[Politics] Does earning £50k a year make you 'rich'

[Tim Over Whelmed]

The most ridiculous argument I've ever had was with someone who wanted a pay rise but wouldn't work overtime. There was no disagreement that we were paying the going rate but he wanted to earn more to have a better holiday etc. He wouldn't work OT because he had to pay more tax! Despite showing the impact of the amount he'd keep having worked more he wouldn't have it. The constant moan was he'd pay more tax .... yes, but take more money home!!!

 

[studio150]

This is what being rich is all about

 

[Paul Reids Sock]

I am on about £55k, the wife is a part time nurse and is on about £16k. we have two kids, a mortgage, long old commute to work (for me)

We are anything but rich despite not having any major debt. The whole thing is relative to your conditions. When I was on £19k I would have killed to get to £50k yet as you go up you make decisions such as being able to afford to have a second child

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

I guess it depends where you live in the UK, and what your circumstances are.

Earning 50K in most parts of Sussex doesn't make you 'rich,' whatever that may mean, considering the cost of housing, particularly if you have a family/kids etc.

Earning 50k and living in certain parts of the UK would certainly, IMO, make you comfortable.I certainly wouldn't say rich.

I know there are 'London weightings' but IMO it's wrong that Public Sector Pay is the same wherever you are based in the UK. The cost of renting for example for a nurse/schoolteacher, social worker etc. is way, way more in the SE than elsewhere in the UK, yet salaries are the same.

 

[chimneys]

This. Our combined income doesn't come to that.

Do you have to pay towards a mortgage/pension contributions/children out of that?

 

[Tiptoe through the NSC]

Surely being rich is to do with what you own, not your annual salary. Ultimately, the rich own the land and accumulate wealth based upon that and their other assets. Hence they do not have a salary at all, just (frequently undertaxed) income.

 

[Eeyore]

'Rich' is a relative and subjective term.

I've never earned that much and when I was earning just under half that I was happy.

It all depends on what you place most value in.

 

[Biscuit]

What if you earn £50k, but your wife doesn't work and brings up the two kids? And you have a large mortgage?

It's all down to circumstances.

 

[pearl]

'Rich' is a relative and subjective term.

I've never earned that much and when I was earning just under half that I was happy.

It all depends on what you place most value in.

my health far more than money

 

[cunning fergus]

This isn't correct.

The loss of personal allowance isn't all at once on hitting £100k, it's lost progressively between £100k and (roughly) £123k. It's always worthwhile earning more!

I’m not arguing that earning more isnt worthwhile, merely highlighting that amongst the rich there is a higher tax rate than 45%.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/01/number-high-earners-caught-60pc-tax-trap-set-double/amp/

Context is everything, dropping into this band will be eye-opening for many who understood that the personal allowance was mandatory.

If 50k is genuinely “rich” then those individuals should have their personal allowance removed too.....

 

[Notters]

many of your household expenses cost about three times less than they do in London/Sussex/Surrey, then I'd say you are pretty comfortable, rich even.

Lots on here going on about the north being cheaper - but the nicer areas still aren't generally that cheap. And I'd love to know which of my "many" household expenses are three times cheaper They do collect our garden waste for free here, admittedly and we didn't have to pay for wheelie bins unlike in Lewes district.

In response to the OP - having kids makes a huge difference. We only have one but would have to pay £1000/month for childcare if my wife worked full time, which just isn't tenable. My colleagues without kids seem to be rolling in it.

 

[BLOCK F]

To be considered rich, one would have to have substantial assets as well as a decent income, either from work or investments or both.
An income of £50 k doesn't make you rich.

 

[Peteinblack]

If earning £50,000 is defined (by some people) as making someone rich, what does that make CEOs on £5 million or more?

£50,000 per year is a definitely a lot compared to the crap wages that millions of people are paid, but arguing over whether £50,000 constitutes being 'rich' seems like another way of getting ordinary working people to bicker among themselves, while the corporate millionaires continue lining their pockets by paying poverty wages (which then have to be topped up through social security payments - so who are the people who are really abusing the welfare state?), and enjoying tax breaks (or avoidance).

Not saying that is the intention of the thread, but that is invariably the consequence of these types of debates; a diversion from the real sources and scale of inequality in Britain, and one which serves to promote divide-and-rule among ordinary working people. We squabble among ourselves, while the top 1%, or corporate elite, literally laugh all the way to the bank - while criticising us for promoting 'the politics of envy'.

 

[Notters]

double post

 

[zefarelly]

Living in Sussex £50k is not enough to buy a house and sustain a family, our family income is more than 50k, we own most of our 3 bed house now and still can't afford regular holidays! We don't have new cars, although we do eat well!

Our income, is numerically the same but in real terms is noticeably worse than it was in 2005.

 

[Titanic]

If earning £50,000 is defined (by some people) as making someone rich, what does that make CEOs on £5 million or more?...

on a par with Premier League footballers?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

As per others, it depends on circumstances.

I have a mate, who is 26, and earns around that, working (bloody hard) nights as a railway engineer. He still lives at home, paying a modest rent to his parents. He drives a mustang, which must cost him an absolute bomb to insure, and does about ten mpg. In terms of disposable income he's probably the 'richest' person I know - certainly far more so than me, on a similar wage, with a mortgage to pay, kids at Uni / college, and a wife working 20 hours a week.

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Living in Sussex £50k is not enough to buy a house and sustain a family, our family income is more than 50k, we own most of our 3 bed house now and still can't afford regular holidays! We don't have new cars, although we do eat well!

Our income, is numerically the same but in real terms is noticeably worse than it was in 2005.

Bit of a sweeping statement, no? My partner and I earn less than £40k between us, we have a child, and a mortgage on our 3 bedroom house. We don’t don’t take the holidays we once did because it would be pointless taking a baby snowboarding, however we will as soon as he’s old enough. We take care of the money we do earn and as a result we can still afford to do nice things.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Do you have to pay towards a mortgage/pension contributions/children out of that?

My other half pays towards his pension and we have a mortgage with another ten years to run.

 

[StonehamPark]

Very relative depending on where you live.
£50k will get you a fairly decent quality of life in the UK an average qol in North America and an exceptional quality of life in most of the rest of the world.

Or to put it simpler, if you earn over £25,000 you're in the top 1% of the world.