Primetime 24/11: Since when is 55,000 not a good wage?

avalon68

I was a bit shocked last night to hear that 55,000 is not considered a good wage to some people. Personally I would consider this person to be a high earner. If I earned that much I would consider myself rich! I'm interested to hear other peoples views on this. Have people gone money mad here?

newman10

I will take it no problem

The_Conductor

I'll take it- if you offer it to me (gladly......)

Riskymove

avalon68 wrote: »

I was a bit shocked last night to hear that 55,000 is not considered a good wage to some people.

did someone say that?

on other threads I think the point was that someone on 55K said they could not afford a cut, given their particular circumstances

muboop1

Depends on your field and qualifications.

Mates in my course are on a starting wage of up at high as 40k from graduation. If you start at 40k a year, surely you would think to end up significantly hight over the course of 40 years working no?

Granted education is this country is free, but if it wasn't or you weren't an irish citizen you would expect a decent return on your expensive college degrees(up to 80k for a basic 4 years). This requires a good salary.

If you work hard and are in the right business there is money to be made. I personally would hope to end up on significantly more then that when i retire. I would not call 55k a year rich. It's all dependant. If i had no mortgage, no kids and was providing for only myself then yeh.

If i had a few kids and a wife to support(assuming she wasnt working or whatever) then no,I would not be rich!

All relative!

gurramok

According to this chart 80% of the workforce earn under 50k. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63041551&postcount=26

Now for 55k, that number grows a bit. So yeh, the person who says 55k is not a good wage is a liar.

SkepticOne

it is a good wage by Irish standards, however if you have had a cosseted existence you may not realise that there are others who would regard this as a good wage and that going on about not being able to live on 55,000 is counter-productive. I think there was a teacher last year who complained about not being able to live on 60,000.

Riskymove

gurramok wrote: »

So yeh, the person who says 55k is not a good wage is a liar.

I'll ask again


did anyone actually say that?

muboop1

gurramok wrote: »

According to this chart 80% of the workforce earn under 50k. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63041551&postcount=26

Now for 55k, that number grows a bit. So yeh, the person who says 55k is not a good wage is a liar.

Depends on your definition then i suppose...

Is a good wage the average wage?
I would call the average wage a "fair" wage.

A good wage would be above average no?

ei.sdraob

ssaye wrote: »

Its all relative, with deductions in the Public Sector at the moment somebody on 55k can be earning 650 per week. If you are now the sole income in your household with 3 kids on a 2000 euro mortgage you now have 600 a month to live. This is extreme but does happen more and more. Money was probably saved for a rainy day I imagine but it cant be much.

55k a year and no debts, you're laughing.

so we should feel sorry for someone who was reckless with finances and overindulged on debt

:rolleyes:

imstrongerthanu

avalon68 wrote: »

I was a bit shocked last night to hear that 55,000 is not considered a good wage to some people. Personally I would consider this person to be a high earner. If I earned that much I would consider myself rich! I'm interested to hear other peoples views on this. Have people gone money mad here?

I don't think half of you understand a simple statement.
He said,55,000 IS NOT A GOOD WAGE. He didn't say oh 55,000 won't get you anywhere because you have so and so debt to pay off because of this or that.
55,000 is a bloody huge wage cop on a small bit.

gurramok

Riskymove wrote: »

I'll ask again


did anyone actually say that?

The OP asked the question and you have your answer. It works out at 3,400 a month, http://www.hookhead.com/Tools/tax2009b.jsp.

Anyone who says it is not a good wage is lying.

muboop1

ei.sdraob wrote: »

so we should feel sorry for someone who was reckless with finances and overindulged on debt

:rolleyes:

No but you should respect that all things are relative to your situation!

zootroid

Riskymove wrote: »

did someone say that?

on other threads I think the point was that someone on 55K said they could not afford a cut, given their particular circumstances

But neither can the country afford the salaries that are paid in the public sector. Both the public sector wage bill and social welfare payments must come down.

