I think people are saying that they don't have any disposable income though despite earning 6 figure sums. That's the bit that doesn't add up for me.

This is such an absolutely nonsense comparison. Could I live off of £14,000 a year with no housing costs and or dependents, easily. You probably have a lot more disposable income than we do despite earning six figures.

As it happens, children and housing costs are more expensive than ever. £150 a day for two in nursery, our oldest needs wrap around care at £300 a month. That’s £3.5k per month on childcare. Add in our mortgage and we’ve hit £5k before we’ve bought a single food shop or paid our electric bill.

It’s a real race to the bottom if £6 for Netflix and swimming lessons for children are luxuries that families that are earning six figures can’t afford.

YANBU

But I think everyone is a bit frustrated atm because no one can afford what was affordable on an equivalent salary a few years back.

So it’s a bit miserable for people thinking “well I’ve got here, but it’s still shit through no fault of my own”. Which is understandable as a thought process.

However, these are thoughts probably best kept to oneself as there are people really struggling to live, and don’t want to hear “I can only afford one somewhat cheaper holiday this year” or “I have to choose between the kids doing x clubs or me doing my expensive hobby/ the gym”.

You think you could live of £14k a year easily. You'd be paying tax on that for a start. I couldn't live on that.

I live on 16k easily and travel for 2 months of the year.

It is and it isn't. Unforseen things we don't chose can put even those with high incomes in a bind. The roof, boiler or previously reliable car can up outgoings suddenly and cause issues.

Bigger income also generally means bigger bills. A choice yes but a higher income affords that decision to live in a nicer postcode in a maybe bigger house with more expenses. Higher day to day expenses can make dealing with unforseen additionals harder.

It is the same at almost all income levels, you could argue that even at very very low income levels if you chose not to pay for TV, ate the cheapest food etc you would have money left (I am not suggesting this is what people should do, everyone deserves a good quality of life).

But whatever income level you have your spending levels dictate what you have left, the only difference is at higher income levels you have more choices to make.

If you have a household income of £50k your choices might be fairly limited, if you have a £160k household income then your choices are far less constrained, you might chose a golf membership, a ski trip every year and then be tight at the end of the month because of that.