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

Nandos once a week. Ha ha. When we boomers were little, eating out was very rare. Maybe reserved for special birthdays. Going to the chippy was a special treat. That's how our parents managed to buy a house. Thrift.

I think your list highlights the lifestyle creep that means people have much higher expectations for what they should be able to buy/do if they are in ‘the middle’ (middle class is not about income, it’s about attitude and education level). Middle class has never meant ‘not having to worry about money’ it meant being educated and aspiring to a certain social standard of behaviours. If anything, I’d say the big difference between my parents - one working class (child of steelworker) and the other upper-middle class (child of barrister) - was their attitude to money. The working class one would spend what they had and get the best they could afford and the upper-middle class one prioritised saving for the future and was far more economical. The typical/‘traditional’ middle class women of the 60s-80s that didn’t work, cooked everything from scratch and took the family to a cafe once a month for a night off, mended their children’s (often homemade) clothes, volunteered for the WI and as a TA at their kids’ primary school. Middle class housewives walked to the local shop because the working husband had the car to commute to work (they lived in the suburbs and he worked in the city centre). Middle class families absolutely went camping on holiday, a hotel would be far too expensive, and going abroad was a more occasional luxury and probably still meant camping or a cheap b&b. The women would usually return to paid work when the children were out of primary school. Children had pocket money for sweets after church on a Sunday or to go to the cinema every so often (not the equivalent of £15 a week). They did ‘worry about money’ - they budgeted carefully and the kids went to cheap activities like Scouts or did school sports clubs (and mainly just played out with their friends).

So, basically, your numbers are a bit off because you’re describing a consumeristic lifestyle more equivalent to the upper-middle class and correspondingly wealthy families who would easily have a single worker earning £100k now (lawyers, investment bankers, senior management, etc.) with expensive gym and sports’ club memberships, two good cars, holidays abroad and restaurants once a week.

Having said that, obviously the cost of living has gone up a lot in the last 15 years, compared to wages. There’s no doubt that it’s harder now to live the lifestyle that we’d all crept up to with overseas holidays every year and restaurants every week being seen as ‘normal’.

I agree with your working, but I am 64 and by the time I was a teenager it was already very hard to exist as a one salary family- and you had to earn similar to what you are showing. The huge increase of people living this life in the 80's , 90's and 00's were able to do so because of the availability of very cheap credit- so most of those people couldn't afford that lifestyle in reality.
70's and earlier my only friends with this kind odf lifestryle had fathers who were doctors, consultats, lawyers and in one case the county surveyor- these jobs all earn well over £00,00 these days , so I don't see the decline you are talking about.

@fashionqueen0123 London was very different pre 00s.

Mortgage costs are way too low. Not standard 3 bed 1930s house costs £2500 per month in mortgage here, even with 50% equity.

I think some of these are inflated. I grew up middle class and my husband was very affluent and neither of our families would be eating out as a family once a week or two parents going out twice a month.

Two parents working would be normal then as well and then.

I don’t disagree that things are more expensive and salaries haven’t kept up however, there’s so much more that we can spend our money on and expectations of what we’re entitled to have also gone up. TV subscriptions, all family members smartphones, two cars, posh cars on contracts.

I think that list and numbers are pretty accurate (except double the house price for the South) and it shows why today’s families are forced to have either both parents working or don’t get to do all those things you suggested OR as lots of posts I see on various forums about this - are in massive debt. I’ve seen so many people post about needing food or clothing banks and it’s because so much of their income is paying past debt. Huge credit card bills etc

A lot of people where I live have that type of middle class lifestyle and we’re in an affluent area but honestly a lot of it is also due to generations passing wealth down. Mainly for things like housing or paying for stuff for grand kids etc. I barely know anyone who wasn’t helped to get a foot on the housing ladder for example as it’s just impossible for a lot of people. Jobs like teaching, nursing, local government etc simply do not pay enough to keep up with housing costs anymore.

I agree! It’s more than £100 a month per child for ‘middle class’ hobbies if they swim, learn an instrument and play a sport. We spend more than £300 a month for 3 kids. Eldest is £150 a month easily as weekly swimming, 1 to 1 music tuition, horse riding and another sport. Balanced by youngest’s chosen hobbies being cheaper… at the moment!

Which isn’t common, so what’s your point?

Our house is worth double and we pay less but only because we put down £300k but I’m not pretending that’s realistic for most people.

1400 a month on a home if bought in the last couple of years is fairly standard.

We bought our first house in our early twenties, have moved up the property ladder a few times, in our early forties now and the mortgage has never been anywhere close to
£2500 a month!

My point was it sounded over inflated to me for a house worth that much.

But it’s not over inflated.

