Life is hard living on £120k a year.

Some people don’t know how lucky they are

On another interesting issue, the story illustrates why cutting charitable status and tax exemption for private schools will only push access to those schools further up the income distribution band, making private schooling even more inaccessible and thus even less meritocratic.

Not going to bother reading all the rest of this, only got as far as

he’s a financial compliance officer in the City for gawds sake, his bonus probably doubles his salary.

Nope. It probably doesn’t. Compliance roles don’t get the same sort of shiny banker’s bonuses you’re assuming. Nothing like it.

Yeah – I’ve just re-read it. It’s the choice for private schooling that’s killing him.

He should move up north – I have lots of friends who have, can’t believe how much better the life is – buy a really nice house near a very good state school and still be in the gravy.

… or maybe it’s the log burner – be costing him a fortune in logs in south London!

ANd thinking about it how old were his kids? 16 & 17? Suck it up for another couple of years sweetheart then let the oldboy network take the strain.

paying for fees to salesian college

It’s not Salesian.

What exactly do you think the ‘old boys’ network will actually do?

IME, unless maybe you’re an Etonian or from one of the other prestige private schools (which is a very different thing from the best academic ones) then it’ll do sweet FA for them beyond the education and learning they get at the school. Even then I’d suggest that in a lot of industries, Etonians and the like wouldn’t get any benefit.

Well if there’s no advantage what’s he paying for private education for? A-stars? Scarcely.

Private schooling offers more than just good grades or access to some mythical old boys network.

Regardless of whether it’s true, people think it means that their kids will stay out of trouble, some see it as a status thing and others believe that it’ll give them confidence in themselves and a work ethic to succeed. It also offers opportunities (sports, trips, etc) that kids might not get otherwise.

Maybe a discussion for a different thread though given that I still think he’s a muppet paying for it when IMO he can’t really afford it.

What exactly do you think the ‘old boys’ network will actually do?

I was thinking the same thing.

@geetee – if you remove the charitable status from private schools (and Universities ?) then you’ll put much more pressure on the state sector as a portion of parents will have to take their kids out due to likely increased costs.

As per CFH a compliance officer isn’t getting a 100% bonus, I’d imagine he gets something though.

As others have posted the school fees are the unaffordable thing, any rationale financial analysis would say his kids should be in the state sector which in that part of Surrey is generally pretty good. I imagine he put his kids into private school when he was earning more (as he probably was in the mid-2000’s before the banking crises).

Frankly nothing the government can do is going to help him out.

He should move up north

😯
Definitely not – we don’t want or need his sort.

He should move up north – I have lots of friends who have, can’t believe how much better the life is – buy a really nice house near a very good state school and still be in the gravy.

SSSSSHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! 😉

Start with the word ‘network’

There’s a certain amount of irony associated with the idea that he might have been earning more as a compliance officer, right before the serious issue of compliance brought the whole banking sector to the brink of collapse.

Affordability is the issue, but there are others such as the notion that you can have a large household income and still be pretty squeezed because of child care costs.

If we want men and women to earn the same then we need them to have equal access to the work place, i.e. not chose to leave for ten years while they have kids.

The cost of that is very high; as I said, for a professional couple who will most likely need a nanny to make it work, it’s about £25k a year from your post tax salary (so around £40k pre-tax at the higher rate.)

Start with the word ‘network’

People don’t do other people favours anymore just because they went to the same school.

bikebouy – Member

iolo – Member
I bought a house in Snowdonia and a small place in vienna mortgage free.

Are you single?
Are you looking for a partner  

Unfortunately for you there is a mrs iolo.
I must admit I have no kids but my step daughter goes to Steiner School paid for by her father.

No, not in an overt, ‘he’s one of our chaps’ kind of way but association and meeting the right people and your social circle does make a significant difference to your chances.

Contracting, particulalry in oil and gas, is proabably the working class equivalent. It’s done on a ‘do you know any good lads’ basis a lot.

There’s a certain amount of irony associated with the idea that he might have been earning more as a compliance officer, right before the serious issue of compliance brought the whole banking sector to the brink of collapse.

