Jackqui Smith Down

<blink> Really?

 

No, you're just doing it wrong. You're supposed to put your salary
into the 'Household Income' box without any deductions other than
income tax and NI.

 

Do you really?

 

That's because your definition of "comfort" is absolutely preposterous.

 

You may judge it so by your own standards, but I know many people with
a much more profligate lifestyle than ours. In fact we don't spend
very much money at all on non-essentials[1], particularly not
'consumer goods'. Cars are bought to keep (we've owned only five
between us since around 1995); electrical appliances of all sorts are
kept until they no longer work, and repaired if I can do so even then;
we eat out only once or twice a month.

Sure, we ski a lot and now have the apartment, as well as a nice house
and garden, plus we take a nice-ish, but not exactly exhorbitant,
holiday most years as well as ski trips. But I don't see that our
lifestyle is anywhere near a "preposterous" level of comfort.

And yes, you can consider that a bite.

[1] Where decent food and drink are considered essential, of course.

 

Plenty of reasons: Necessity, geography limiting the available
options, other personal commitments, lazyness, inquisitiveness,
proving a point, creating a working class back-story, stupidiy, or
because benefits would stop paying if you didn't take the first job
you were suitable for.

 

Lessee...

Council tax £120
Gas £65
Elec £55
Insurances (buildings,contents,life) £100
Water £32
TV/Phone/BB £60
TV licence £10

Total £442

I don't think I have any other monthly bills. Obviously I have other
standard outgoings but they're pretty optional really. Arguably the
tv/phone/bb is optional as well. But we were talking living
comfortably.

 

That's where I was going wrong, I didn't read the instructions and put
my gross salary into the box then thought I was doing well, now I've
redone it based on monthly net salary and am 3% behind Champ.

 

Out in the real world, people take the jobs they can get, not the jobs
they're able to do. A classic route into politics used to be for shop
stewards to become Labour MPs: their training in what it takes to be a
good MP came through their trade unionism. If you only looked at their
job, you would not see their real ability.

 

OK, let's put in another way - if the total cost of state expenditure
were charged on a per capita basis, people at the bottom of the heap
wouldn't be able to afford to eat. How fair is that?

 

Obviously - just done it again and got 98%

 

Did anyone suggest that it would be so?

Anyway, I was just suggesting that the number of people who wouldn't
agree with 'ability to pay' being a fair system is probably much
higher than you seem to think.

 

You are correct of course, that is why there is an earnings break before
you start to pay tax.

 

**** 'em. The pikeys...

 

er, what about food, clothing, household repairs, petrol, etc etc?

 

But add to your nett salary any pension contribution you make.

 

Yes, that's what I did first time round too. Of course it's all a
nonsense for me anyway, as I'm earning Swiss Francs in Switzerland.
so any UK comarison is entirely meaningless.

But by the time Champ's done it properly he'll rise back up into the
98th or 99th percentile range, unless he really does earn a hell of a
lot less than I thought he did.

 

That subthread there <points> is doing a very nice job of demonstrating
that "well enough" is a rather subjective and flexible term. Anything
much over "starvation rations" is "well enough" to somebody, somewhere.

 

No.

"**** you, Jack, I'm all right" self-interest really isn't a difficult
concept to grasp.

 

What about other necessities, including all your household contents?
You should factor in replacements over a period of time as well. It's
a standard accounting method known as Fixed Asset depreciation.

Typically you might be looking at 10% per year (i.e. assuming an
average ten-year lifespan), so if your contents are worth 50k, then
there's another £416 a month to consider. 'Comfort' may be, in some
people's views, compatible with shorter replacement times on some
articles, but is not necessarily so.