So while a cut might be painful, it will be nothing compared to what will happen to the country if nothing is done.

ei.sdraob

muboop1 wrote: »

No but you should respect that all things are relative to your situation!

of course all things are relative

does that mean we have to accommodate people who are reckless?

MaceFace

muboop1 wrote: »

No but you should respect that all things are relative to your situation!

Indeed - how we all felt sorry for Padraic Flynn who only earned £100,000 but was had to run his three houses with housekeepers.

The_Honeybadger

My god that is shocking! Thats a fantastic wage by anybody's standard surely. It's not your employers fault that you are in debt or have kids and your partner is not working. Nobody owes anybody a living, I realise that certain professionals earn much more than this but for a regular PAYE worker with a normal degree that is an excellent wage. I didn't see primetime so I don't know who said that but I have a B.Comm and Masters and earn 32k, with little hope that will go up by much anytime soon. 55k would be dreamland for me. During the boom I did earn over 40k and had a lovely company car but I was made redundant from that job due to cutbacks, that felt like a very good wage though, perhaps my expectations are too low?

brianthebard

gurramok wrote: »

The OP asked the question and you have your answer. It works out at 3,400 a month, http://www.hookhead.com/Tools/tax2009b.jsp.

Anyone who says it is not a good wage is lying.

Before or after tax?

avalon68

Im not sure if it was before or after tax

omega man

55K is a good wage, certainly not 'rich' territory though. As previous posts have mentioned, its all relative. I earn 55k but with a stay at home wife and 2 kids it does not keep me in a luxury lifestyle if you know what i mean. In saying that we are doing fine (touching wood) and after selling 2 newish cars for older ones we actually have a fair bit of spare cash which makes a nice change. Although my job is fairly secure for now, we are still getting our finances in shape as the likes of interest rates will surely start to rise soon enough. I guess during the 'boom' the more you earned the bigger your debt, house and car etc. so someone earning 30K may well be in the same boat as someone on 80K.

brianthebard

avalon68 wrote: »

Im not sure if it was before or after tax

So it could conceivably be quite a poor wage, or at least not a rich or 'good' wage as you previously suggested?

The_Conductor

zootroid wrote: »

But neither can the country afford the salaries that are paid in the public sector. Both the public sector wage bill and social welfare payments must come down.

So while a cut might be painful, it will be nothing compared to what will happen to the country if nothing is done.

In conjunction with this- there *has* to be an audit of people's skills and qualifications in the public sector- it is criminal that there are thousands of highly skilled people being postboxed into menial chores- when they could play a much more meaningful and necessary role in trying to get the country back together. To put this into context- there are at least 18 economists in the Department of Finance doing admin work- while the Department feels its necessary to bring in external consultants, because it doesn't have the necessary internal expertise. This is both demoralising to those who are highly capable and qualified- but also scandalous that the taxpayer is paying several times over the odds, for a resource that is already present........

If this were replicated across all government departments- you can be certain the bill for external consultants could be drastically reduced- and very fulfilling roles given to those who are already present. Just because someone is employed in what might be considered a menial admin role- does not mean they cannot be more profitably employed elsewhere.

I am shocked that there has been no calls for a skills audit in the Public Sector.

tomcollins97

ssaye wrote: »

Its all relative, with deductions in the Public Sector at the moment somebody on 55k can be earning 650 per week. If you are now the sole income in your household with 3 kids on a 2000 euro mortgage you now have 600 a month to live. This is extreme but does happen more and more. Money was probably saved for a rainy day I imagine but it cant be much.

55k a year and no debts, you're laughing.

How would you have got a mortgage costing 2000 a month on a 55k salary?

Dickerty

ssaye wrote: »

Its all relative, with deductions in the Public Sector at the moment somebody on 55k can be earning 650 per week. If you are now the sole income in your household with 3 kids on a 2000 euro mortgage you now have 600 a month to live. This is extreme but does happen more and more. Money was probably saved for a rainy day I imagine but it cant be much.

