Wages

It's about what you prioritise in society. Ireland prioritises education which uplifts the vast majority of people. On the flip-side healthcare is not completely free, you pay for prescriptions and smaller amounts for GP visits or hospital appointments. Think it's €50 to see a GP.

Ireland also pays more taxes, a flat rate of 20% up to circa £35k, then 40% on anything above. Sensibly there are higher thresholds for single parents and single income families. In return there is more money for nice things like free education and a high standard of living, similar to Scandi countries.

 

I work for a company as a tradesman have done since leaving school I'm employed with the perks tools, van, fuel,holidays etc. Subcontractors doing the same job at the same firm making about 12k+ a year some more. Obviously pros and cons to both.

 

Think they can still prevent you from discussing during working hours.

 

I keep reading about all of these fairer tax policies for hard working people but where are the benefits for us lazy ********?

It's a disgrace.

 

Don't worry those that have worked hard, studied their arse off and now on a good salary we will take off them and give to the lazy bustards you'll be fine

 

You know what I'm really struggling with? If so many people on the BBS claim they're struggling and barely have a penny left after their bills have gone out on their 50k wages then how come so many of us are managing to live on 25k a year? Are we all knicking from Tesco to get by?

And before anyone says "but kids" in pretty certain that there isn't yet a ban on anyone under 50k having a child

 

We don't all live in Barnsley, house prices, big mortgages etc etc

 

I've done a quick Google and people on 25, 30, 35k a year are allowed to have children outside of Barnsley too. They must all be drug dealers to afford it.

Edit: That's overly sarcastic, I apologise for the tone of the message to you.
My point is that people have children and live outside of Barnsley on 25k a year, they just do. Yet people on 50k are saying it's practically impossible for THEM to live on that money. So surely either those surviving on low incomes are stealing to survive (considering we know how bad benefits are these days) or those on 50k are squandering money and don't even realise it

 

Don't worry, I get taxed plenty. I'm a high functioning divvy.

 

I guess it depends what you consider "squandering" money means (just for the record, my income fluctuates a lot month to month depending on work, as I've alluded to in other posts). If it's buying your kid the latest smartphone or pair of Nikes every time they demand them, or some daft overpriced food when out and about then I'd completely agree. If it's paying for extra clubs outside school like drama, ice skating etc, going to the Crucible to see a play or to a concert, or having a weekend away somewhere new, that's hardly squandering money. We've never spoiled our daughter materially, but we bend over backwards to make sure she sees as many places, tries as many activities, and generally has as many interesting life experiences as we can afford throughout her childhood and teenage years.

 

£25k is just about survivable in the rougher parts of Barnsley where houses are cheaper. It would not be as easy in Cawthorne or Stainborough. And just because someone is on £25k *now* doesn't mean they always were. I was made redundant 15-20 years ago and went from £45k to £30k almost overnight. That crippled us financially for over a decade - and it took almost as long to get back to the higher level of income. The big problem was the mortgage and other debts - all were comfortable at the higher income, but dropping down made it very tight and at times we came close to losing the house. This was over £100k - many newer mortgages are double or even triple that.

Situations vary a lot from person to person - but life has an habit of kicking you when you are down and losing a job, long-term illness/injury or even death can make what was comfortable overnight into something that is very, very tight.

 

Before I say this, I'm well aware that a pension is a personal choice and it's money that will help you in the future and as such should IMO be included in money earned. However just as a quick comparison of take home pay that's spendable and influences someone's lifestyle:

Someone on £30k with no student loan and not putting anything into their pension takes home around £25,000
Someone on £50k with student loan and putting 15% into pension (which is definitely high and shouldn't be taken as anywhere close to average, but I have worked at companies that match up to 15% and so it seems silly not to take that) can take your take home down to about £29,500 (depends on the type of student loan etc, this is worst case scenario)

Again, definitely not saying anybody should feel sorry for the second person, they have almost £90 a week extra in their pocket and will have far more in the future when they take their pension, but I'm just illustrating how pre-tax income can't necessarily be compared when it comes to take-home pay and lifestyle etc.

