If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Have you ever actually been to London?
You can't buy anything for 120K in London.
The REAL Labour budget will come after the election when we'lll be hit by massive new tax hikes to fill Labours £12 Billion black hole!
The point is that most people aren't on 35k a year, so therefore if those that do earn that and a lot more can't afford a one bed flat in ANY part of the London/South East, what hope is there for the rest. Oh, by the way, I didn't realise people in the South were on a different tax structure to those in the North.....
It doesn't actually sound like he has. More happy to cling to the stereotype that all Londoners have moved there especially to take up a position at some city firm as an investment banker. God forbid that people were actually born in London/South East, working in very average jobs - let however million of them move up North and scrap for jobs and accommodation that don't exist.
Hell, I used to travel about an hour and a half within London to work on a good day - no complaints. And of course there are never delays on the railway network, must be my mistake......
And without being patronising, the rest of the country has social outreach workers and teachers too. It might not be a fair choice, but you do choose to live in London.
i see what you're saying about not being able to afford to buy, but i don't see how you've been screwed. two weeks ago you had to pay stamp duty on everything in the south east. and now you have to pay stamp duty on everything in the south east.
what is does mean is that some people in some areas on a low wage (and no, 15, 18, 20,000 is NOT a low wage) have been given a little helping hand. why you are begruding them that, i don't know.
Maybe what he's saying is that he thinks that they should be?
Still, that would be a bit ridiculous, methinks. It is no fairer to say that the threshold should be higher in more expensive areas than it is to set it at a single value in all places.
I disagree though that 120000 is a lot for a house. It still is less than the 162000 pound average price for a UK house, which means that the "average" person buying a house gets hit by the duty, which is surely not meant to be the point of it all.
That said though, stamp duty is a small fraction of the overall cost, and, realistically, I can't see it being the deal-breaker in buying a house.
You get paid more than the practice nurse I work with.
As Kaffrin says:
Really? Jeez. I'm glad I live in the north.
As do I. Please read the comment in it's context. Clearly 120000 is not "cheap", but it's not a lot in the frame of houses, which does kinda mean that the threshold may still be too low. Unless the point of moving it up was just to pay lip service to the idea.
My northern end terrace is probably nudging on 120000 now.
I think this is the point really - £120,000 isn't cheap in monetary terms, but in house price terms, particularly from the Midlands downwards it is almost nominal.
And yeah, most people still couldn't afford to buy just because the stamp duty tax had been removed, BUT I can't see how you can begrudge people from these areas the right to complain that the 120K threshold wont make a bit of difference for THEM. I highly doubt anyone is saying 'well we have to suffer so those bloody northerners should too'.
they are complaining that because they choose to live in an expensive part of the country, that they are "penalised", when they are not. £120,000 for a first house IS a lot of money for most people in this country, from about Peterborough northwards.
In terms of all houses £120,000 isn't a huge amount of money, but most people wouldn't spend more thab £120,000 on a first house, bearing in mind that mean averages are always skewed by those who buy as a first house a £1million penthouse.
Patronising is exactly what you are doing. What do you suggest? That London has no teachers, nurses, outreach workers?
You really are being a patronising wanker here. Are you saying that poor people shouldn't live in areas where they grew up, where their families are, their friends are?
Then they choose not to. It's not a very fair choice, but people choose to live in London, they don't have to. Nobody forces them to.
Anyway, my point wasn't even about the cost of housing in London. It was simply that because London doesn't (for the first time ever) benefit from a tax break at the expense of everyone else, that it means London has been "shafted". Kaffrin put the point best.
i'm having to move away too. i can stay in leeds, if i like, but there's no way i can afford to live anywhere near where i grew up. such is life. the house prices in this areas have increase tenfold in the last 20 years, and as i'm not going to be earning £100k any time soon, i have to go where the cheap housing is, or i don't get a house.
it's what people do. i could stay here and complain about how i can't afford to live in the expensive parts of leeds, or i can move away where i CAN afford to live. it's a choice you make, and you'll find it's a choice most people have to make.
this north/south this is a bit ridiculous too. the house prices in london are double the leeds houses? probably true. but someone in london doing my job would be on twice my wage. maybe more. it's another choice. i have chosen to stay up here. no one's forcing me. so i don't think i can really complain about it.
Because its elitist patronising bollocks. Should there only be rich people in London? Aren't nurses, teachers, road sweepers, shop assistants etc allowed to live here anymore? Why put money ahead of people?
I doubt it. London weighting is fuck all. Its funny how you're all spouting off about London without ever actually having visited here. I usually try to know something about a subject before shooting my mouth off.
Blagsta - again agreed that people need to actually know something about a subject before spouting mis/ill informed nonsense.
twice your wages, or more? absolutely not - maybe a couple of grand more.
I was in a rush to get out of the office, and I believe that was the only badly phrased/reasoned comment made by myself throughout the whole of my arguments within this thread.
Otherwise, I stand by everything I've posted, and I believe a lot of people are speaking very much out of turn, with little or no knowledge of the matters under discussion.
Possibly - but they won't have lived there, which is a different matter.
it's funny how you made that assumption without actually knowing if, (a) i'd ever been to london (i have), (b) i know anyone living in london (i know several) or (c) i know anyone doing a very similar job to me in london (i also do). and i assure you, he is earning twice what i do for the same role in a different company.
i also know several people temping in london and being paid around £9 - 10 p/h. and several people temping in leeds, and pulling in about £5 p/h
i have not just randomly been pulling figures and arguments out of my ass.
There are (almost) always ways for people to improve their prospects and income - it's just up to them to go for it.
In my experience, and the others I know, for a position with a fixed salary, the difference is usually, as mentioned before, around 10-15%, 20% tops.
Without meaning to cause offence, I would suggest that you could be being paid less than you're worth. I've NEVER before, in my experience, come across somebody earning double down here compared to Leeds! I can't see how this could be unless the person up North were being screwed royally.
To be honest, I'd have to agree - On the whole, London wages are not double Leeds' wages. There may be certain exceptions, as Kaffrin has spoken about, but I can assure you, being from London originally and knowing a good few people in Leeds, as well as lots of other Northern cities that there is not the huge gulf of divide in wages that people are suggesting.
Not to mention the fact that even in the same city, the wage structures of companies can be quite varied anyway.
This is unmitigated bollocks. Capitalism just doesn't work like that.
Going by some of the comments on here, I doubt it. You seem to think the streets are paved with gold. They're not, they're paved with dog shit for the most part.
Going by what you're posting on this thread, you haven't got a clue. When I was temping in Birmingham 3 years ago, I was getting about £6/hour. An equivalent job in London might get about £7.50/hour. This in no way makes up for the difference in the cost of living. My rent is twice what it was in Brum, travel expenses are about 3 times the amount, food is more expensive, council tax is more etc. London is not some kind of rich man's paradise y'know. :rolleyes: