£100k a year doesn’t go far you know

The_Lizards_Jumpers said:
No they're not though.

They're focusing on his statement, and getting angry at anyone who suggest that's he may have a some semblance of a point when you look at the cost of things like housing, childcare, transport etc especially in the SE - it's an alternative version of "but they all have big TV's and the latest phones", for example the poster people bringing St Moritiz into it - people earning £100k in Surrey are not hanging with Bezos or skiing in St Moritiz they're not starving either of course.
Click to expand...

I disagree, the majority of what I've seen are just angry at the statement coming from someone like Hunt, being massively out of touch.

Yes, people will go further, especially if it's being defended on the principle of lifestyle and funding for childcare to maintain it.

But again, he's not playing any mind games here, he's simply looking after those likely to be paying his extortionate rents when he's out of government. Abusing his position to do so.
 
What's madabout that to me is our average floor space being so much lower than Japan. A country with famously small residences
 
Unravel_Morrison said:
It is a fortune; it doesn't sound like it; it is.

'After I've paid for this stuff' isn't an argument.
Click to expand...
I know, eeeh I earn a billion per year but have nowt left after I've bought a billion quids worth of stuff. It's a ridiculous thing to say.

If you are struggling on 100k per year then your house is probably too expensive and you need to move to a cheaper area or downsize in your existing location.

Also, whether we earn 100k or 20k you can rest assured that Jeremy **** believes that all of us PAYE wage slaves are absolute and utter scum.
 
Unravel_Morrison said:
It is a fortune; it doesn't sound like it; it is.

'After I've paid for this stuff' isn't an argument.
Click to expand...
Of course it is. If your mortgage is £300 each month and you have no child care costs then £100k is a fortune.
If you have a £2/3k mortgage and have to pay for 40 hours of child care/school fees etc then it’s probably comfortable at best

Just dismissing the idea that someone who has a large income might be struggling is just daft, when you refuse to take any outgoings into account
 
I understand the argument regarding outgoings but you're not pumping a load of money into property because you have to.

That argument works at 250K or 500Ka year if you believe it.
 
Unravel_Morrison said:
I understand the argument regarding outgoings but you're not pumping a load of money into property because you have to.

That argument works at 250K or 500Ka year if you believe it.
Click to expand...
Yes you are though. What if you want to live near your work, your family, your support network?
 
Unravel_Morrison said:
but you're not pumping a load of money into property because you have to.
Click to expand...

For someone working in London or the south east, where do you expect them to live?

The fact of having to live remotely close to a place of work, surely means you have to pump a load of money into property
 
As others have said, it depends where you live as to whether you feel wealthy on £100k.

On Teesside you’d live very comfortably on that salary.

If you then moved to a leafy part of Surrey, you wouldn’t as your mortgage will have probably trebled.

If you then moved to London you’re probably trying to keep your head above water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top