 

More you earn more you spend

 

You can call it squandering, perhaps it's just living a bit more of a comfortable lifestyle. Is that so bad? It's not a race to the bottom, or shouldn't be.

I agree that £50k is a decent salary, but it's not at such a level that it should be the focus for higher taxation.

 

Stayed out of this thread thus far but it strikes me that this ‘discussion’ is exactly what the (hopefully) outgoing government want.

Squabbles between those on the lowest wages and those on a bit more - but still not huge.

Divide and conquer.

Meanwhile the top 5% on silly money and hiding it all god knows where and by any means they can, are taxed little to nothing. Big business and Tory sponsoring corporations get away with murder.

The lower middle class is not the enemy of the working class. We don’t need to look at eachother.

In-fighting, finding someone to blame - and then convincing the ones on a middling income that they’re actually well off and elite so should vote Tory, is straight out of chapter one of the Conservative playbook. Chapter two, get those at the lower end on low wages or benefits to verge to the right by blaming them foreign types…

Blame those on more money. Blame those on less. Blame those on benefits. Blame immigrants. It’s not our fault…

As for salary, when I was contracting I was at times bringing home well in excess of 50k. At one point just under £300 a day, which would equate to about £75k (if I didn’t take any time off). Some contracts closer to the £50k mark.

I’m now in a ‘perm’ role, in lower management (customer service team lead) for a financial company in Leeds. £32k. It was a shock to the system going to that level - especially when you factor in travel costs. My wife works full time too, earning less than me, works in a bookies. We have three kids, have a mortgaged three bed semi in Donny. Two old(ish) cars. (63 and 67 plate). We cope, we’re ok, but we’re not doing great, there’s nothing left at the end of each month. We have no extravagances other than the youngest goes to dance class and the oldest still plays rugby.

And when I was on more money, at no point did we feel particularly well off then either. Never had brand new cars or ‘elite’ brands, don’t splurge on clothes. Rarely had boys/girls nights out with friends. We maybe had the odd takeaway, and had holidays abroad five times in thirteen years. I don’t have spiralling debts but any savings I had were absorbed by being out of work a couple of months.

You can cope on a £25k salary (in Barnsley and Donny at least) - but if you have kids then you’re very likely to be topped up above that level with universal credit. £50k is a decent salary, again, especially around here - but it really doesn’t make you as well off as some of you think.

 

Working tax credits.
Child tax credits.

Are 2 of the benefits that people on 50k a year don't get. In fact anyone on 50k a year get diddly squat. And even after that start having child benefit taken off them (until it changed this year).

I think anyway, but happy to be corrected.

Not that I'm having a pop at anyone, but someone on the lower end, get top ups and not just the basic wage. Which is what this thread seems to be missing out on adding. For context.

 

Great post, spot on for me.

You've alluded to something important there. Are we supposed to earn income to merely 'survive', or is it right and fair that we should be able to go to the football sometimes, have the odd holiday, take the kids for a day out, the occasional takeaway and a Netflix subscription? All those things (bar the latter perhaps) have also increased significantly in price in general. I suppose in the simplified £50k v £25k argument, the £50k may be able to spend on a few of those 'luxuries', but it's not exactly the multiple sports car, mansion owning, jet-setters.

 

Excellent point... and guess what... the higher earners are being taxed more to pay for all those tax credits...

Not saying there's anything wrong with that, but it's a good point.

 

My only bug bear around it, is that we have companies making millions, and pay their staff minimum wage. And general tax payers are therefore subsidising the lower earners. Instead of the companies paying them a decent wage.

Is the point I was trying to make. Admittedly after reading it back, may have come across differently or harsher than intended.

 

That's very true but the right wing press would have us believe the answer is to take those benefits aways and that really isn't it at all.