Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I'd say anybody earning over 40k+ is having a 'good' life.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sherry1993)
    Come on, its not living in poverty.I had a really good childhood
    I'm sure you did have a good childhood. People living in absolute poverty can have a good childhood. People living in relative poverty certainly can have a good childhood. The most affluent can have a bad childhood (though most don't!). You don't necessarily need to have lots of money to have a good childhood or feel that your basic needs are being met (Love, shelter, food).

    I'm talking about relative poverty, not absolute poverty. Relative poverty is living with less than a certain percentage of the average household income. If you lived with less than this then, yes, you experienced relative poverty. Poverty relative to the majority of this country's population.

    It is a contested term, and some believe it just simply means "inequality" (some people will always be better off than others), focusing their attention on absolute poverty only. But when the government focus on child poverty they usually include relative poverty.

    If this is not relative poverty then why are in work benefits offered to those who work but earn a low salary?

    I just didnt have the most expensive shoes on my feet, or the latest gadgets etc.
    Indeed and this can have an effect. Those living in relative poverty may still be disadvantaged socially and educationally by their parents' lack of wealth. For example, expensive educational toys, access to IT, money for school trips and so on.

    Also in health, in terms of not always being able to provide the widest range of fresh and best food, and more likely to live in areas with poor or overstretched health services.

    We ate three meals a day and I never went hungry, ok we didnt eat branded foods like heinz or walkers but we didnt go without. That isnt poverty.
    Even if you were able to get by when younger, things could have still been difficult or precarious at times.

    Ultimately if you were happy with your upbringing, and felt your needs were catered for, this is what counts. They could have been. You had your own experience and one which could be very different to many others on a similar income. So I don't mean to suggest you were hugely disadvantaged. But relative poverty is well recognise.

    Well they are certainly working class, theres no arguement there. Second class and working class are most comparable I would say...
    I just don't think many would chose "second class", and I've never heard it used outside train travel (which was abandoned long ago in favour of first and "standard"). It immediately suggests that the less well off person is inferior than the more affluent, which I'm sure neither of us agree with.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    You guys should get jobs in sales, I'm 19 and earn on average so far £1900 a month, there's an 18 year old who earns over £2000 a month, no problem. Not saying you should stay in the field, but it's good money if your GOOD, at least have one while you're applying for grad jobs.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    I'm sure you did have a good childhood. People living in absolute poverty can have a good childhood. People living in relative poverty certainly can have a good childhood. The most affluent can have a bad childhood (though most don't!). You don't necessarily need to have lots of money to have a good childhood or feel that your basic needs are being met (Love, shelter, food).

    I'm talking about relative poverty, not absolute poverty. Relative poverty is living with less than a certain percentage of the average household income. If you lived with less than this then, yes, you experienced relative poverty. Poverty relative to the majority of this country's population.

    It is a contested term, and some believe it just simply means "inequality" (some people will always be better off than others), focusing their attention on absolute poverty only. But when the government focus on child poverty they usually include relative poverty.

    If this is not relative poverty then why are in work benefits offered to those who work but earn a low salary?



    Indeed and this can have an effect. Those living in relative poverty may still be disadvantaged socially and educationally by their parents' lack of wealth. For example, expensive educational toys, access to IT, money for school trips and so on.

    Also in health, in terms of not always being able to provide the widest range of fresh and best food, and more likely to live in areas with poor or overstretched health services.



    Even if you were able to get by when younger, things could have still been difficult or precarious at times.

    Ultimately if you were happy with your upbringing, and felt your needs were catered for, this is what counts. They could have been. You had your own experience and one which could be very different to many others on a similar income. So I don't mean to suggest you were hugely disadvantaged. But relative poverty is well recognise.



