Middle income one person family! Does that count?
Printable View
Middle income one person family! Does that count?
I'm in the 20th percentile. Just under the 2nd average. . .
30th! I included FTB in ours. We live pretty comfortably within our means I guess. Can't afford a house, but hey we have a roof :)
Thanks MD, that's interesting.
Wow, low income earners here! Living on DH's wage only so it has been tough for sure, but we do have a lot of money tied up in our house. Sorta makes me feel a little better and worse knowing where I am on the 2nd layer chart lol cos I didn't think we were that low end but now I feel kinda validated for feeling like we do really struggle sometimes!
Really really interesting, thanks for posting! :)
Sent from my iPhone more than likely while I should be doing something else!
Low side of middle. I thought we were bang in the middle, so I am surprised. We have an amazing life and I never feel like any of us are missing out.
It's important to realize this is just one measure of income distribution, and not necessarily used to determine wealth or wellbeing. The social policy people who use these figures are well aware of the sorts of pressure points that individuals experience, like diffrences in cost of living etc. I started the thread mostly because there has been lots of debate in the past about what exactly is a high income and what is middle income, which of course is always going to be relative to many other things.
DH has what I would have considered a high income but we are in the 30th . I think our tax rates are higher here, plus atm we are paying an extra 10% tax until his student loan is paid off - bring on May 2012! Or maybe we have too many kids lol
It's been really interesting reading everyone's replies, especially those who have commented how surprised they are at where they sit on the scale. Of course there are a whole heap of other things that feed into how many $$ you've got left over once all your main expenses are met. Childcare, transport and medical are all areas where I suspect we're paying a lot mroe than the "average" family in our demographic, that's probably where the pressure is in our budget.
interesting MD! We are currently on the 4th quintile but when this bubby arrives we will drop to smack on middle income. I always thought we were middle income earners, not towards the higher end. My net income is not great but due to generous salary sacrafice my gross income is quite good so when I say how much i earn it doesnt sound like much but in reality the money in my hand is equivalent to about an extra $17000 on my net income without salary sacrafice ITMS
Mmm we are between the 4th and 5th with my only working p/t. If I went f/t it would be on the 5th but we don't feel like we are. We are very comfortable, have recently bought an investment property, could live off DH's income without me working but I wouldn't say we are high income earners or anywhere near wealthy?? We drive "middle class" cars but don't have a huge amount of debt I guess so that makes a difference I think. I am a bit surprised and would have thought we would be more like on the high end of middle class, however really whatever you call it, it really is all relative to your personal situation I guess and we know we are really lucky and have worked pretty hard to get to where we are now.
DH told me recently (don't know where he heard it or figured it out) that his income puts him in the top 15% of wage earners. However, to be in the top 8% he'd have to earn another $100 000 a year, and well over that again to be in the top 5%. In other words, there's a big difference at the top end of the scale! We are comfortable, more than comfortable, but don't have money to throw around - his income is boosted by salary sacrifice too. We don't earn enough to put us over the 'high income thresholds' that the government uses as cut offs for rebates and discounts e.g CCB etc (about $120 000 I think).
I also know people who spend $50-100 a week on soft drinks, chips, chocolate, lollies etc and $80-150 on alcohol and ciggies. We spend that amount or less in a year if we're lucky! But we'd average $50-100 a week on holidays and meals out/takeaways (one nice meal a month and a couple of strictly budgeted holidays). It's all about choices, budgeting and preferences.
:o Ok so maybe we wouldn't be in the 5th with me working full time but still sitting somewhere in between like we are now!! :rofl::
However, to be in the top 8% he'd have to earn another $100 000 a year, and well over that again to be in the top 5%.
We are a bit like you too with choices in that we don't smoke (anymore!) or buy hardly any junk food, but we do have takeaway and nice meals out, holidays etc. All relative I guess and you choose where you will spend your $$ based on what is important to you.
We're middle class, that's calculated without FTP and my small income. We have no debt except our mortgage in which we pay more per month into. We're also comfortable and feel we live within our means!
Reading that formula gave me a headache. But I don't need a fancy formula to know I'm in the red. Seriously, I think we have slipped into poverty. The crazy thing is we own nice things from better days gone by. I look all put together and drive a nice car but am struggling to hold onto it. :(
That was a great forumula to see how work it out.
i can't work out that formula, but think i know where i would be classed anyhoo.
Just bumping this thread as it may be of interest with the current issue around PHI rebates/Medicary levy increases.
It's interesting how they calculate disposable income in that formula. Or that a child is not considered unless they live with you, even if you provide for the child/ren.
I'm sure this is only one measure that is used out of a number of things that create an much more detailed picture. I think non-residing children aren't included because this is a measure that is used across populations, and so you'd only want to count each child once (in the household where they live) otherwise it would skew the population figures.
FWIW it probably doesn't address a lot of things, like spouses that work away some of the time, or children that technically still live with you but are actually away at university, or a family member who is in hospital or residential care for extended periods. But as a broad measure, still interesting, I think.
It is interesting. And a little scary, because it apparently puts me and DP in a bracket I didn't think we were in.
We live in a rented townhouse in Brunswick. We own one car - a 2006 corolla. I own an investment property in Perth but also a sizeable mortgage to go with it. We have debt. I have 4 children that I variously support even though none of them live with me.
I would have thought I was comfortably middle class at best. But no, we're apparently rolling in it with the Murdochs and the Rineharts, except I can't see the 'it' we're rolling in.
Who knew?
Same here... It's definately flawed. But I think where you live has a lot to do with how much 'it' you have to roll in. It really should take into account how much it costs you to keep a roof over your head.:
I work in the city and DP in Richmond, and he doesn't drive, so for now Brunswick is the most convenient place for us to be. Though I'm trying to convince him that for what we pay, something in the Eastern Suburbs close to a train would be a better idea. ;)
I agree that you tend to live to your means. I was earning half what I earn just 4 years ago, so I lived on that, but I always paid my bills late, and never had anything spare for emergencies. Now I have a little bit of a buffer, and for once, I'm earning more than I have to pay out in bills. So that's the 'it' for me, I guess.
But having said that, I'm no Gina Rinehart, so to say I'm in the 90th percentile just blows me away.
Sushee, that's not what this implies at all. If you think of a bell curve, there's a long tail of distribution at the top and bottom of the curve, so if you broke the top and bottom deciles down into incremental percentiles (eg 90th, 91st, 92nd) the average income figures for each of those would get further and further apart, pretty steeply. That's probably why they don't publish those :lol::
I would have thought I was comfortably middle class at best. But no, we're apparently rolling in it with the Murdochs and the Rineharts, except I can't see the 'it' we're rolling in.
And, secondly, this is a measure of what's happening over a large population. There would be people in similar circumstances (supporting children not in their household, to a significant proportion of their income) right across all the brackets for whom this measure wouldn't translate very directly as an indication of their ability to build wealth. Or people in other circumstances. Like us, really, we have much higher non-discretionary expenses (medical and childcare) that are not typical of most families at our incomre or age and stage of the lifecycle.
But given that the government tries to think of the ways they can help the broadest number of families without creating further inequalities, this model does give us a glimpse of the lens they look through to try to work this out. And I think it's good to understand how these figures are calculated because it does give an idea of what sort of income people really are earning out there past our own front doorsteps.
ETA - let me just add from a personal viewpoint, I think the whole area of child support payments is very problematic, and creates all sorts of flow-on inequalities in Australia. The system intends to make things fair and equitable but really hasn't achieved this, not by a long shot.
Low income here. Just over the 20% percentile. A bit scary to think about really.