Families need £36,800 to live acceptably.....

[jaybee]

Outskirts of London here and our combined income is under 36k with kids. We "get by" and have to limit luxuries. We cannot get on the property ladder/have holidays/have nice cars, but we do have a life of which I am perfectly happy with in terms of what we provide for our kids. I mean to say, they hardly go without and do various activities.

To be "comfortable", I would describe similar to the above really. But then, we've kind of excepted we have peaked in terms of earnings and it won't ever get better.

To have a standard of living (where I live) where you consistently have significant amounts of disposable income to be able to have modern cars, a holiday a year, a nice 4 bed house etc, I would say you need to have a combined of more like 60k a year.

 

[Djwayne]

I was privately educated, I can be as snobby as I like about state education, it's a crock of ****.

It's not so much a target as much as an 'at least' if I were to have kids. Of course, I won't be having kids, and chances are it what's going to split the mrs and I up, but if something did happen by accident and I couldn't convince her not to ruin my life then I would have course do what's best for the child and give it the best start in life.

Which most certainly means no state education.

The level of selfishness in that post is quite staggering although I must say your opposition to reproduction has come as a source of great relief to me and probably many others on this forum.

 

[jakspyder]

My school was fantastic with great teachers and great pupils. The atmosphere was fantastic and little things like fights happened once or twice a year at most. Sure there were a few bad teachers but once you got to the final 3-4 years you had all the best ones that motivated and taught amazingly well. I am very thankful for my education at that school.

A state school obviously.

 

[shoes]

The level of drivel you spout has almost legendary proportions. However making a sweeping statement like that is beyond idiotic. It's offensive.

Thousands of teachers, support staff and hard working pupils all dismissed because you, apparently, have deemed state education to be rubbish.

Probably for the best that you don't inflict your offspring on the world, privet education or not.

Oh and that's the polite version of my post. Best I could do, old chap.

It's not so much the state education itself which is the problem, it's the overcrowding and non-selective nature of it which is the problem. Either the bright kids are held back by the slow kids, or the slow kids are left behind as the lesson is taught to the brighter kids' standards. You cannot teach one class to cater for all levels.

Selective education is where it's at IMO and as far as I know there are no state schools which are selective?

 

[krooton]

Just to clarify.

I get £0 Working Tax Credits.

I get about £400 Child Tax Credits.

That's based on 2 kids (age 7 and 6), it'll change soon as my 3rd has just been born, so I don't know if that figure will change.

Child Benefit is a fixed amount anyway that everyone with kids gets.

I live in Yorkshire so cost of living isn't as high as down south.

Also my £22k wage listed there is gross. I get about £19k or so net. So my Yearly net income is probably around £25k or so.

You already have 2 kids, and get support to pay for them, and then you have a third?

Then you get other people who want to raise kids without any state support waiting until they earn enough just to have one.

This country really confuses me sometimes.

 

[shoes]

The level of selfishness in that post is quite staggering although I must say your opposition to reproduction has come as a source of great relief to me and probably many others on this forum.

Oh yeah, I'll happily admit I'm selfish (although not selfish enough to have children that I don't want, or to have kids when I clearly do not earn enough money to support them without help from the state) and that is as good a reason as any not to have kids.

 

[Firestar_3x]

It does make me laugh how shoes was privately educated, yet the best joint wage he and his partner can muster up is 45k a year.

 

[Martini1991]

Well my "family" is over 20k short of that

 

[LordSplodge]

You already have 2 kids, and get support to pay for them, and then you have a third?

The you get other people who want to raise kids without any state support waiting until they earn enough just to have one.

This country really confuses me sometimes.

He works. The state should assist people who work. What's wrong with that? Would you rather his kids were forced into poverty? Or is having kids only a right of the super rich now?

Has that what things have come down to? A society so shallow, so materialistic that it is willing to yank support from hard working families?

 

[The Halk]

It does make me laugh how shoes was privately educated, yet the best joint wage he and his partner can muster up is 45k a year.

Hmm. I earn more than him and his partner combined. I went to (probably) a better private school. I'm better looking, I'm wittier. I dress better and I'm better endowed. I'm also considerably more modest, and in no way conceited.

How's that superiority complex going Shoes?