IMO, if you took on a 2000 a month mortgage (even if at the time you had two incomes), you get what you deserve. At it's peak, our mortgage was never much above 1400, that was all we got approved for, and our combined earnings would have been more than 55k.

nesf

brianthebard wrote: »

Before or after tax?

That's after tax for someone on 60K a year.

brianthebard

nesf wrote: »

That's after tax for someone on 60K a year.

How do you know if the person on prime time was referring to their income before or after tax? I haven't seen the programme so don't know.

avalon68

brianthebard wrote: »

So it could conceivably be quite a poor wage, or at least not a rich or 'good' wage as you previously suggested?

No, I stand by my original statement that 55k (even if it is before tax) is still a very good wage. Hell, considering the average industrial wage is 32k (or thereabouts), I think its a great wage! I would gladly take it.

ei.sdraob

how about the teacher on PT, ~49-50K salary

saying "whats the point of having a job if you cant make ends meet"

a simple question, would he get more by working as private teacher? would he even have a job?? does he think he would be better of on the dole??

and "getting 900euro a fortnight"
is it me or the numbers dont add up here?

nesf

brianthebard wrote: »

How do you know if the person on prime time was referring to their income before or after tax? I haven't seen the programme so don't know.

PrimeTime did their usual graphics with how much someone earned etc. They identified her as earning 55K if that's what you mean. If a number is quoted like that it's almost certainly before tax income rather than take home pay. 55K sounds about right for a youngish physio too from what I've heard.

tomcollins97

ei.sdraob wrote: »

how about the teacher on PT, ~49-50K salary

saying "whats the point of having a job if you cant make ends meet"

a simple question, would he get more by working as private teacher? would he even have a job?? does he think he would be better of on the dole??

and "getting 900euro a fortnight"
is it me or the numbers dont add up here?

900 odd a fortnight. Mortgage of 900 a moth - so he has 900 to play with each month for all other expenses.

2 children in childcare so presumably a partner worker - therefore more spare cash a month. The figures do not add up at all.

Anyone notice the fancy sound system mounted on the wall behind him?

xabi

ei.sdraob wrote: »

how about the teacher on PT, ~49-50K salary

saying "whats the point of having a job if you cant make ends meet"

a simple question, would he get more by working as private teacher? would he even have a job?? does he think he would be better of on the dole??

and "getting 900euro a fortnight"
is it me or the numbers dont add up here?

Was thinking that myself, 1800 / month adds up to less than 30K id say. 900 / week more like

ei.sdraob

the guy on 34K

saying

"that will set me back 5 years"

well thats the thing, the country is set back more than 5 years now, we were living in a bubble

thats the harsh reality
they look like nice people but come on

ei.sdraob

was doing more thinking

across the Irish sea (and border up north) in UK

everyone including the public sector is literary 30% poorer due to money printing and currency devaluation


30% !! thats how much they are being screwed by


are there any strikes about it?

AARRRGH

brianthebard wrote: »

So it could conceivably be quite a poor wage, or at least not a rich or 'good' wage as you previously suggested?

Is 55k a good wage? Yes.

Is it enough money for a man with a couple of kids and some debt? That's a different question.

MaceFace

ei.sdraob wrote: »

how about the teacher on PT, ~49-50K salary

saying "whats the point of having a job if you cant make ends meet"

a simple question, would he get more by working as private teacher? would he even have a job?? does he think he would be better of on the dole??

and "getting 900euro a fortnight"
is it me or the numbers dont add up here?

I didn't get those numbers either. Something fishy going on......

brianthebard

nesf wrote: »

PrimeTime did their usual graphics with how much someone earned etc. They identified her as earning 55K if that's what you mean.

Yes that's what I meant thank you. I agree 55k is nothing to sneeze at, but after tax it is substantially reduced and should not be considered living in the lap of luxury as some here are suggesting.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Is 55k a good wage? Yes.

Is it enough money for a man with a couple of kids and some debt? That's a different question.

