The cost of an "acceptable" standard of living

[HeadingNorth]

I find this rather bizarre. According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, a single person needs £14,400 a year income in order to reach an acceptable standard of living.

 

My wife and I have a joint income of just less than that and we have a quite comfortable standard of living, thanks very much. It would be luxurious if we didn't bother running a car.

[chipX]

"This research shows what ordinary members of the public think is needed - not just to survive but to take part in society," said Julia Unwin, chief executive of the JRF.

 

I probably earn about £7000 a year before tax, and I really struggle. However i don't pay council tax, or rates - BUT i do pay my share of rent ( £200 ) , I don't drink or smoke.

If i had to pay the full rent, bills , council tax etc etc - then i think it would be impossible, without locking myself away in a dark room 24/7

[HeadingNorth]

"This research shows what ordinary members of the public think is needed - not just to survive but to take part in society,"

 

 

Ah, I missed that part; it's not a report about what people actually need to live comfortably, but about what they think they need.

 

That must say something fairly significant about the British public, given that more than half the globe survives on less than £1,440 a year; but I'm not sure what.

[rubydazzler]

I can't see that less that £20k would enable a single person to have an 'acceptable' standard of living, unless the standards were very frugal? Maybe they only asked OAPs?

 

Especially as it was what people themselves thought, not the Government's idea what's acceptable. Maybe it's after stoppages?

 

ETA: It apparently doesn't include running a vehicle?

[HeadingNorth]

I can't see that less that £20k would enable a single person to have an 'acceptable' standard of living

 

 

...and yet £14,000 enables a couple to have a comfortable, not merely acceptable, standard of living. I know this, because I'm a member of that couple.

[Mr_Squirrel]

Its all relative to each individual(s) circumstances.

 

14k per yer may be enough for a single person living in low cost housing (council flat maybe) in a 'low cost' (lousy) area, living on 'low cost' (lousy) food and that enjoys spending every spare moment sat in front of the TV set.

 

14k per year is nowhere near enough for a single person trying to mortgage a private flat in a 'reasonable' area, eat reasonably healthy food and live a 'reasonably' enjoyable lifestyle.

 

It certainly is nowhere near enough for a family of 4 to mortgage an 'average' semi in an 'average' area, eat 'average' food and live an 'average' lifestyle.... for that, you really need to double that figure at least.

[HeadingNorth]

Its all relative to each individual(s) circumstances.

 

14k per yer may be enough for a single person living in low cost housing (council flat maybe) in a 'low cost' (lousy) area, living on 'low cost' (lousy) food and that enjoys spending every spare moment sat in front of the TV set.

 

 

It's enough for a couple to run a car, eat out once or twice a week, live on good quality food and spend very little time as couch potatoes.

 

Again ... I know, because I'm in the couple that does it.

[Halibut]

I can't see that less that £20k would enable a single person to have an 'acceptable' standard of living, unless the standards were very frugal? Maybe they only asked OAPs?

 

Especially as it was what people themselves thought, not the Government's idea what's acceptable. Maybe it's after stoppages?

 

ETA: It apparently doesn't include running a vehicle?

 

I take home much less than that and consider my standard of living very acceptable thanks!

Mortgage, single, two kids, no car. I smoke and drink and get away for a bit of a break a couple of times a year.

[Mr_Squirrel]

It's enough for a couple to run a car, eat out once or twice a week, live on good quality food and spend very little time as couch potatoes.

 

Again ... I know, because I'm in the couple that does it.

 

Maybe, but you dont (and i dont expect you to) go into details of your outgoings.

 

For example, a couple who bought a house (say a 2 bed terrace) in 1995 would probably have paid in the region of 25-30k.... that same house now would cost a buyer in the region of 80-100k while wages have not increased to reflect the market rise. Therefore the cost of living for the new buyer is much higher than the 'old' buyer, just on mortgage fees alone.

 

As i said, its relative to each individual circumstances. A person(s) who 'set up' 15-20 years ago, is in a much better situation to 'accept' this figure to live on now than a person(s) just setting out.

[dukedum]

Maybe, but you dont (and i dont expect you to) go into details of your outgoings.

 

For example, a couple who bought a house (say a 2 bed terrace) in 1995 would probably have paid in the region of 25-30k.... that same house now would cost a buyer in the region of 80-100k while wages have not increased to reflect the market rise. Therefore the cost of living for the new buyer is much higher than the 'old' buyer, just on mortgage fees alone.

 

As i said, its relative to each individual circumstances. A person(s) who 'set up' 15-20 years ago, is in a much better situation to 'accept' this figure to live on now than a person(s) just setting out.

 

Absolutely. It is housing that makes the difference. There is a massive difference between having a house that is paid for and having a huge mortgage, or paying inflated rents.