    I just don't think many would chose "second class", and I've never heard it used outside train travel (which was abandoned long ago in favour of first and "standard"). It immediately suggests that the less well off person is inferior than the more affluent, which I'm sure neither of us agree with.
    I understand where your coming from, I of course have a bias outlook on the subject due to feeling that I was not disadvantaged as a child. Therefore dont see it as poverty, of any sort that you describe.
    My other half, is Albanian born and raised. One of the poorest countries in the EU (in geographical terms it sits in the EU) I would say he experianced relative poverty, with regards to the flow of income that is equivilent to our 150pound was what his family would recieve in the Albanian currency of Leke, once a month, with his father working two jobs. I even counteract my own arguement on this though, because of the facilities they had to grow their own fruit/veg and rear their own livestock (and the pride they take in doing so) But then how the income would only stretch so far just to make ends meet. So I think that is 'surviving' and hits poverty on the borderline.

    I was trying to get the point across that, everyone on here talking about how you need 30k to 'live' dont understand the realities of being financially independant.

    When I was studying Sociology we often use the term 2nd class, and that was only 3 years ago, so I am sure its still used. Maybe our tutor was just a little outdated.

    If I had my salary taken from me tomorrow, and was given minimum wage, I dont think I would see a huge difference in my life style to be honest, I of course wouldnt be buying all the branded foods I buy now, but I would still have the same diet with the cheaper options that are out there, I would still be able to run the car and pay the bills, my savings would of course drop, but thats a future investment (so doesnt involve my current standard of living) I would find it difficult to readjust to but I wouldnt consider myself going into poverty or deprivation
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IntriguedUser)
    You guys should get jobs in sales, I'm 19 and earn on average so far £1900 a month, there's an 18 year old who earns over £2000 a month, no problem. Not saying you should stay in the field, but it's good money if your GOOD, at least have one while you're applying for grad jobs.
    Before or after tax? Even after tax, £2k per month is still around 30k.. the figure most people here are saying is a 'decent' salary.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sherry1993)
    I don't think you quite get it do you?
    Surviving is living.
    You clearly have not been raised by 2nd class parents, I have. A single parent at that. A mother on minimum wage raising two kids, we lived an ok life growing up, it was average, and guess what?! It was in one of the biggest cities in the UK, one of the most expensive if we're looking at the cost of living, So do not talk to me about '2nd world conditions' The minimum wage is set accordingly.

    Now theres a fine line between wanting to earn minimum wage and not having much choice. Which you dont understand. Clearly, because by 25 you'll be earning your 30k.

    The salary isnt my problem, I live a good life and I am now very financially stable, and my partner and myself earn a hell of a lot more than other friends our age and guess what? Neither of us went to uni, and we both come from working class families. We appreciate what we have and that we can enjoy the finer things, which is the difference between me and you.

    You 'EXPECT' 30k by the time your 25.
    I never expected anything, I worked hard for what I have and if it was all taken away from me tomorrow and I was put on a minimum wage salary, I would be able to live, because I understand what living means.
    Op said living decently, not scraping by in one of the most deprived areas in the UK, which is where you'd be if on min wage in London.
    Actually when I was growing up my parents were broke. So knowing that you can lose the self proclaimed moral throne, take a breather, and understand im not attacking your past...
    The minimum wage is set according to what? Rent in hull or rent in Kensington? Minimum wage DOES NOT WORK IN LONDON. If you go to London, you will see for yourself.
    Instead of trying to attack me for wanting to earn 30k (something im on track to doing) understand that it is achievable and having ambition isn't something you should be criticising.

    Unless you are going to calm down and deal with whatever issues you have to do with earnings, I don't have any desire to hear back from you.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    Op said living decently, not scraping by in one of the most deprived areas in the UK, which is where you'd be if on min wage in London.
    Actually when I was growing up my parents were broke. So knowing that you can lose the self proclaimed moral throne, take a breather, and understand im not attacking your past...
    The minimum wage is set according to what? Rent in hull or rent in Kensington? Minimum wage DOES NOT WORK IN LONDON. If you go to London, you will see for yourself.
    Instead of trying to attack me for wanting to earn 30k (something im on track to doing) understand that it is achievable and having ambition isn't something you should be criticising.