It is indeed, one which most here seem unwilling to ask.

ei.sdraob

apparently in UK starting teacher salary is £21K thats €24K

the teacher guy on PT can be replaced by 2 teachers from UK

hmmm i bet unions wont like that

Riskymove

gurramok wrote: »

The OP asked the question and you have your answer. It works out at 3,400 a month, http://www.hookhead.com/Tools/tax2009b.jsp.

Anyone who says it is not a good wage is lying.

ah I see

so this thread is just a discussion about whether or not 55k is a good wage....but noone has actually said it isnt

......and the starting position is anyone disagreeing is a liar?...interesting

nesf

brianthebard wrote: »

Yes that's what I meant thank you. I agree 55k is nothing to sneeze at, but after tax it is substantially reduced and should not be considered living in the lap of luxury as some here are suggesting..

Honestly, I'd consider it a good salary and enough to raise a small family on comfortably even after the deductions. Not rich but the idea of it being in the same category as someone on under 30K which was suggested by Prime Time (not the girl herself!) is absurd.

Riskymove

nesf wrote: »

Honestly, I'd consider it a good salary and enough to raise a small family on comfortably even after the deductions. Not rich but the idea of it being in the same category as someone on under 30K which was suggested by Prime Time (not the girl herself!) is absurd.

I agree

but the problem with threads like this is that context is everything

we can pick any amount and speculate about what lifestyle you'd have but obviously variables like kids, mortgages, health etc will seriously skew things

55K is a comparitvely good wage, it has to be given wages generally....but its another story to talk about "rich" and "poor"

alastair

tomcollins97 wrote: »

900 odd a fortnight. Mortgage of 900 a moth - so he has 900 to play with each month for all other expenses.

2 children in childcare so presumably a partner worker - therefore more spare cash a month. The figures do not add up at all.

Anyone notice the fancy sound system mounted on the wall behind him?

The stereo wasn't anything fancy tbh - but the 900 into his hands a fortnight makes no sense unless he's already accounted for loan repayments, car payments, utilities, something else he chose not to mention. And given that he's in a two income household, the whole personal affordability of paycuts issue is fudged to high heaven. I won't be rushing to shed tears for his situation though.

AARRRGH

AARRRGH wrote: »

Is 55k a good wage? Yes.

Is it enough money for a man with a couple of kids and some debt? That's a different question.

It's more than enough if your not stupid and living beyond your means. Myself, wife and child get by on 22k, these people need to cop themselves on.

bbam

alastair wrote: »

The stereo wasn't anything fancy tbh - but the 900 into his hands a fortnight makes no sense unless he's already accounted for loan repayments, car payments, utilities, something else he chose not to mention. And given that he's in a two income household, the whole personal affordability of paycuts issue is fudged to high heaven. I won't be rushing to shed tears for his situation though.

Surely the fact he didn't mention what his partners income was ruined the whole point of having him on.. My SO works in the public sector and she agreed it looked like he was mis-representing his situation.

MysticalRain

brianthebard wrote: »

It is indeed, one which most here seem unwilling to ask.

Maybe that's because it's irrelevant. We're talking about people's level of pay, not people's ability to manage their own personal finances. Most people in this country have raised families on far less than 55K.

Vyse

AARRRGH wrote: »

Is 55k a good wage? Yes.

Is it enough money for a man with a couple of kids and some debt? That's a different question.

You get paid based on your qualifications/ experience not your personal circumstances.

ei.sdraob

Vyse wrote: »

You get paid based on your qualifications/ experience not your personal circumstances.

one word:

benchmarking


higher pay for no productivity gain

The_Conductor

Vyse wrote: »

You get paid based on your qualifications/ experience not your personal circumstances.

In the public sector?
Other than teachers and some other cossetted segments- no, you don't. Irrespective of your qualifications or experience- you come in at the bottom of the salary scale for a particular role- and very often, even if you have qualifications highly pertinent to the body/department/organisation assigned to- you may be given a menial role where you have precisely zero opportunity to make use of your expertise.

Its criminal.

