Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Couple earning €105,000 p.a.

Options
1…457910…13

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,887 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    That's almost the average industrial wage in difference, that's huge!

    in relaity if the couple on 72k have a large mortgage and a couple of kids and the couple on 52k don't they are basically the same


  • Options
    #183
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    jimgoose wrote: »
    Bingo. This is precisely the point, you see. A dog with a mallet up his hole wouldn't attempt to argue that €105,000 p.a. is handsome money indeed coming into any house. It is not however, wealth, and people earning such money are not necessarily wealthy.

    Double bingo, as I said previously in this thread this entire argument is pointless because the OP seems to have wanted to ask one question but through poor choice of wording ended up inviting semantic battle.


  • Options
    #184
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    OSI wrote: »
    So 24% of the entire nation are wealthy?

    No, I went through the different brackets earlier. 150k+ = super-wealthy and so on.


  • Options
    #185
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    In your opinion. Others might perceive it (the standard of living you have described) as being wealthy.

    This is the problem, it's a perception based on a false idea of wealth. You can't make up a definition based on a perception. It doesn't matter how poor you are, you can not call someone else wealthy or say they're wealthier than you based on what you perceive to be the case. I know people on less than half my wages with brand new cars and no debt so should they consider themselves to be wealthy or me to be wealthy just because I earn more, even though my house is in negative equity of over 150k and my car is 10 years old?


  • Options
    #186
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    Riskymove wrote: »
    what are you on about?

    who said anything about "hard done by"?

    The issue is trying to decide a measure of what we consider "wealthy people" to be. Obviously people consider other people who earn a lot more than them "wealthier" but we are talking about looking at it from an overall view



    The problem with saying "wealthy" is anyone earning over €100,000 is that if fails to take into account other factors

    someone earning less, let's say €80k could be far "wealthier" if they have less costs

    wealth is more than your salary

    People are saying there's a problem, what is the problem?
    Here's the overall view: Some 76% of income earners earn less than 50k a year, therefore just 24% earn over 50k. So 105,000 consits of 2 people in the top bracket of earners.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    jimgoose wrote: »
    Bingo. This is precisely the point, you see. A dog with a mallet up his hole wouldn't attempt to argue that €105,000 p.a. is handsome money indeed coming into any house. It is not however, wealth, and people earning such money are not necessarily wealthy.

    They are wealthy, they have an abundance of money. How they spend their wealth is a different matter.


  • Options
    #188
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    They are wealthy, they have an abundance of money. How they spend their wealth is a different matter.
    An supposed "abundance" can only be calculated after you subtract debt.


  • Options
    #189
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,887 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    So 105,000 consists of 2 people in the top bracket of earners.

    not necessarily, although at least one of them is


  • Options
    #190
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 24,715 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    No, I went through the different brackets earlier. 150k+ = super-wealthy and so on.

    Please 150k = super wealthy :rolleyes:. 150 million in the bank and buying a Ferrari because its Wednesday is super wealthy, someone earning 150k before tax is on nothing more than a good salary and certainly aren't wealthy never mind super wealthy. You are also forgetting the huge tax burden which higher earners have who are paying 52% of a large portion of their salary over to the government.

    I will say it again just because someone earns more than you does not make them wealthy, its nonsensical to think it does. Some one on 100k earns more than someone on 30k the person on 100k should have more comfortable lifestyle and be able to afford a couple of luxuries that the person on 30k cant (that's comparing two single people on the relevant salaries) but they aren't wealthy and just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so, it just makes you look clueless.


  • Options
    #191
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    OSI wrote: »
    Meh, feck it. No point arguing the point, I'll just go back to enjoying my wealth and decadence. If anyone needs me I'll be sipping champers in the back of the Roller while Jeeves does laps of the coast road.

    30,000 is very little money to you, so what you describe there mighten't be far from the truth.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    Riskymove wrote: »
    in relaity if the couple on 72k have a large mortgage and a couple of kids and the couple on 52k don't they are basically the same

    That's how they spend their wealth, a different matter.


  • Options
    #193
    Packardb
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7 ✭Packardb


    No matter what the TV ad's are trying to sell you . . . . .

    If you have to work for a living, you're working class.


  • Options
    #194
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    30,000 is very little money to you, so what you describe there mighten't be far from the truth.
    Oh dear... Next time you look up the definition of wealth go and look up sarcasm while you're at it.


