Report on increasing gap between rich & poor. What's a London without 'average' families like?

[BrummieOnTheRun]

The Rowntree report published today describes the increasing gap between the richest and poorest in society, with increasing segregation between their lives.

One observation in the report is that 'average' families had virtually disappeared in some areas.

As one family amongst what seems like a mass exodus of families from London in the last year, I was interested to read that.

Does it matter if the only families left in large cities like london are the really rich and those reliant on state benefits?

Should cities try to retain 'average' working families, or just let this trend take its course?

I can't let what WWW says (about £100K salaries) pass without putting it in context.

What it is fairer to say is that £100K doesn't go far if you live in London and if you have expensive outgoings. These need not be outgoings you necessarily have any choice over - may be high council tax, mortgage etc. (Although a big mortgage is a choice in the way that a big council tax and gas bill are not, necessarily.)

The average salary in this country is, Im think, about £22K. Think about that, for a minute. As many people will be above that as below.

To call £100K "not much" is insulting to people who live on Doncaster housing estates on ONE FIFTH or less of that.

And yes, their outgoings will be less. But think about this - proportionally, they may be as much, or even more...

It's very expensive to be poor. If you don't have a current account you can't set up direct debits so you get charged extra by utility companies. Or, even worse, have a meter - they are charged at a higher rate than DDs or quarterly bills. You can only afford cheap shoes which wear out faster than expensive ones. So you have to buy shoes more often. Bus fares are bloody expensive - best part of a fiver round trip to my nearest town, five miles away. Etc. etc. etc. The couple on £100k are probably getting much better value for their money.

Every single Londoner I know who is under 40 and either have or are planning children, has moved out of London because they couldn't afford to live there. Some of them commute in, it costs them £3K a year, but it's still cheaper than the mortgages.

The only people I know who still do, are my mother (pensioner, right to buy house, mortgage paid off 15 years ago) my brother (single childless taxi driver) and my childless double income friends who bought property 20 years ago.

I know no-one "average" who still lives there.

Boot, a lot of other UK cities are going the same way.

Okay to afford a house - two people have to work. Pretty well. Unless one person earns a hefty salary.

So what happens when children come along? We pay for childcare - another big bill alongside housing costs.

So we end up working harder and harder and achieving less and less for our hard work. It's not easy to work out how to solve it though, is it?

We have a joint income of a bit less than 50K and live in London
Does that count as average-ish?

UnquietDad, you're right about sensitivities to regional employment difficulties, but let's get back to useless averages.

Let's do Scotland VS Islington.

Inner london average salaries: 1.3 x higher
Inner london childcare costs: 1.4 x higher
Inner london house prices: 2.45 x higher

So while an 'average' aberdeen' family would earn £606/month less, their childcare cost would be £255/month less

...and mortgage payments on the 'average' property (not realistic because assumes 100% LTV, but for comparison) would be £2440 vs £995 for the aberdeen family

It was ages back in thread but lol at Eastern European archaeologists. Not surprising, seeing as you are talking about highly qualified people (first degree plus masters, maybe even PhD) being paid around £13 or £14k a year equivalent (and on poxy short term contracts at that). Some archaeologists work in the public sector as well, but of course like many others they're not "essential" workers so they have to put up with crappo salaries and no help to afford somewhere to live. In fact this applies to most specialist professionals in the public sector who aren't a political priority.

Incidentally, since we bought our first house in 2000, house prices have trebled. My public sector salary has increased by a measly £4000 (and that's through promotion).

and every time there are wage rises, it's viewed as an inflationary evil and interest rates rise pushing mortgage costs higher.

I wouldn't mind, but half the time the wage rises are just city bonuses going up again.

But look at it this way. How much further does a "good" salary go? £100K is swallowed up quickly by London costs. But in my area it would buy you (on a reasonable 3-times-salary mortgage) this
or this
so it's not to be sniffed at.

Now, I know not everyone in Yorkshire is going to be on 100K. But quite a few are. So to take a figure out of the air and say "that's not much" is not helpful.

Wages are on the whole much lower in Scotland than London, so that entire argument is pointless, Brummie.

It's shite living in London. We live barely inside the M25, but, we still pay London taxes. Oh, and we pay an extra 20% I think it is for Mayor Ken too . That's worth its weight in gold - NOT.

If I could move right now - I would.

People here will soon be paying £500m for trams they'll then have to pay to ride, too. How lucky!

this is what 3 to 5 x our combined salary would buy us now

Funny, thats what us Londoners call "The Underground" expat.

Except this one isn't underground, VVV. And it's going to cost about £1b and take years of nightmare road disruptions - to buses, too, of course - to build.

Yeah, that sounds about right.

Hey - it'll be just like living in London for you, but without the excessive house prices and hideous taxes

No, it actually won't. Because we're getting the hell out and never coming back .

They did try to ramrod a congestion charge in. Went to public referendum and lost by a HUGE landslide.

Ah, that's coz you are missing a Mayor Ken. You absolutely need one of those

We don't need either one when we had an entire Labour council to stand up for his beliefs .

i really really want to say boo hoo.

reality is - you will have property - ergo your kids will have property and get on the property ladder.

Brummie to pick up on your Kentish town £500 sure start grant for buggies that those with a quater of a million pound poky flats cant afford becuase they are on beans on toast...well thats my point really - those mums with the new buggies will almost certainly not get to be in the position of most on this thread - with the life chances for their children - that most on this thread have got.

re: raising standards of council housing ha ha raising the "£" profile of the area cannot be a bad thing, changing some areas from ghettos to mixed areas - also not a bad thing. to infer that all those in council housing need standards ( social) to be raised is questionable.

my personal aquaintance with immigration. everyone in london is australian - well not everyone - some are from new zealand. fecking work visa them piss off back leaving people on the recieving end of front line delivered services - such as housing for instance.

to answer the question yes it matters. London seems to have changed a lot and not got better but so have other places just more marked here. Will probably be heading out ourselves in the next couple of years. (reminds me of that will the last one out please turn out the lights cartoon)