Log in

No account? Create an account
A couple with two children now need to earn £36,800 a year to have a… - livejournal uk [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
livejournal uk

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Jul. 10th, 2012|11:41 am]
livejournal uk


A couple with two children now need to earn £36,800 a year to have a "socially acceptable" standard of living, an anti-poverty charity says.

A couple with two children were said to need to earn a minimum of £18,400 a year each before tax; single people £16,400 a year, while the figure for lone parent with one child is £23,900 and a pensioner couple £12,000 each

This seems like quite a lot of money to me, especially outside of London or the South East.


[User Picture]From: lerabollera
2012-07-10 11:16 am (UTC)
It isn't when you factor in childcare costs, mortgage/rent and council tax.</p>

As a, in the eyes of the law, single person there is no way I could live on £16k a year. After deductions and bills I'd have hardly anything left.

(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: radiantsoul
2012-07-10 07:06 pm (UTC)
But socially acceptable does not seem to imply much luxury.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lerabollera
2012-07-10 09:52 pm (UTC)
no but you don't want to live the life of a hermit either. It's all about having a fine balance and not wanting to live a champagne lifestyle on beer money.

Tbh, I have no idea which planet these researchers live on and why they spend so much time putting together a study that can so easily be torn apart.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: youfuckingwhat
2012-07-11 01:33 am (UTC)
Depends what you call a luxury. Lots of people feed themselves on pot noodles and cheap frozen ready meals, is a balanced diet with fresh meat and veg a luxury or something everyone should be able to provide for themselves and family? Lots of people drive their kids around in cheap old unreliable cars with no airbags that would fold in 2 in a collision with a modern vehicle, is car safety or even having a car at all a luxury? Lots of people shop entirely at charity shops and cheap outlets like Primark, is anything better a luxury? Also holidays, if I didn't get away for a week or 2 a year, the stress of work would quite probably break me, so is a holiday really just an added luxury?

People can get by on less than those figures sure, but I think if they're working any kind of full time job in one of the richest countries in the world, they should be able to afford to live a bit more comfortably.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bopeepsheep
2012-07-10 11:21 am (UTC)
It's really too simplistic to report it like this, there are far too many variables involved and ambiguities in the story as reported.
e.g. Two people earning £18,400 bring home 2x £1,239 a month or £2,478; one person earning £36,800 brings home £2,282, although usually then that couple don't need childcare because one of them isn't working. So what's the required minimum income? Which figure? Are they "better off" than the couple&kids on £30,000 whose mortgage is 1/3 the cost because they live somewhere different?

If you poke the reports a bit more closely, it's revealed that after housing costs the figure required is £193 per adult per week (£455 (£2047 a month) for the couples referred to above - meaning the first couple must pay £430 housing and the second £240, hardly realistic figures!). This is then grossed up, with housing costs, to a figure which will necessarily vary quite a lot around the country. The figures you've quoted are only the national average - something that applies to very few of us. (Although possibly bang on if you live in Swindon.)

Edited at 2012-07-10 11:24 am (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: charlycrash
2012-07-10 11:49 am (UTC)
I think it depends on whether it's before or after tax and where they live. In London, I can see that. What does "socially acceptable" mean, though?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bopeepsheep
2012-07-10 12:32 pm (UTC)
What socially acceptable means in this context. Click on the + to break down each category.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lazy_hoor
2012-07-10 01:38 pm (UTC)
It's gross, not net.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sheppeyescapee
2012-07-10 01:40 pm (UTC)
Doesn't seem a lot to me living on the utter outskirts of Bristol and still paying £475 a month just on rent in social housing, private rents are even more. I wonder what the costs are for households including a disabled person, probably a lot higher although DLA is available not all disabled people get it and it nowhere near covers the extra costs.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: slashlover
2012-07-10 06:34 pm (UTC)
I guess it would depend on the place, my rent for a 2 bed council flat is £62.50 a week and council taxt is £79/month after single discount. Actually, I'm an assistant manager at work and earn £15000...something.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: veela_angel
2012-07-10 06:39 pm (UTC)
yet mimimum wage is £11,000, and you can earn more on benefits if you are privately renting and have kids.

I'm on £14,000 (or just under) before tax. It will be a very long time before I will be able to earn over the threshold for a single person. I don't feel like I'm in poverty.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: box_of_sorrows
2012-07-13 09:57 am (UTC)
Not intended as a dig, but I fucking hate this sort of thing: "This seems like quite a lot of money to me, especially outside of London or the South East. ".

I can't stand it when you read/hear people complaining that it costs more to live/work in and around London - move and work somewhere else then! That is a lot of money for a 2+2 family to live on, assuming they're sensible with it and not being stupid wanting to stretch it to more than it can support. But the problem is people want to live beyond those means and end up struggling.
(Reply) (Thread)