People on the internet talking about their huge salaries

andekwarhola

Pádraig Flynn joke.

DellyBelly

Arghus wrote: »

Well, that's your view. Personally I think 120k is a very, very high threshold for the starting pointing for deeming someone a high earner. That's three times the average annual salary! I'd love to know what percentage of people earn more than 120k a year.

I'd say it woukd be around 15% of the population. For a couple in Dublin 120k wouldn't be great though. You could live but not very well..

Dave1711

DellyBelly wrote: »

I'd say it woukd be around 15% of the population. For a couple in Dublin 120k wouldn't be great though. You could live but not very well..

I'd be pretty surprised if 15% of working people were on over 120k a year. But cant say im that knowledgeable on other industries outside the one i work in (pharma)i guess region has big impact too as you say salaries are going to be higher in Dublin.

Arghus

DellyBelly wrote: »

I'd say it woukd be around 15% of the population. For a couple in Dublin 120k wouldn't be great though. You could live but not very well..

According to the survey I linked to, 14% of households earn more than 100k - so the percentage of those earning 120k is surely smaller than that again. We could be talking about the top earning 12-10% here. People can't live well on that?

I think you may need to define "not very well."

JupiterKid

People on the internet giving out about people on the internet claiming to earn huge salaries....

Can I not enjoy my unfeasibly huge salary in peace? Is that too much to ask?? :D:pac:

Geuze

Arghus wrote: »

Well, that's your view. Personally I think 120k is a very, very high threshold for the starting pointing for deeming someone a high earner. That's three times the average annual salary! I'd love to know what percentage of people earn more than 120k a year.

Mean annual earnings are 49k for full-time workers in 2019.

(Mean, not median)

Geuze

Arghus wrote: »

Well, that's your view. Personally I think 120k is a very, very high threshold for the starting pointing for deeming someone a high earner. That's three times the average annual salary! I'd love to know what percentage of people earn more than 120k a year.

In terms of household incomes, the threshold for the top 10% is 1826 per week disposable income.

That is 95k disposable income pa to be in the top 10%, per household.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-silc/surveyonincomeandlivingconditionssilc2019/income/

The average disposable income for the top 10% households is 2,642 pw, or 138k pa.

Arghus

Geuze wrote: »

Mean annual earnings are 49k for full-time workers in 2019.

(Mean, not median)

According to this report, from Sep 2020

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ireland-s-top-earners-do-not-see-themselves-as-rich-study-finds-1.4361897

The mean or average gross personal earning rate in Ireland is just over €36,000,

dotsman

A person earning 120K per annum would put you in the top 1-2 percent of earners. I think I remember reading a few years back that the threshold for top 5% was in the 80's.

120K per household would only be "above average" for Dublin (and maybe Cork city etc), but high for the rest of the country.

For me, anyone earning over 75K is a "high earner". A household > 150K would be a high income household (and very high for anyone living in the countryside)

Geuze

Arghus wrote: »

According to this report, from Sep 2020

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ireland-s-top-earners-do-not-see-themselves-as-rich-study-finds-1.4361897

My post referred to full-time workers.

The mean earnings of FT workers is 49k.


Your post referred to all workers.

The mean earnings of all workers is 40,283.

All info here:


https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2019/

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

It’s all relative, really, but I wouldn’t consider anyone on less than €120k a high earner.

It so depends on your wealth (which is really what defines who is rich or not - not income. Remember trump only earned $700 that year). But if you are paying a mortgage out of that 120k in Dublin and have kids it would be comfortable but not very comfortable.

Arghus

Arghus wrote: »

Well, that's your view. Personally I think 120k is a very, very high threshold for the starting pointing for deeming someone a high earner. That's three times the average annual salary! I'd love to know what percentage of people earn more than 120k a year.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0620/1056481-cso-geographical-incomes/

According to this only 14% of Irish households had incomes above 100k and that's households - not individuals - so the percentage of those individuals earning 100k must be less again and those earning over 120k must be even less again, again.