@geetee – I don’t want to see the thread derailed after “just” 3 pages but the financial crises was caused by too much borrowing by individuals (mostly in the US but in the UK we did quite a decent job), companies (thankfully not too many) and worst of all Governments. You can’t really hold a mid ranking compliance officer complicit.

You can’t really hold a mid ranking compliance officer complicit.

Especially one who can’t even manage his own salary…..

You can’t really hold a mid ranking compliance officer complicit.

Does it even mention which branch of Compliance he’s in? Again, there’s a lot more to Compliance than meets the eye. Didn’t read the full article this morning, was too busy with the crossword!

No, not in an overt, ‘he’s one of our chaps’ kind of way but association and meeting the right people and your social circle does make a significant difference to your chances.

True but that opportunity is open to everyone within the sphere in which they move at least. I’ve always had a really good network but I went to pretty ordinary comprehensive and a very average uni (at least for my undergrad).

Interestingly I did go to a top 30 global business school and while I graduated ten years ago, and have friends in some fairly senior roles, I’ve never once experienced the kind of chance you’ve referred to here. I have had those chances, but they were more of my own making than ones which came as a result of schooling.

@geetee – I don’t want to see the thread derailed after “just” 3 pages but the financial crises was caused by too much borrowing by individuals (mostly in the US but in the UK we did quite a decent job), companies (thankfully not too many) and worst of all Governments. You can’t really hold a mid ranking compliance officer complicit.

Don’t worry Jammy – I’ve been banging that drum myself for years also. I am in complete agreement with you. Nevertheless, someone somewhere should have been asking whether it was such a good idea to lend to them….

Not wishing to provoke anything, but surely if you’re earning a basic salary of £120k pa then a mortgage of £350k is hardly monstrous. Even in the good old days, 3.5 x salary was the sensible calculator you looked at, so with a salary like that, his mortgage is fine.

Except I reckon with a 45K outgoing after tax, he can only be paying interest or making a small investment/repayment and still be eating anything other than Lidl beans everyday.

I think the other point worth making is that his wife could get a job and certainly his oldest son if not the younger one. My kids where all working part time when they where 17.

iolo – Member

bikebouy – Member

iolo – Member
I bought a house in Snowdonia and a small place in vienna mortgage free.

Are you single?
Are you looking for a partner

Unfortunately for you there is a mrs iolo.
I must admit I have no kids but my step daughter goes to Steiner School paid for by her father.

You mean, cough, you are hitched already?

Is dissapoint 😥

thestabiliser – Member
No, not in an overt, ‘he’s one of our chaps’ kind of way but association and meeting the right people and your social circle does make a significant difference to your chances.

As I said, maybe in some industries and maybe more so in London but I’ve spoken with plenty of mates about this and essentially we feel a bit hard done by as we don’t seem to have benefited from it other than the direct benefit of the education itself. I don’t believe for a moment that it doesn’t happen – just look at the top people in politics for proof – but it doesn’t happen across the board and not to the extent that people who are ‘outside’ think it does.

that money never was theirs and never will be

If you read my post properly you will see that it was their money, the threshold has been reduced systematically so more and more has been taken in tax. Easy target though, higher earners, as shown by many of the comments on this thread. We have a culture propagated by the politicians that people who earn more don’t deserve the extra income. Taking money off the higher earners is a lot easier than dealing with the underlying out of control nature of the cost of living. A relatively small percentage of the population are net contributors to the state and a significant majority are net recipients. That’s not going to be sustainable if keeps going. House prices, rents and basic expectations of what a normal standard of living is need to be rapidly reassessed to more realistic levels but that ain’t going to happen.

Thinking about it – he basically can’t really afford to send his kids to private school – like pretty much everybody else in the country.

The fact he has decided to spend all his money on something that is not essential (there is a freely available and often very good alternative) and sacrifice is his lifestyle is his choice to make and I’m sure he believes that the sacrifice is worth it.

But on that basis, why is he offered as a case for our sympathy – affluent family have to scrimp a bit to afford something large majority of population can’t even dream of. So what?

“Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery.”

Wilkins Micawber.

We have a culture propagated by the politicians that people who earn more don’t deserve the extra income.

Or maybe that’s a culture propagated by common sense when people see the likes of bankers, top civil servants, senior managers, executives etc taking wildly disproportionate remuneration packages which have no relation to what they actually do on a day to day basis.

House prices, rents and basic expectations of what a normal standard of living is need to be rapidly reassessed to more realistic levels but that ain’t going to happen.

I don’t necessarily disagree that there needs to be a downward re-adjustment in people’s expectations, but that can’t/won’t happen until those at the top take the lead either through their own self-control (yeah right!) or through government intervention. You seem to be arguing the opposite however.

stumpyjon – policy makers who would agree with the first half of your analysis ie greater tax on high earners is no way to improve the economy – would completely disagree with any government involvement in artificially keeping prices/cost or living down. David Cameron went off on one at the mere mention of rent controls at PMQs today. The market will out – if people are prepared or feel obliged to commit increasing amounts of their income for property then the prices will keep going up and everything else will be squeezed.

This is a structural problem in our economy – the other solution in housing is to build lots more property – but difficult on two points – who wants 1000 new homes in the fields around their village/town? and it will push down property prices.

But on that basis, why is he offered as a case for our sympathy – affluent family have to scrimp a bit to afford something large majority of population can’t even dream of. So what?

Context. This is in the Telegraph, a paper which aims at people like him. Now, it may be nothing more than he/his Mrs is friends with the journo. Or it may be a bit more tactical than that: there’s an election in 12 months, and everything the papers say on matters of the economy will be driven by an agenda – in this case “look, even one of our chaps on a reasonable income is struggling to get by”.

The great and good of STW may hold a (legitimately) different view, but there’s a reason for everything, especially where the national press come in….

Or maybe that’s a culture propagated by common sense when people see the likes of bankers, top civil servants, senior managers, executives etc taking wildly disproportionate remuneration packages which have no relation to what they actually do on a day to day basis.

Strange how that perspective only ever works in one direction……

This is a structural problem in our economy – the other solution in housing is to build lots more property – but difficult on two points – who wants 1000 new homes in the fields around their village/town? and it will push down property prices.

It is structural. I am against rent controls but you can only use the argument of free markets if they are truly free to clear. If you set planning regs in such a way you limit the number of new houses being built, it won’t clear. Similarly, if you build your economy based on how rich people feel because of house price inflation, then similarly, you create a scenario that inhibits house building.

We don’t need rent controls if house prices do indeed go down, which is exactly what happened in 2008 and some how we seem to have taken leave of our senses again.

Plus ca change….

Oh and for the record I live in Horsham, which currently has four separate developments and 5000 new homes being built, which I am all in favour of.

… oh I understand the wider Tory narrative – look hard working middle can’t even afford to eat out while those unemployed are getting all the benefits etc…

My question was rhetorical

geetee1972 – perspective in one direction – are you sure there isn’t just a little bit of stigmatizing of the unemployed and other benefit recipients going?

Election looming – I don’t expect too much long-term thinking over the next 12 months…

… oh I understand the wider Tory political narrative – look hard working middle can’t even afford to eat out while those unemployed are getting all the benefits etc…… oh I understand the wider Tory narrative – look hard working middle can’t even afford to eat out while those unemployed are getting all the benefits etc…

The middle class put you in power, (not the unemployed), so every party pays more attention to them, be stupid not too.

geetee1972 – perspective in one direction – are you sure there isn’t just a little bit of stigmatizing of the unemployed and other benefit recipients going?

You misunderstood me. I just meant that when people who started in low level positions work their way up, they never hold that view even if they once did.

Prejudices aside it’s actually quite an interesting article, the point is that every section of society is feeling the pinch, and let’s face it £120k salary for a City worker living in Surrey ain’t that much, he’s being honest and isn’t really after sympathy as he said himself:

Jackson’s tone is matter-of-fact. Like the rest of the Squeezed Middle, he is keenly aware that his situation evokes little sympathy.