    Unless you are going to calm down and deal with whatever issues you have to do with earnings, I don't have any desire to hear back from you.
    The minimum wage is set accordingly to the cost of living, being able to buy and pay fro the things you NEED and not buy luxuries. I appreciate that everyone wants and deserves to have luxuries from time to time, but there are people living on MW and are grateful that they have a job.
    I am not attacking you for wanting to earn that money, I understand its what everyone wants, everyone always wants more. It was your expectation that I didnt like, so it was a misunderstanding. You came across like a little bit of a brat, that its what you expect and if you didnt achieve it you would through the toys out the pram, kinda thing.

    I am not critisising ambition, I thrive on it. I just dont expect like everyone else on this thread seems to.

    Sorry for the bark. Its actually worse than my bite
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sherry1993)
    Come on, its not living in poverty.I had a really good childhood, I just didnt have the most expensive shoes on my feet, or the latest gadgets etc.
    We ate three meals a day and I never went hungry, ok we didnt eat branded foods like heinz or walkers but we didnt go without. That isnt poverty.
    Yes, I agree with people on MW do face further problems, but it can still be possible, like said I came from that life but now earn a good salary, and I am on the property ladder. My mum is now in a good decent paid job, with a similar salary to myself so its achievable to go up. She's pretty comfortable now.

    The members posting the inflated salaries, is my biggest issue here. I'm possibly just convaying it in the wrong direction.

    Well they are certainly working class, theres no arguement there. Second class and working class are most comparable I would say...
    This is why you are getting emotional over the topic. Poverty isn't to so with whether you had a good childhood or not, it's to do with measurable metrics like earnings. You may of had a good childhood, but also you may have been living in poverty.
    Second class and working class age nothing alike. Being part of an income bracket and being seen as a lesser human being are worlds apart. I think you need to crack out a history book circa 1950's America.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geoking)
    This is why you are getting emotional over the topic. Poverty isn't to so with whether you had a good childhood or not, it's to do with measurable metrics like earnings. You may of had a good childhood, but also you may have been living in poverty.
    Second class and working class age nothing alike. Being part of an income bracket and being seen as a lesser human being are worlds apart. I think you need to crack out a history book circa 1950's America.
    I wouldnt say I am getting emotional over it. I'm certainly not gonna loose any sleep either.
    I just don't like people being unapreciative and assuming you need to be earning plus 30k to have a good and happy life.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sherry1993)
    I wouldnt say I am getting emotional over it. I'm certainly not gonna loose any sleep either.
    I just don't like people being unapreciative and assuming you need to be earning plus 30k to have a good and happy life.
    Nobody made that assumption, though. The question is about what is 'decent', not 'happy' or 'good'.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sherry1993)
    I wouldnt say I am getting emotional over it. I'm certainly not gonna loose any sleep either.
    I just don't like people being unapreciative and assuming you need to be earning plus 30k to have a good and happy life.
    You are changing what was asked though. The question was about living a comfortable life. If you want to basically not have to worry about money whilst living modestly, down south you are looking at 30k+. No one is saying you need money to be happy - im sure you can find more suitable threads for that line of thought in the philosophy forum.
    You shouldn't bring your childhood into this, its not relevant...And as for expectations you're misinterpreting it. I'll be making that money as long as I don't walk into a board meeting drunk off my arse, pants around my ankles, brown bag in hand, swearing about the boss. Its not about feeling like im owed it by some act of the universe, I expect it from my career path as its industry standard.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    Before or after tax? Even after tax, £2k per month is still around 30k.. the figure most people here are saying is a 'decent' salary.
    After tax

    No graduate is going to get a £30,000 job straight away, apart from a few. You're probably going to end up on £7 p/h and not do anything related to what you did at uni..

    You're paying for a bit of paper...
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IntriguedUser)
    After tax

    No graduate is going to get a £30,000 job straight away, apart from a few. You're probably going to end up on £7 p/h and not do anything related to what you did at uni..

    You're paying for a bit of paper...
    I think £7 p/h is a bit of an understatement, but I do agree that the huge majority of people will take some time to reach £30k.