I don't think you have to be in the top 10 - 12% of earners to be classed as high, I would argue that even the top 30% of individual earners should be classed as high. Maybe that is being generous in some people's eyes, but, surely, equally, only classing those within the top 10-12% is a bit too stringent

Why wouldn’t a high salary rather be 3 times the average? The highest earner is probably 100 times the average. Or even far more.

It’s hard to get the income stats (partially because the rich can hide income) but I do know that a woman in Britain earned about £100M a few years back. The average wage there is £30k. Three times that is £90k.

So you are talking about the difference between 0.03% and 0.09% of the highest income. Put like that you could argue that both are poor.

Saying the top 30% are high incomes ignore this kind of distribution, which is a power distribution. The top 30% of tallest people are tall because that’s a normal distribution. They are within a few inches of the tallest person.

The top 30% of App Store earners earn either $0 or a tiny amount, the top ten earn hundreds of millions.

The top 30% of islands by area are a few acres, Greenland is 836,000 sq miles.

I earn nowhere near 120k btw.

EmmetSpiceland

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It so depends on your wealth (which is really what defines who is rich or not - not income. Remember trump only earned $700 that year). But if you are paying a mortgage out of that 120k in Dublin and have kids it would be comfortable but not very comfortable.

That may be the case alright but, just talking earnings, 120k would be where the “high earner” bracket starts, for me.

Anything below that is just “middle management” money.

DellyBelly

DellyBelly wrote: »

I'd say it woukd be around 15% of the population. For a couple in Dublin 120k wouldn't be great though. You could live but not very well..

We're in dublin on a whack less than that as a couple

We live very nicely on it tbh

No kids is i think the key

I recommend it tbh but ppl get snippy

If you are earning €120k+ a year as an individual you are in the top 5% of all wage earners in Ireland, probably even top 2-3%, even if it doesn't feel like that.

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

That may be the case alright but, just talking earnings, 120k would be where the “high earner” bracket starts, for me.

Anything below that is just “middle management” money.

Well let me put it this way. If I were to inherit a million euro house and take a 20k wage cut I would feel and be richer. My discretionary income would stay the same after taxes and mortgage (which is zero of course if I inherit a house) since I spend ~10k post income tax on my mortgage.

Then I’d also have a 1M euro house. In the income stats I would be below average. But I would be wealthier.

GreeBo

I would say anything about the 75th percentile is high.
Being just above the average (or even median) cannot be "high"!

EmmetSpiceland

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well let me put it this way. If I were to inherit a million euro house and take a 20k wage cut I would feel and be richer. My discretionary income would stay the same after taxes and mortgage (which is zero of course if I inherit a house) since I spend ~10k post income tax on my mortgage.

Then I’d also have a 1M euro house. In the income stats I would be below average. But I would be wealthier.

Yeah, that’s fine but we’re not talking wealth or legacy wealth, we’re just talking “earnings” from work. Aren’t we?

Anyway, it’s not worth making big money these days. You get taxed out of it.

beauf

GreeBo wrote: »

I would say anything about the 75th percentile is high.
Being just above the average (or even median) cannot be "high"!

It would have to be something like this.

monkeysnapper

My neighbors always talking about money and how he got to the massive heights he's achieved.... bla bla bla

I'm on tiny money compared to him .... the fecker still lives in exact same house as me and with his dodgy knees and ankles doesn't cycle on his 4500 euro bike anymore.

I'm out cycling my 1000 euro bike every week and running

As another poster said ..... your health is your wealth. ....

GreeBo

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Yeah, that’s fine but we’re not talking wealth or legacy wealth, we’re just talking “earnings” from work. Aren’t we?

Anyway, it’s not worth making big money these days. You get taxed out of it.

So no point earning over 44K?

I think the studies showing satisfaction with income rises to a certain point then tails off are understandable and make sense

That point is going to be different for everyone depending on costs, priorities, wealth besides, etc

If the housing need is met and you're happy there, you dont have to be thinking twice about going for whatever your poison in (pint or meal out) and the hols you like are within your reach every year or year-odd and youve enough put away that a missed paycheck or two doesnt scare you, then the extra hour at work to earn an extra hours pay doesn't seem worth it as much

owning yr property, knowing you can fall back on qualifications/experience/connections, having a very stable job or having stocks/pension/owning the business are all secondary safety nets that would seriously cushion any attitude towards "income" alone, also

Jim Root

You are doing well if you get to 6 figures and fair play to anyone who does through their own hard graft.

