[i] i'm just pointing out that London and the home counties is pretty different to the north of england.
[/i]
No not really, just the difference of a hundred or so a month - taking into account that rent is cheaper but wages are lower.
Ok get your coat you pulled.
Yay! 🙂
Three bedrooms = rooms for your bikes - everyone does this surely
I have a separate utility room/workshop for my bikes. Doesn't everyone have one in the socialist utopia that is the north of England?
Not if you share rent/bills with other people IMO, even in London. Just googled houses in Woking - looks like you could rent a reasonably nice looking 4 bedroom house for £1500. That takes your rent down to £375 a month, plus you save loads on bills too.
True, but at some point wouldn't you want to live by yourself / with your partner? That's why I live in a 3 bedroom house - my wife and I brought it so we could potentially raise a family.
I lived in house shares whilst I was a student / in my twenties but I wouldn't want to go back to it, although I guess in theory I could. Unless you have a partner it may not be a choice anyway
"So yuo think the rich Ronney does not work hardfor his money either but we should let him keep it"
no not that he just shouldnt be paid that in the first place
sorry for long wait on reply but am busy earning/working
no not that he just shouldnt be paid that in the first place
Assuming you're talking about a footballer who attracts thousands, if not millions, of people who will willingly pay to watch him work, and you think he should not be alowed to receive a percentage of that. Am I correct?
sorry meant that much
Above we see one of the problems, @trail_rat suggests £45k pa is rich. So that would make sense that the 40% tax rate kicks in at the rich level. A lot of people on here would say £45k isnt't rich.
Here is another example, Bob Crowe earns £100kpa plus lives in a subsidised house, all paid for by union members, is he rich ? is that right ?
When people say tax the rich what they really mean is someone else.
When people say tax the rich what they really mean is someone else.
Good point well made. That said, I'm quite happy to be taxed progressively based on my income, easiest option to not c0ck up massively in my opinion.
A lot of people on here would say £45k isnt't rich.
SO they would be wrong
Here is another example, Bob Crowe earns £100kpa plus lives in a subsidised house, all paid for by union members, is he rich ? is that right ?
Right winger in almost factually accurate and yet utterly misleading anti union diatribe shocka.
When people say tax the rich what they really mean is someone else.
No they dont, I am rich
io would be happy to pay an additional tax to help out the needy and to try and raise everyone out of poverty - especially where there is starvation, poor sanitation etc
any chance of buying me a new bike then?????? please
@Junkyard - that's the first time I've ever been called right wing. I am with Liam Byrne, if we don't fix the social security system we will loose everything we've got. There are 6,000 council houses occupied by families with an income in excess of £100,000. There is sadly a very long list of stuff like this.
True, but at some point wouldn't you want to live by yourself / with your partner? That's why I live in a 3 bedroom house - my wife and I brought it so we could potentially raise a family.I lived in house shares whilst I was a student / in my twenties but I wouldn't want to go back to it, although I guess in theory I could. Unless you have a partner it may not be a choice anyway
Yeah but you are also then saving money by sharing rent/bills with your wife. Not as much as a house share but it's significant.
When people say tax the rich what they really mean is someone else.
Nope. I'd be happy to pay more tax, especially if it was in return for Scandinavian levels of education, health care, and sense of society.
A lot of people on here would say £45k isnt't rich.
It isn't. Not by quite some distance.
with 45k you can stick a roof over your head you can walk round the supermarket with the ability to stick food in your basket without counting the pennies and you can afford clothing without having to save up.
you might not own your own house or that big fancy house you aspire to BUT you can live comfortably without penny counting if you choose to.
to me thats rich. If you have been at the other end of the scale where your walking round the supermarket counting the value of what your buying and wondering if your cards going to get declined because your almost out of money and its a week till payday then 45k is rich.
if someone was going to give me 45k a year for the rest of my life for nothing you wouldnt see me at work tomorrow put it that way.
house shares, best 5 years of my life bring it on
A lot of people on here would say £45k isnt't rich.
I earn less than that and I think I'm relatively rich
As a sole wage earner, I've managed to help raise a family and send the 3 kids to uni, keep everyone fed,watered and warm and don't struggle to pay the monthly bills.
Maybe it's just me but a lot of my work colleagues that are always skint are the ones that buy sandwiches and coffee at lunchtime for around the same cost of putting a meal on the table for 5
so I'm rich and even better, I feel it.
Interesting perspectives. To me £45k in the UK isn't rich, it's reasonably comfortable not least because of the safety net the NHS provides and the other social service benefits we all enjoy.