You were middle class because you had books and watched the BBC not ITV, not because you went to Nandos once a week.

Your Mum could cook from scratch as well. You played in the street and weren't obese. You did homework every night and perhaps begrudgingly cleaned Dad's car for half a crown on a Sunday morning.

Until retirement, I will have no choice but to go in the holidays. £3000 for a week for 4 people somewhere even vaguely nice is cheap. Sadly.

Some of the stuff you have budgeted is unreasonable. Going out for a family restaurant meal every single week?!
I dont know anyone who considers that part of a normal 'comfortable' existence and thats 6k per year already. Likewise the 1400 you've allowed for the parents going out twice a month. Most parents of young children i know are not going for drinks out every other week, they don't have time!
£1500 a year on pocket money is also loads, most kids are not being given £50-£60 each for pocket money unless they are 16-18.

There you go just saved you probably £8k a year of post tax costs right there

I think it depends on what you want in life and what you prioritise. We have quite blue collar jobs but earn a decent amount. Comparable to our current neighbours who are all professionals, thanks to gentrification.

The main difference in our financial priorities is that they are essentially saving to be able to gift their children the money they need to get started in life. This means that in the current climate, they are having fewer fancy holidays and things like that.

We take a different approach where we are using money now to ensure our kids are able to make money when they are older. We aren't planing to gift deposits or anything like that and we invest gifted money to them in our businesses. They have a sizeable little wedge each already. My oldest works in a way that is low pressure and relatively high income alongside education.

Part of spending money now is having holidays and experiences that widen their skillset and deepen their character. That's what we are spending the "deposit" money on throughout their childhood.

From the outside, that looks like us having more and doing more nice things than our neighbours. It's just that we spend our money differently.

We spend approx 5/6k a month on bills food life. Two teens. One has issues so has twice monthly therapy. We only have a small mortgage tho due to age and getting an inheritance. Dh is a high earner. But money definitely isn’t going as far as it did.
meals out are rare as I can’t justify cost for quality. If we go it’s only to trusted places we know are worth it or got a deal or a. Birthday etc . This year we have not been abroad. Dd who is too unwell to work out of the home been selling stuff in vinted to make money.
son looking for a part time job. Very difficult to find. Lots of competition. Life is most definitely getting harder and harder for everyone except the multi rich!

This actually doesn’t make sense because if everyone in the past only had fish & chips once a year as a treat or whatever then it wouldn’t have been possible for all the chippers to survive, same for cinemas etc.

35k chippers in the 30s

The population averaged over 30 cinema visits per person per year in the 40s

and let’s not forget pubs 75k of them in the 60s

So thrifty!

Just the phrase ‘comfortable middle class existence’ sound snobby and not something to aspire to. Just be yourself, not a category.

Eating out every single week is not moderately affluent that is very wealthy/ luxury lifestyle.

Look at the outgoings and re do them for pensioners then. What do you expect the state to fund for you outside of your other retirement savings?

I disagree with much of this.

As a child, we were middle class: 1960s: large detached house, pony, private school, tennis, ballet, theatre, foreign holidays (often two, in good hotels), daily, two cars, racing, mother had a p/t job admittedly, ate out at nice restaurants, probably once a month. We were very well off compared to others.

My children had a middle class upbringing in London: London day schools, sports clubs, large house, two cars, I was at home for the first 7/8 years and then worked through choice, home abroad, nice holidays, theatre, music, sport, two cars, holidays. We ate at a mid range restaurant for birthdays, special occasions. We never spaffed £125pw up the wall on pizza.

DH had a working class upbringing, possibly lower middle as his parents were a teacher and a engineer but wc roots. 3 bed semi, his sisters shared, one car which served 20 years, things rarely replaced, local comp, no foreign holidays, no eating out, no paid activities or small luxuries. They weren't skint but lived skint; most people didn't have the choice.

I think the op is describing a materialistic lifestyle which was livable when interest rates were low. Generations and generarions of people scrimped for enough on the table. There was a window when people had high expectations and plenty of disposable income but it was never going to last.

£100 a month for parents socialising separately with friends either a weekend brunch with her friends or 2 beers on a Thursday night after work with his friends is hardly unreasonable or out of the norm.

I think it’s interesting as some of the middle-class markers the OP identified are definitely missing in previous decades. I was middle class growing up with a SAHM in the 80s. However eating out was a special occasion only for birthdays and major events. We also did not have big foreign holidays every year. We had one car. None of us kids had big wardrobes and as one of 4 it was expected to have hand me downs. This was pretty standard among my friends - we did all live in large leafy houses with gardens though that would be difficult to afford on a single income family now I think.

Which isn’t common, so what’s your point?

It is common because so many homeowners are older, not common for young people though.