Wildly Boaring

Along with the US study that found people's happiness reached a level at about 70 to 75k and didn't rise thereafter there is a second I saw last week...

People on different salaries were asked what salary they needed to be "happy".

Those on 30k responded with 50k
Those on 100k responded with 250k!!!

This may explain some of the differing views on "high" income.

BrianD3

Geuze wrote: »

Please note the following:

• that 375k case recently on AAM includes shares as payments, and that amount is not a typical case in the Money Makeoever
  
• Yes, there are plenty of cases doing well, e.g. 80k - 100k - 120k
  
• Note that there is a selection bias here, and many on AAM are aware of it

Was there any more discussion on the selection bias? Yes, the 375k is an unusual one for the Money Makeover forum and there are also some relatively average salaries. However, I bet if the salaries quoted in all posts were averaged, the figure would be way above the national average.

I'd speculate that the numerous posters quoting 6 figure salaries would work in multinationals rather than as solicitors and doctors etc. who I'd imagine would have a "I'm a professional and I'll pay a professional for advice" mentality rather than posting on the internet. Could be wrong of course.

If there are large numbers of people who

• Don't work in "the professions" (might have a background in accountancy however)
• Are not big risk takers/business owners
• Probably not genius material
• Earning well into 6 figures in their 40s

It begs the question of what the rest of us have been doing with our careers and where did we f*ck up. Another question would be whether there has been major wage inflation in multinationals in recent years and what implications that might have for the economy.

JimmyVik

Deleted User wrote: »

I think you sort of answered your own question there OP. I mean I wouldn't be in that 400K bracket either, but I suppose I do alright for myself. Thing is though I did grow up in more modest times shall we say, I learnt the the value of an 'oul punt at a very young age and I've never lost that mentality. Couldn't afford to back in those days, simple as that.

I've never gotten it out of my head "I'm a pay check away from sleeping in the park". Far from it of TBH, but that was the attitude our parents gave us to money. People who didn't grow up in hard times seem to have less of a knack for managing themselves in my experience. And for the life of me I can't fathom it, I mean if you earn £100 you spend £90, not £110. How fuppin' hard of a concept is that for a grown adult to wrap their head around?

I would agree with this.
We grew up without a bean.
I think we were the poorest family in our estate of poor families.

Taught me the value of money.
Now that I earn more than I ever dreamed I would, I am always aware that hard times, are very hard. So now I want to manage my money in a way that if a big crash did come, that even without working i could maintain the same standard of living. Plus im just burnt out so wouldnt even mind not working for a few years..



But I would look for advice on how to do that. Its a safety measure, rather than anything else. Always aware that it could turn at any minute. So just trying to get ready for it when it does.

JimmyVik

dotsman wrote: »

A person earning 120K per annum would put you in the top 1-2 percent of earners. I think I remember reading a few years back that the threshold for top 5% was in the 80's.

120K per household would only be "above average" for Dublin (and maybe Cork city etc), but high for the rest of the country.

For me, anyone earning over 75K is a "high earner". A household > 150K would be a high income household (and very high for anyone living in the countryside)

I heard somewhere that household income of €130K puts you in the top 2%.
Cant remember where i heard it though.
I think there is some cso chart that breaks them up by earnings.

GreeBo

JimmyVik wrote: »

I heard somewhere that household income of €130K puts you in the top 2%.
Cant remember where i heard it though.
I think there is some cso chart that breaks them up by earnings.

That would seem very low to me.

JimmyVik

GreeBo wrote: »

That would seem very low to me.

You are right.
€130k puts you about top 7%


https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-gpii/geographicalprofilesofincomeinireland2016/incomeinireland/

The Mighty Quinn

GreeBo wrote: »

That would seem very low to me.

I'd well believe it.

A household where both adults are working and earning an average €65K+ is far from a common thing.