To think that a comfortable middle class existence is basically unattainable for the vast majority of people.

[joelm1776]

I was thinking today about how much someone would actually need to earn per year in order to have a traditionally financially comfortable middle class existence. This, to me, means having a family one parent being able to look after the kids, being financially secure and having some pleasures in one's life on a regular basis but not necessarily any extravagant pleasures ie. not having multiple holidays a year, or luxury items or fine dining meals out. I know these things are fairly subjective, but I would like to think that my judgements here are quite middle of the road. I'll show you my working:

2 parents and 2 child household

1. £17,000 per year in mortgage payments for a 3 bedroom house (average price of a 3 bedroom house in the UK is about £275,0000)
2. £8,300 per year in supermarket shopping
3. £5,500 rough estimate for running 2 cars per year (one for commuting one for short journeys) including fuel, tax, MOT, insurance and maintenance.
4. £5,000 utilities, internet and council tax for 3 bedroom house
5. £1,000 per year on clothing (£20 per person per month)
6. £2,500 repairs and long term replacement fund for house.
7. £2,000 student debt
8. £6,000 one family meal out at a mid-range restaurant per week
9. £1400 2 night out for drinks with friends per month for each parent.
10. £3,000 one week family holiday to mainland European destination per year.
11. £1,500 pocket money for kids
12. £1,200 sports clubs and gyms memberships
13. £1,500 general household items excluding clothing and food
14. £2250 large purchase fund (e.g two cars lasting 15 years each, 4 smartphones lasting 5 years each etc)
15. £2,000 saved for other contingencies

Total = £60150 net + 7.5% saved as a pension = aprox £64650
Total gross = £94000

so basically you need to earn £100K even if you don't live in London, and only the top 5% of uk earners earn around this amount and most of those people probably work in London.

I know the the mortgage figure ignores the fact that people often have equity from other properties, but that makes the calculation a bit too complex

Most of the families around here where only one person works are firmly working class. It was achievable in our area about 15 years ago, but it isn't anymore. Middle class families can't afford houses on one income. It's that simple.

I don't think it's aspirational not to work. Its not an easy arrangement and it puts an imbalance in the relationship. It financially exposes one to risk. Previously the child care arrangements available locally we're not sufficient to cover the gaps - this put women into a position where they couldn't work but that wasn't a disaster because at least house prices were lower.

I have a close group of friends who are ten years older than me - I'm the youngest. The differences are massive between them as a half generation and the those of my peers.

They have much less pension provision - it's tied up with their husbands but their pensions are bigger anyway. Their careers are significantly less good. But they all have much bigger houses than my peers. Their quality of life is significantly better and easier even for peers of mine who earn substantially more. They are almost all retiring or part retiring in their mid fifties. Very few of my peers will have the mortgage paid off by the time they are a similar age.

To be aspirational now, I'd say it's more about being able to have the bigger house or retiring early than to be a stay at home parent because it's just not feasible. Life is utterly different for kids growing up in the same middle class area just because of house prices - there is no need to calculate all the other stuff - it just comes down to whether a mortgage company will lend you enough to buy locally or not.

This has a significant impact on the schools. The number of kids has dropped significantly and they've closed a number of classes at primary due to lack of children. They struggle to get volunteers to help with school trips because parents aren't available.

Having said that, I think the kids are way more spoilt and expectations for holidays are significantly higher. They eat out a lot more than my friends kids ever did.

Being middle class has shifted imo. The people living here are no less middle class. Indeed id argue they were more aspirational and more middle class - there's less lower middle class and working class here now (they do exist as there's a substantial amount of council and social housing here). It's starting to get into footballers wives territory in terms of who can afford to be stay at home mums. There's less of a community and there's a lot more people who have moved up from down south. People haven't been able to afford to stay here after growing up here.

I'm the one who bucks all the overall trends locally. It's hard in its own right because there isn't anyone else in a similar position in my peer group (hence having a lot of older friends).

What’s your housing situation?

Housing is the main issue in affording the lifestyle OP describes - and as a single parent in London that must be very difficult.

I certainly don't own a luxury car but I think even more affordable cars have gone up in price now. I bought my 2015 Mini for 8k years several years ago and it seems to have held it's value. Plus if you live in outer London where public transport still isn't always great it has to comply with ULEZ. I do look at the many Teslas on the road and wonder how much they are paying monthly though. More than my mortgage I expect!

