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

[Thunder Bolt]

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.
.

I'd agree with that. Houses in the better areas of West Yorkshire are almost on a par with houses in the SE, although it is still possible to buy cheap terraced houses or houses that need doing up.
This is why we needed a mortgage to move south even to a cheaper area like Newhaven despite having cleared a mortgage up north.
Utilities are on a par all over the country, and council tax is slightly cheaper up north. Food and fuel are similar prices.

 

[Insel affe]

no.

 

[schmunk]

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.....

For those with school-age children, the earnings band between £50k and £60k sees the loss of child benefit, giving an effective tax rate on this £10k of:

1. Child - 51%
2. Children - 58%
3. Children - 65%
4. Children - 72%
5. Etc.

 

[Madafwo]

Having looked into it a bit recently as my wife doesn't want to leave our 8 month old to go back to work I've figured out it's just about possible to survive on £50k a year in Peacehaven. I'm very fortunate that I earn as much as I do, my commute is 15 minutes, I don't have to pay for parking or a £5k+ railway season ticket, admittedly I'm mortgaged up to the eyeballs and if I don't over pay on it (I do at the moment) then I'd be paying it off until I'm 68.

Its not all about the headline figure, id have to earn over £60k to have a similar amount of disposable income, not to mention the extra 3+ hours a day spent away from my family. Financially I'm not rich but I'm lucky to be in the situation I'm in and give my wife the choice of going back to work or not.

 

[Brian Munich]

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

That’s unusual for a bank to lend for a term that would take one of you into retirement. I take it your partner is significantly younger than you then?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

That’s unusual for a bank to lend for a term that would take one of you into retirement. I take it your partner is significantly younger than you then?

Yes.

 

[GT49er]

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.

You're right - prices up north are not always anywhere near as cheap as is sometimes believed. A few years ago my daughter took me to revisit Liverpool, where I went to Uni - the grotty student flat I lived in in Liverpool 8 (Toxteth) in the late 60s/early 70s is now worth a million quid!
And as for the price of a nice house or flat in Edinburgh, where I also lived for a few years in the 70s - believe me it would make your eyes water!

 

[schmunk]

That’s unusual for a bank to lend for a term that would take one of you into retirement. I take it your partner is significantly younger than you then?

My in-laws are both of a similar age, they both retired in their early 60s and have a mortgage on their main (and only) residence which runs until they are 75.

 

[Geestar]

Ridiculous statement. Plenty of cash if you don't have kids, mortgage, bills etc...

When did the OP mention any of those?

We obviously all have bills and such.

I'm on minimum wage, £50k would see me more than comfortable

Sent from my TA-1020 using Tapatalk

 

[Bob'n'weave]

It's pretty meaningless without knowing the circumstances.

If you're living in London with a spouse who doesn't work and with four kids, you may well be struggling. If you're single or living with a working spouse with no kids oop North; you're quids in

Is the correct answer.

 

[Weststander]

£50k gives net income of £3k per month.

No one, certainly no politicians, claim that level if income makes an individual "rich".

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Having looked into it a bit recently as my wife doesn't want to leave our 8 month old to go back to work I've figured out it's just about possible to survive on £50k a year in Peacehaven. I'm very fortunate that I earn as much as I do, my commute is 15 minutes, I don't have to pay for parking or a £5k+ railway season ticket, admittedly I'm mortgaged up to the eyeballs and if I don't over pay on it (I do at the moment) then I'd be paying it off until I'm 68.

Its not all about the headline figure, id have to earn over £60k to have a similar amount of disposable income, not to mention the extra 3+ hours a day spent away from my family. Financially I'm not rich but I'm lucky to be in the situation I'm in and give my wife the choice of going back to work or not.

Posts like yours simply highlight that this thread is kind of on a road to nowhere. At the end of the day the amount that a person earns is fairly irrelevant, it’s more to do with how people spend their money. In my household, if I was earning 50k a year, Mrs DFP would not have to work, DFP Jr (6 months old) could stay at home with mum and we’d have an absolute wealth of expendable income. As it is we earn far less than that, but we still enjoy life.

 

[Springal]

Posts like yours simply highlight that this thread is kind of on a road to nowhere. At the end of the day the amount that a person earns is fairly irrelevant, it’s more to do with how people spend their money. In my household, if I was earning 50k a year, Mrs DFP would not have to work, DFP Jr (6 months old) could stay at home with mum and we’d have an absolute wealth of expendable income. As it is we earn far less than that, but we still enjoy life.

But the vast majority of people adjust their expenditure to their earnings. There are always exceptions but I don't believe that would be the case with you, if you earnt that much. Especially as usually you gradually increase your pay over time so it is smaller increments. Go from 20k-25k you might eat out a bit more, 25k-35k you might have an extra weekend break + nicer car... etc

 

[Weststander]

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'.

Corporate types.
BBC senior management.
BBC presenters.
Presenters for independent broadcasters.
Partners in professional firms.
PL & Championship footballers.
Consultants working for the Nuffield etc.
Psychiatrists and some psychologists.
Dentists.
Property developers.
Commercial and some residential landlords.
Full time directors at football clubs.
Plus many more. All on big money.

There's no conspiracy to get £55k earners against £35k earners, what nonsense.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Being rich is all about your net worth.

 

[Bold Seagull]

It makes you very comfortable and leading a very nice enjoyable lifestyle, but not sure it can be defined as 'rich' which suggests plentiful disposable wealth.

 

[Weststander]

Being rich is all about your net worth.

Isn't that wealth?

If some earned £400k each year, lived in a rented home and blew all their earnings on a lifestyle, wouldn't they be rich?

 

[BN41Albion]

Definitely means you're rich. If you don't think so then you simply don't realise how lucky you are. Millions upon millions of people around the world would give anything to earn anywhere near that kind of money - even relative to their own country.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

The argument making the rich richer is a bit of a "Class warrior" type statement and creates a knee jerk reaction from people in the higher tax bracket.

I earn close to £70k , Divorced and re-married with 3 kids.
I wouldn't say I'm rich, far from it, but if I had to deal with an emergency, I could cut back on some small luxuries and probably cope.

Do I need a tax cut more than people earning minimum wage, the unemployed etc? No I don't.
But for as long as I can remember government's have given bigger tax breaks to higher earners.
It is illogical, but it is the way governments think.

 

[Pudos]

I earn over 50k a year and I struggle

being nosey but how do you struggle on that? earn 19k myself, have mortgage, son, wife, old banger (no 70's jokes please) and live in Worthing. So, to me, 50 sounds huge. How is it a struggle? Just interested!