    My point was however that your suggested sales job is not particularly amazing either.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sherry1993)
    I don't think you quite get it do you?
    Surviving is living.
    You clearly have not been raised by 2nd class parents, I have. A single parent at that. A mother on minimum wage raising two kids, we lived an ok life growing up, it was average, and guess what?! It was in one of the biggest cities in the UK, one of the most expensive if we're looking at the cost of living, So do not talk to me about '2nd world conditions' The minimum wage is set accordingly.

    Now theres a fine line between wanting to earn minimum wage and not having much choice. Which you dont understand. Clearly, because by 25 you'll be earning your 30k.

    The salary isnt my problem, I live a good life and I am now very financially stable, and my partner and myself earn a hell of a lot more than other friends our age and guess what? Neither of us went to uni, and we both come from working class families. We appreciate what we have and that we can enjoy the finer things, which is the difference between me and you.

    You 'EXPECT' 30k by the time your 25.
    I never expected anything, I worked hard for what I have and if it was all taken away from me tomorrow and I was put on a minimum wage salary, I would be able to live, because I understand what living means.
    You're not the only one raised in a working class family, my mum was a single mother and there were four of us!
    Coming from that doesn't give you the right to get angry at others for wanting the best for themselves, everyone does. It makes you a better person, not worse, for being able to aim high and work hard. We all know that it's easier for some people, but that just makes what you've achieved even better!
    I think you would get through to people on this thread better if you just showed them its possible, rather than getting angry, like you said, it's not you that would be screwed living on minimum wage, it would be them.
    Getting to where you are from where you were is an amazing accomplishment, show others the way


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)

    Just thought you might be interested, had a conversation with my brother about this last night.

    He was actually only on 25k when he first moved into London and didn't use savings. However, he still managed comfortably (travelled, went out twice a week and saved up 5k in that first year). First house was £250 a month, which I know is relatively cheap (I'm paying £215 for an average/below average house in Newcastle). He admits he skimped on accomodation. I remember one of those first houses in Leytonstone as a Pakistani (suspected) drug dealer where they found several grand in the loft. They also got burgled and suspected it was related to their Landlord's possibly dodgyness. So not ideal accomodation.

    After four years, moving to increasingly expensive properties and reaching a salary high of 50k by 30 years of age and had saved up 20k and got onto the property ladder.

    But he thinks 30k is certainly a comfortable enough salary for London, if you're OK with only saving a couple of grand a year at most. I do think I could manage on 20k in London, certainly 25k (less if you include a small amount of money I receive from other sources but that would be cheating)
    Oh wow even with the dodgyness of the landlord, that's a bargain being able to pay 250 in rent. I can certainly see why people would go for lesser than nice accommodation for a short amount of time as it sounds like it does give you a fantastic step onto the property ladder.
    Yeah I think 20k - 25k is do-able, but savings as you said would suffer. Thanks for the info!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think anything around £30,000 would be a decent wage. Anything over £35,000 would be absolutely fantastic!!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    You young'ens have funny expectations. Believe me, 25K will be a jackpot when you get out if uni. Unless you're in the top lot.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Nothing less than £52k out of uni.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crazy92)
    Nothing less than £52k out of uni.
    What?!? Crazy indeed.

    Myself and my partner earn around 30k between us at present, taken a bit of a financial hit whilst I finish my degree! We manage perfectly fine, saving for a holiday and running a car. Fair enough, we do all of our shopping at Aldi and don't go on many nights out , but we don't "struggle." I'm going to assume that either one of us would need about 25k to live independently and not have to cut on savings etc .

    My wage will be around 24k out of uni, putting us up to over 50k as a couple, we'll no doubt be much more comfortable then!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    £18000 can be quite liveable and comfortable if you're a good saver and have a frugal attitude.

    But £30000, if you need an iPhone, Ultra-fast broadband, Satellite TV, M&S food and believe it's better to turn the heating on for 5 hours instead of wear an extra layer.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.