@Retiler Well growth wise we never recovered from the 08 crash, lots of people didn’t notice the impact on wages because low interest rates made housing affordable & many profited from house price growth. Of course this has disadvantaged young people & families in particular & many are feeling it due to inflation & interest rates.

If you earned 60k 5 yrs ago you need to be on 77k now to keep pace with inflation.

I don’t know how you tackle growth tbh; successive governments don’t seem to know either. The ageing population is expensive & tempers growth. I think the policies needed to drive growth will not be popular so won’t happen. People also want quick fixes which is impossible really.

@RedToothBrushI do think it’s crazy how 10-15 years can make such a difference to financial outcomes.

I find it really odd that SAHM is seen as a MC thing. At my kids school drop off (state, mixed catchment) the only SAHM are the ones on benefits / in social housing. MC women are professionals, more often than not the breadwinner, who have interesting jobs that make best use of their intellectual abilities. Girls have afterall been outperforming boys in exam results for many years now. They certainly didn’t work hard at school while aspiring to a shallow life of spa days and PTS.

@Retiler They certainly didn’t work hard at school while aspiring to a shallow life of spa days and PTS.

There’s really no need for this.

As I said in an earlier post, Google Prosperity Alliance 2030’s recent report. It’s an apolitical group formed with the aim of driving growth in the UK to try to put the breaks on the constant rapid decline.

I didn't save that much tbh. I paid school fees after we downsized and I paid my parents care fees. That cost us a huge portion of our equity. I'm still classed as a high earner but I'm semi retired and haven't really worked due to ill health for a couple of years. Savings are dwindling.
My parents didn't save and we had feast and famine years. I didn't inherit. We still have a big mortgage and I wish we didn't as we partly pay out of pensions. We can't fully downsize as we have a SEN young adult at home.
Luckily I have shares and one day I might get a pay out!

I think it was more a thing in the past, married women were far less likely to work.

“by 1971 the rate of employment among married women was close to 40%” so still not the majority.

Mothers in employment has grown steadily and far more work f/t now vs previously

I’m just illustrating the point that for so many it’s nothing to aspire to.

@Secretsquirrel2 fingers x you do. The 80s did seem to have a bit more “go big & don’t worry about tmw” about it. Lots of my parents friends were earning ££££ but didn’t save much.

@RetilerI will read it, my internet is playing up except for the MNs app! 😆

It's nuts.

Our older friends are shocked at how much it's changed. Some of them would not be able to live in the area. They didn't realise how stark it was until we told them the numbers.

A couple of them work(ed) in education so they noticed changes but didn't grasp the details of it.

Levels of engagement by parents has dropped off a cliff and this is reflected in behaviour. Or parents are ever more demanding and their children can not do wrong. That's the depressing one. The spoilt generation incoming.

I’m sure I have read that biggest increase in women’s employment is those who are married to higher earning men.

Perhaps because people tend to marry from similar backgrounds now? Or meet through uni, work?

Split across two earners, this is totally achievable.

The level of women in employment was disproportionate to class. You had to have family locally too.

This isn't the case now - it's much less common.

@joelm1776 we’re more than moderately affluent. We wouldn’t dream of eating out once a week!

What right do Brits have to a higher standard of living, say to Indians?

Lol of course they are! wtf

Harking back to the seventies or even maybe the eighties it was more normal for middle class families to have the mother staying home. As opposed to working class families where women often worked too. What really changes was the types of jobs available to women expanded to being better paid, traditionally aspirational jobs. But by the nineties and 2000s it was already normal for both parents to work. So if OP is harkibf back to 10/20/30 years ago that hasn't changed. If she is thinkjng about further ago then she has a point but then the other stuff about annual family holidays in Europe, two cars etc would not have been normal.

I think that depends on where you were.
The Specials did a song called ‘Ghost town’. To reflect on precisely what living in much of Britain was like then.

Among the people I know, it’s pretty much universally dual professional couples.

There’s not really high earner / low earner, or mum doing a part time job to juggle the kids too - it’s two professional jobs worked full time.

We don't, but it's normal to hope that each generation has the same standard of living, or better, than the generation before. That's been the expectation for a long time (it first took a hit for millennials) and is absolutely also an expectation in India. Hence the unrest/frustration there at the problems facing aspirational young peoplem

Eh? OP’s £6k is £115.38 per week.