RMDrive

smccarrick wrote: »

In conjunction with this- there *has* to be an audit of people's skills and qualifications in the public sector- it is criminal that there are thousands of highly skilled people being postboxed into menial chores- when they could play a much more meaningful and necessary role in trying to get the country back together. To put this into context- there are at least 18 economists in the Department of Finance doing admin work- while the Department feels its necessary to bring in external consultants, because it doesn't have the necessary internal expertise. This is both demoralising to those who are highly capable and qualified- but also scandalous that the taxpayer is paying several times over the odds, for a resource that is already present........

If this were replicated across all government departments- you can be certain the bill for external consultants could be drastically reduced- and very fulfilling roles given to those who are already present. Just because someone is employed in what might be considered a menial admin role- does not mean they cannot be more profitably employed elsewhere.

I am shocked that there has been no calls for a skills audit in the Public Sector.

It's a very good point. Wage cuts alone are not going to be enough to take us through the next 10-20 years. If there is expertise and experience available it should be used to the maximum.
It's a great idea.

thebiglad

nesf wrote: »

Honestly, I'd consider it a good salary and enough to raise a small family on comfortably even after the deductions. Not rich but the idea of it being in the same category as someone on under 30K which was suggested by Prime Time (not the girl herself!) is absurd.

Yes €55k is a decent wage but...

If you suddenly receive that today - have previously earned €20k then happy days.

If however you previously earned more then you have probably cut your cloth based on the higher salary - it is more difficult and many previously higher earners have lost their jobs or seen their salary reduced.

Please do not start with the well I earned €27k and reduced to €x cos that is not the point I am going to make.

Based on the earnings of €55k pa rightly or wrongly they have probably gotten a mortgage which is around €2k per month in repayments. Add to that a car loan (which a lot of us have) and then the utility bills and basically they are no better off than the rest of us and have a lot further to fall if they do lose that €55kpa job - there are even less of them than there are in the €25k - €30k bracket

If you do not have a mortgage (or a lower cost mortgage) then it is very good, if not then it is possible to struggle with an income of €55k as much as the next guy - it is all relative.

Doubtless many will shoot down this logic as they do not believe anyone should be entitled to spend money on a larger house or earn such salaries but the question was, is this a good salary.

Answer yes but as I came in with, one adjusts living to their salary and it goes no further once the mortgage is paid.

brianthebard

nesf wrote: »

Honestly, I'd consider it a good salary and enough to raise a small family on comfortably even after the deductions. Not rich but the idea of it being in the same category as someone on under 30K which was suggested by Prime Time (not the girl herself!) is absurd.

I agree that its a good salary, but will the person on under 30k (perhaps 29,500?) not be on a lower tax band? obviously the 55k person will take home more, but how much more?

ei.sdraob

thebiglad wrote: »

Yes €55k is a decent wage but...

If you suddenly receive that today - have previously earned €20k then happy days.

If however you previously earned more then you have probably cut your cloth based on the higher salary - it is more difficult and many previously higher earners have lost their jobs or seen their salary reduced.

Please do not start with the well I earned €27k and reduced to €x cos that is not the point I am going to make.

Based on the earnings of €55k pa rightly or wrongly they have probably gotten a mortgage which is around €2k per month in repayments. Add to that a car loan (which a lot of us have) and then the utility bills and basically they are no better off than the rest of us and have a lot further to fall if they do lose that €55kpa job - there are even less of them than there are in the €25k - €30k bracket

If you do not have a mortgage (or a lower cost mortgage) then it is very good, if not then it is possible to struggle with an income of €55k as much as the next guy - it is all relative.

Doubtless many will shoot down this logic as they do not believe anyone should be entitled to spend money on a larger house or earn such salaries but the question was, is this a good salary.

Answer yes but as I came in with, one adjusts living to their salary and it goes no further once the mortgage is paid.

so once again

we should feel sorry for someone

who got themselves into alot of debt?!


you know whats really perverse?
shes (and other PS buddies) want the whole country to keep getting into deeper debt for longer so her debt fueled lifestyle can be sustained

does anyone else see a problem with that?