“The gardener used to come twice a month, but then he increased his costs from £230 a year to £245 a year. We only have him come once every other month now.”
I find it hard to believe a household with a combined salary (No bonus included) of £345k can’t scrape together an extra 15 quid.
Get the feeling this was deleted because they realised it was utter bollocks, though that’s not much better as they allowed it through.
I know it’s not the point but a gardener isn’t doing shit for £230 a year. That must be a typo, that has to be monthly and if they have a big garden that could be weekly!
Do you understand that your logic doesn’t make any sense? First of all, half of their income goes into taxes. Second - they still need to spend money on bills, food, etc. So it will take them a lot more than 30 years to get to £10m. They won’t live as long.
You’re also confusing top earning workers with the rich.
My logic? Even if the income figure is gross and not nett, they are part of the top 0.5% earners in the UK. So… Logically… They can be considered rich by the 99.5% of the population who earn less. They are almost certainly millionaires. Their kids go to public school. They take 5 holidays a year FFS, how many people do you know who can afford that? If you don’t consider that being rich then you are either richer than that, being a troll or deluded.
I don’t know what planet someone is on to think that sort of money doesn’t put this family in “rich” territory.
Maybe it’s the differing interpretation of “rich”. Maybe it’s living in London and losing perspective because you’re surrounded by wealth and lose scale
They seem to be insisting on an alternative definition of “rich” that means you don’t have to work for a living. That definition is fine, but they insisted on using it without explanation and causing confusion and then being condescending about it so I just blocked them.
Look, here’s a thing. 40% of all land in England is owned just by around 200 families. And they are laughing their arses off when they hear that peasants earning £181k per annum are rich.
So? A lot of people dont have PAYE income, they still have income. What point are you trying to make? Are you trying to argue that £181k doesnt put you in the top 1%?
His point is the only really rich people are the fantastical ones in his mind and are cartoonishly rich instead of just real life rich cause it’s easier to draw a dividing line and come to an answer.
No way this snobby wannabe toff cunt has money, Succesful people dont spend their time trolling on lemmy lol Sounds more like a spoiled child, Only a fucking loser needs to get their dopamine from pissing others off.
I’m not sure there is actually a proper definition of ‘rich’ that would allow you to accurately classify a group of incomes into rich and not rich.
But if you were to think of it in terms of the ‘feeling’ I’d say I’d feel rich if I never had to choose a cheaper option for anything at all, ever, could eat out and check into a hotel for the night any time I liked, all whilst currently putting away a handsome investment of some kind - but still have more disposable income than I could possible waste between income periods with nothing but my own debauchery (barring expensive drug habits).
That’s what I call rich - basically never having to worry about your supply of money, thing is, some people can achieve this on much less than others due to their tastes and circumstances. I’d feel rich if I worked 9-5 and took home upwards of £300k for sure. Others might not though.
That’s all well and makes sense to me, but the person I was questioning stated that $350k+/year is not rich. All of those boxes you mentioned could be ticked way lower than that, and this is nearly 10x the median salary of the UK. That roughly means this family has the ability to spend 8x the median individual and still save/invest 2x their salary per year.
actually, while it doesn’t change the conclusion hardly, we have all forgotten that 395k wage is a combined income.
I mean these are still silly high wages… Having said that though, both the combined income, and that it’s very conceivable a good portion of that income is from capital gains, not work… they probably get more take home out of that 395k income than we’d expect too…
I have not forgotten. I mentioned it was the family’s ability to use that money, not the individual! You are right that it doesn’t change the conclusion though.
I think most people would see that as ultra rich or super rich. To most people “rich” means having significantly more money than them. So given that the median salary in the UK is £37k, most people would probably say someone on £80k is rich, even though its pretty easy to earn that much and still want for more.
Don’t mean to get into the argument here, but the way that people like him have spending money is to take loans out against their investments, so they go into debt and don’t pay taxes on that. The banks don’t care because if they need to cover the debt they can just sell some of the shares.
I find it hard to believe a household with a combined salary (No bonus included) of £345k can’t scrape together an extra 15 quid.
Get the feeling this was deleted because they realised it was utter bollocks, though that’s not much better as they allowed it through.
I know it’s not the point but a gardener isn’t doing shit for £230 a year. That must be a typo, that has to be monthly and if they have a big garden that could be weekly!
I’d happily pay £240 a year for my garden, I have probably spent more than that on plants since I bought the house 2 years ago.
That’s really not good wages for twice a month, is it?
depends, how much weed does he get for it?
deleted by creator
Lifestyle sacrifices are news for the rich. Luckily there aren’t enough to support this kind of journalism.
A household with £345k income is not rich, lol.
Wtf are you talking about? You must be a billionaire.
This family earns more than the value of my house in a year.
If they carry on earning this and work for 30 years they will have amassed a fortune of £10m.
It also puts the family in the top 0.5% of earners in the country.
I think that makes them fairly rich.
Do you understand that your logic doesn’t make any sense? First of all, half of their income goes into taxes. Second - they still need to spend money on bills, food, etc. So it will take them a lot more than 30 years to get to £10m. They won’t live as long.
You’re also confusing top earning workers with the rich.
Dude, just stop.