When you start using words like rich the media will show pictures of yachts, luxury cars and large houses. You'll not be living like that on £45k.
Junkyard - that's the first time I've ever been called right wing.
Everyone is to the right of me 😉
I dont think council housing is technically subsidised and i dont se ewhy someoene succesful [ rich if you like] has to seel up and move to a posh part of town rather than saty within his community simply due to wealth. perhaps he should be charged a fair market rate to stay or something similar
A lot of people on here would say £45k isnt't rich.It isn't. Not by quite some distance.
Well it puts you in the top 10 % of the top 7 countries in the world and the top 1 % globally - in your view how much further do you need to go to be rich then? A long way my arse.
See this is the problem with rich it is a subjective view exacerbated by the fact that if you live in that there London it may not feel like being rich even though you are.
Rich is the ability to buy clothing and groceries?
[i]Come on.[/i]
Rich is 5 bed with no mortgage, regular new cars, organic free range fair trade, kids privately educated. You will not get that for £45K.
And whats the difference between husband and wife earning £22.5k each and husband earning £45k, wife not working? By this measure, the H&W team are also rich.
Rich is not dying of poverty you are describing wealthy 😉
- tickRich is 5 bed with no mortgage,
- tickregular new cars,
- I'd rather have normal stufforganic free range fair trade,
well, I've paid for 3 in Uni, still paying for onekids privately educated.
How old are you jota?
53
I am not sure how you can be poor with a high income tbh
I did carefully say "relatively high"! The sort of thing I was thinking of was people I've worked with in India who earned enough to be some way off the bottom of that scale but were expected to support an extended family of several generations. They were not rich by any measure we'd use it in the west.
I'm guessing that you didn't pay current house prices for your place then? You finish your term? Had any inheritance? You've worked all your life? I take it you've always felt rich?
Point taken on left/right !
Council Housing is massively subsidised. It may operate at break-even but you couldn't build them based upon the rents paid.
IMO Council housing should be means tested, it should be for the most needy. If you are fortunate to get a well paid job it's time to move on.
How can it make sense that local authorities spend £30k+ pa putting families in B&Bs when they are very comfortably off people living in council properties who are very capable of fending for themselves.
i guess it depends what you value in life and if you follow what the media wants to spoon feed you.
i dont earn 45k and im more than comfortable with my life.... more money is always nice but it would be excess.
"IMO Council housing should be means tested, it should be for the most needy. If you are fortunate to get a well paid job it's time to move on."
agreed !!
to me thats rich. If you have been at the other end of the scale where your walking round the supermarket counting the value of what your buying and wondering if your cards going to get declined because your almost out of money and its a week till payday then 45k is rich.
I'd assume a lot of people who you would call rich have experienced the penny pinching at University...? I know I counted my pennies to the degree i'd be stressed if I spent more than 10 quid a week on food and I wouldn't even call 45k well off.
If you're under 35 and didn't get the benefit of the 90's and 00's house price bubble then you're pretty screwed unless you're earning considerably more than 45k (as a single earner).
There's an awful lot of "in theory" going on in this thread on a topic that is so very often a subjective one. At the heart of some of the discussion is what you consider the meaning of the word "rich" is. And for many that is all wrapped up in how much disposable income you have left after what you consider are your current outgoings. Not all outgoings are "essential" but they are what you have become used to. A large number of people naturally increase their spending in line with their income without necessarily making a conscious decision to.
So, in theory, £45k is a good salary. I would also argue that for most people that is not their definition of rich though. As a single person living in a place that is not excessively expensive I would argue that life could be ok but you would not be "rich" as you would certainly consider owning / buying a home a reasonable investment (that is likely to be cheaper than renting) and may need a car for travel. Are those things essential? Maybe, maybe not. Once you start adding in a spouse, offspring etc then I would say £45k is not that big a salary if you want to own that house, have that car and have a partner that is happy to be a full time parent and not work.
And, as others have commented, why do people think it is right that someone who earns a bigger salary should pay a higher rate of tax? The current tax system is already progressive in that the more you earn the more tax you pay but at a rate that is consistent and fair. And why should someone who earns more pay a higher local / community tax? Do their bins cost more to empty? Does it cost more to educate their kids in the same school as someone who earns less? I agree, it will seem proportionately cheaper for them but that tax is about the local services which, it could argued, are probably used less by the more wealthy thus being less value.
I'm guessing that you didn't pay current house prices for your place then?
We paid the going rate, bought what we wanted 22 years ago and stayed in it rather than continually trying to get something 'better'
You finish your term?
yes
Had any inheritance?
we have now but not cash
You've worked all your life?