 

[LordSplodge]

Selective education is where it's at IMO and as far as I know there are no state schools which are selective?

Yes and private education selects on the cost of entry. Both state and private schools must meet the standards of education set down by Government.

Having quite a bit of experience of state education I can tell you that bright kids aren't left to their own devices and the less gifted kids aren't left to rot.

Also you judge people based purely on intelligence that in itself shows how narrow minded your viewpoint is.

 

[Greebo]

It's not so much the state education itself which is the problem, it's the overcrowding and non-selective nature of it which is the problem. Either the bright kids are held back by the slow kids, or the slow kids are left behind as the lesson is taught to the brighter kids' standards. You cannot teach one class to cater for all levels.

Selective education is where it's at IMO and as far as I know there are no state schools which are selective?

I do tend to a agree somewhat with your point of view.

I know there are good state schools but I went to my local private school and my brother went to the comprehensive.

Were the teachers better at my school? Maybe not?

The differences were that we had smaller classes, more facilites (we had computers, chemistry labs, enough books to go around, playing fields, squash courts, indoor and outdoor tennis courts, gliding club, heated swimming pool, even a firing range and an M60 machine gun!) and we were split into A, B anc C streams from an early age.

So, private schools don't necessarily give you a better education (we had people leave with no qualifications) but better opportunities in life.

 

[RazrLite]

Maybe if they stopped banging kids out left, right & centre, they'd be able to life on less.

 

[dowie]

hmm I'm on a bit more than the socially acceptable figure and after paying for a mortgage on a flat in London I'm not sure I'd be too comfortable supporting a partner and child.

Then again socially acceptable is a bit vague... someone on a much lower income might well have subsidised or even free housing. I'm sure people can survive on much less but will no doubt involve using the bus a lot and the kids wearing second hand clothes etc.. (then again I had to wear second hand school uniform when I was at school). Given the prevalence of of satellite dishes and cigarette buts on UK council estates it seems that even on benefits people manage to still have some level of disposable income.

 

[HeX]

You already have 2 kids, and get support to pay for them, and then you have a third?

Then you get other people who want to raise kids without any state support waiting until they earn enough just to have one.

This country really confuses me sometimes.

I could support them without the Tax Credits, it just means the Mrs would have to go to work.

Personally I'd rather have my wife at home and my kids brought up by family than a stranger.

I'd also prefer to have kids while I'm younger, plus its much harder on the wife as she gets older (physically and with the chances of conceiving and the baby going full term etc).

There's plenty of people out there that 'wait until we have more money', and wait so long that by the time that they feel they have enough money their body is no longer up to the task, hence the numbers of mid 40's women who need IVF etc.

 

[krooton]

He works. The state should assist people who work. What's wrong with that? Would you rather his kids were forced into poverty? Or is having kids only a right of the super rich now?

Has that what things have come down to? A society so shallow, so materialistic that it is willing to yank support from hard working families?

I didn't say to take the support away, it's the mentality of already needing help to support your family, and then increasing your family's size.

Surely it's more responsible to not have more kids if you already cannot support the ones you have?

 

[Deleted member 77746]

I have never been on benifits. Always worked since day 1 of leaving school.

 

[shoes]

It does make me laugh how shoes was privately educated, yet the best joint wage he and his partner can muster up is 45k a year.

I'm not sure what it's like where you are, but at 26 I don't know anyone my age who is earning as much as me around here, except one bloke who had to move to london for work, he earns 15k more than me and has less disposable income.

Anyway, watch this space as I was head hunted earlier in the year for a new project starting at the beginning of august - significant increase in salary and a new bonus scheme, so if all goes to plan then I could be well on my way to my having kids income... but with no kids. Now that would be an epic win

 

[dowie]

Selective education is where it's at IMO and as far as I know there are no state schools which are selective?

erm not true - there are still grammar schools out there

Also you don't have to select at a school level to solve the problem of slow kids getting left behind and/or bright ids getting held back - its perfectly possible to stream kids within a comprehensive school - have a top/middle/bottom set for maths, english, science etc...

 

[Jez]

shoes, you live in london and do not know anybody earning better than 20's? Even my little brother who is just 23 and just out of uni earns with a 3 infront of his salary, you either have an underachieving friendship group, or are not in touch with what your peers are earning.