Removed by mod
My logic? Even if the income figure is gross and not nett, they are part of the top 0.5% earners in the UK. So… Logically… They can be considered rich by the 99.5% of the population who earn less. They are almost certainly millionaires. Their kids go to public school. They take 5 holidays a year FFS, how many people do you know who can afford that? If you don’t consider that being rich then you are either richer than that, being a troll or deluded.
A household with that income is very rich.
Jesus, toffs are so separated from reality it’s unbelievable.
No, it’s not.
It objectively is.
Nope, you’re wrong, look it up. Average income of the top 10% is like a third of that figure. https://equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk/
I don’t know what planet someone is on to think that sort of money doesn’t put this family in “rich” territory.
Maybe it’s the differing interpretation of “rich”. Maybe it’s living in London and losing perspective because you’re surrounded by wealth and lose scale
They seem to be insisting on an alternative definition of “rich” that means you don’t have to work for a living. That definition is fine, but they insisted on using it without explanation and causing confusion and then being condescending about it so I just blocked them.
Yes sorry, I hadn’t finished reading and saw that’s the path it took lol. What fun :)
That’s irrelevant.
£181k is all you need to be in the top 1% in the UK.
one day I might earn that much in a year.
Top 1% workers, not top rich.
Look, here’s a thing. 40% of all land in England is owned just by around 200 families. And they are laughing their arses off when they hear that peasants earning £181k per annum are rich.
Top 1% of income from all sources which includes your 200 mega rich families. 1% of 70m people is 700k people. Of course the top 0.1% are way richer.
No, these 200 families don’t have PAYE income at all. Man, you people are so ignorant… No wonder the rich play you like the fools.
So? A lot of people dont have PAYE income, they still have income. What point are you trying to make? Are you trying to argue that £181k doesnt put you in the top 1%?
His point is the only really rich people are the fantastical ones in his mind and are cartoonishly rich instead of just real life rich cause it’s easier to draw a dividing line and come to an answer.
People on PAYE are not rich.
If you’re earning that much money, you’ll pretty quickly end up in the 1% of net worth.
And these people earn around 10x the typical household income.
No, you won’t.
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/work-pay-and-benefits/pay-and-income/household-income/latest/
That’s many times what the typical household income is, and most people would certainly consider that rich.
But that’s not rich, lol.
Where the hell do you live that people regularly get more than that?
I would like your address and the times that you will not be in.
Y’all should know Aux isn’t an actual person by now
Some folks barley scraping by need to throw your ass to the ground and just beat the fuck out of you for saying such stupid shit.
I swear, every day rich folk are becoming increasingly more unbelievable.
No way this snobby wannabe toff cunt has money, Succesful people dont spend their time trolling on lemmy lol Sounds more like a spoiled child, Only a fucking loser needs to get their dopamine from pissing others off.
Ahaha, ok.
Depends who you ask
Anyone you ask.
Global indexes are scraping the ground against those numbers, I can tell you for sure they’re 1%.
1% of what? Lol. Please don’t confuse high earning workers with the rich.
It’s one banana, Michael, how much could it cost? 10 dollars?
Wut?
By what metric? Where would you define rich?
I’m not sure there is actually a proper definition of ‘rich’ that would allow you to accurately classify a group of incomes into rich and not rich.
But if you were to think of it in terms of the ‘feeling’ I’d say I’d feel rich if I never had to choose a cheaper option for anything at all, ever, could eat out and check into a hotel for the night any time I liked, all whilst currently putting away a handsome investment of some kind - but still have more disposable income than I could possible waste between income periods with nothing but my own debauchery (barring expensive drug habits).
That’s what I call rich - basically never having to worry about your supply of money, thing is, some people can achieve this on much less than others due to their tastes and circumstances. I’d feel rich if I worked 9-5 and took home upwards of £300k for sure. Others might not though.
That’s all well and makes sense to me, but the person I was questioning stated that $350k+/year is not rich. All of those boxes you mentioned could be ticked way lower than that, and this is nearly 10x the median salary of the UK. That roughly means this family has the ability to spend 8x the median individual and still save/invest 2x their salary per year.
actually, while it doesn’t change the conclusion hardly, we have all forgotten that 395k wage is a combined income.
I mean these are still silly high wages… Having said that though, both the combined income, and that it’s very conceivable a good portion of that income is from capital gains, not work… they probably get more take home out of that 395k income than we’d expect too…
I have not forgotten. I mentioned it was the family’s ability to use that money, not the individual! You are right that it doesn’t change the conclusion though.
I think most people would see that as ultra rich or super rich. To most people “rich” means having significantly more money than them. So given that the median salary in the UK is £37k, most people would probably say someone on £80k is rich, even though its pretty easy to earn that much and still want for more.
The rich don’t work and don’t have income.
What does this mean? By this metric, the wealthiest person in the world is not considered rich. Elon Musk both works and has an income.
Just FYI, I’ve tagged this guy as “kinda a dumbass” in the app I use.
I wouldn’t spend too much effort arguing with them.
Yeah good shout. I gave up after I realized. Thanks!
Don’t mean to get into the argument here, but the way that people like him have spending money is to take loans out against their investments, so they go into debt and don’t pay taxes on that. The banks don’t care because if they need to cover the debt they can just sell some of the shares.
His wealth doesn’t come from his income. His salary doesn’t mean shit to him.
His investments and stocks do provide income (although not a salary). Regardless, my earlier statement still stands.
No, it doesn’t.
They’d have to delete the whole paper then.