Indeed, when Thatcher destroyed our industry, I worked on the bins, on the roads and a hundred other shitty jobs, sometimes 2 and 3 at a time
I take it you've always felt rich?
I've always managed to pay my bills and feed my family and feel very good about it, to me that's rich, so yes
i could pick alot of holes in that generalised statement ewan but im not giving away any more about my personal financial affairs in here.
We paid the going rate, bought what we wanted 22 years ago and stayed in it rather than continually trying to get something 'better'
And if your mortgage was £1200/month for the same house, would you still have felt rich?
I think this is quite an important point; property is so expensive. If you want to own a 5 bed so that you can house a large family, you will need a fair whack of income (or be on welfare).
I actually admire your achievements in raising and providing for a fairly large family so well.
And jota - exactly what do you mean by paying for 3 kids to go through Uni? Given you have suggested you are on a lower income I imagine your kids therefore qualified for near maximum grant. Plus they get a loan for tuition fees. Did they get any other financial support? So what did that leave you to be paying?
[Only asking here as it would be useful to see it in context as the definition of paying for your kids to go through Uni will mean very different things to different people]
If you're under 35 and didn't get the benefit of the 90's and 00's house price bubble then you're pretty screwed unless you're earning considerably more than 45k (as a single earner).
I am over 40[just] and bought my house, less than 2 years ago, on 22k gross
One way to rile up any STWer.
Punch 'em right in the financials.
Given you have suggested you are on a lower income
I'm on more than average
I am over 40[just] and bought my house, less than 2 years ago, on 22k gross
You've had a good opportunity to save a deposit though 😀
What % deposit did you pay?
Council housing subsidised ?
WTF --you show your ignorance and prejudice in one line !
FWIW-- a council house will be paid for after 30 years, they are for long term not short, i lived in a CH built in 1933- nearly eighty years old, its tip top, has paid for itself two or three times over, and is still providing a much needed quality home for someone.
There is an ideological hatred of social housing for some, its one of the best ways to regulate and control rents/conditions-- private sector has no interest in providing anything but a quick return.
once upon a time council housing was well built ....
for that reason alone i live in a 1950s ex council property.
You've had a good opportunity to save a deposit though
What % deposit did you pay?
We are reaching the limits of what I will discuss freely on the Internet but yes fair point 20%- pre crash I would have got away with 10% and it was post divorce [ no large equity from that as that house was only 2 years into a mortgage].
I said on another thread as well even at 100% mortgage - which i cannot get [ can anyone?] it would be cheaper than rent
Bikingcatastrophe - Member
And, as others have commented, why do people think it is right that someone who earns a bigger salary should pay a higher rate of tax?
Because;
trail_rat - Member
i dont earn 45k and im more than comfortable with my life.... more money is always nice but it would be excess.
Is essentially true; yes you can argue about the threshold where essential becomes luxury, but there come a point where you don't need more money, but desire it. I think that it's fundamentally fair that I share the 'excess' income that I have earned at a higher rate than the 'essential' income. That's why.
@rudeboy. I stand by what I said, it's massively subsidised. Don't look at the build cost in the 1930's look at the replacement cost today including land and you have to do the analysis using commercial rates of return. FWIW I am in favour of council and social housing, I think there should be more of it but it should definitely be more appropriately distributed.
I said on another thread as well even at 100% mortgage - which i cannot get [ can anyone?] it would be cheaper than rent
this.
alot of the time(but not always) buying a house is about realising that if you make sacrifices for a short period to save the deposit then things can be changed. .
if you can afford to rent you can afford to buy. you just need to save the deposit (with the caveat that it may not be what you want but any house owned is better than renting and burning your money)
i lived in a 1 bedroom shoe box spending very little - i even put all bar my singlespeed bikes in storage last year so i wasnt tempted to spend on bike bits. - its amazing what you can save in 2 years when your committed. How ever i do accept this is alot harder with kids in tow and it was a concious agreement between me and mrs T-r to do this now while it was an option rather than doing as we both want to do and take off with the money cycle touring again.
when i look around at folk i know moaning they cant afford a house i see them with iphones , massive tvs , sky sports and out drinking both nights every weekend. one mate admitted he spends 100 quid a night minimum each weekend.
he has a good time and i dont grudge it to him but it all adds up quite quickly to a house IF that is what you want
i could pick alot of holes in that generalised statement ewan but im not giving away any more about my personal financial affairs in here.
Wasn't trying to be specific to anyone, no offense intended! 🙂
How rich you are is your own personal state of mind.
<thread closed>