  • Options
    #195
    FloatingVoter
    Registered Users Posts: 6,133 ✭✭✭FloatingVoter


    Rich is going to sleep and waking up worth more than you were before you closed your eyes.
    That is earned by royalties, royalty and / or a shedload of hard work.
    Anyone who stands to lose a job if the alarm clock fails is not rich.


  • Options
    #196
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    smash wrote: »
    An supposed "abundance" can only be calculated after you subtract debt.

    Abundance = A great or plentiful amount.


  • Options
    #197
    NewCorkLad
    Registered Users Posts: 957 ✭✭✭NewCorkLad


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    They are wealthy, they have an abundance of money. How they spend their wealth is a different matter.


    Can you not grasp this basic concept, Income does not equal wealth, Income after expenses & debts equals wealth. This is the basic definition accepted by everyone else except you.


  • Options
    #198
    crannglas
    Registered Users Posts: 185 ✭✭crannglas


    FloatingVoter wrote: »
    Rich is going to sleep and waking up worth more than you were before you closed your eyes.
    That is earned by royalties, royalty and / or a shedload of hard work.
    Anyone who stands to lose a job if the alarm clock fails is not rich.
    Hear hear you are just the number. Aiming to change that for myself. And when I hire others, I will make sure that will change for them and their families. Now anyone going to nominate me for the dail?


  • Options
    #199
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 24,715 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    Abundance = A great or plentiful amount.

    Yes it does but 105k before tax between two people is not a great or plentiful amount, its not even in the same ball park. Its a pretty mediocre amount of money in reality.


  • Options
    #200
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    Crystal Zealous Bath wrote: »
    Please 150k = super wealthy :rolleyes:. 150 million in the bank and buying a Ferrari because its Wednesday is super wealthy, someone earning 150k before tax is on nothing more than a good salary and certainly aren't wealthy never mind super wealthy. You are also forgetting the huge tax burden which higher earners have who are paying 52% of a large portion of their salary over to the government.

    I will say it again just because someone earns more than you does not make them wealthy, its nonsensical to think it does. Some one on 100k earns more than someone on 30k the person on 100k should have more comfortable lifestyle and be able to afford a couple of luxuries that the person on 30k cant (that's comparing two single people on the relevant salaries) but they aren't wealthy and just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so, it just makes you look clueless.

    It is wealthy, just because you keep denying it doesn't make it so.
    I've asked already but no one answered, what would you describe the different brackets then. You think 150 million is supper wealthy, what is 100 million? 1 million? 100,000? 50,000? 30,000?
    I'm not comparing it to what I earn. 24% of people earn over 50k, just 24%. That's the only way we can get the objective view. I wonder what % of couples earn more than 100k, I wouldn't say it's very high.


  • Options
    #201
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    Packardb wrote: »
    No matter what the TV ad's are trying to sell you . . . . .

    If you have to work for a living, you're working class.

    Bull****.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    smash wrote: »
    Oh dear... Next time you look up the definition of wealth go and look up sarcasm while you're at it.

    Oh dear.... Obviously I got it, read my statement slowly and you'll see that.


  • Options
    #203
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    NewCorkLad wrote: »
    Can you not grasp this basic concept, Income does not equal wealth, Income after expenses & debts equals wealth. This is the basic definition accepted by everyone else except you.

    Wealth = The state of being rich; affluence.
    There's another definition I just searched on google, seems like google doesn't accept your definition either.
    Now I've asked before but what is the problem here? Do people really think the definition of wealth is important? Why all the arguing?


  • Options
    #204
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    Crystal Zealous Bath wrote: »
    Yes it does but 105k before tax between two people is not a great or plentiful amount, its not even in the same ball park. Its a pretty mediocre amount of money in reality.

    Only 24% of people earn more than 50k. 105k is a huge amount of money, most households wouldn't get next nor near that amount. Is there anywhere we can find out the % of couples earning 100k+?


  • Options
    #205
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    Abundance = A great or plentiful amount.

    If you owe someone 200k and someone hands you 100k then you don't have an abundance of cash. You have minus 100k.
    Laois6556 wrote: »
    Only 24% of people earn more than 50k. 105k is a huge amount of money, most households wouldn't get next nor near that amount. Is there anywhere we can find out the % of couples earning 100k+?

    The household earning 105k won't get near that amount either! If a couple earns 105k and then pay tax and expenses, they do not have an abundance of cash. And they certainly don't have 105k. Get it yet?


  • Options
    #206
    Valetta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    They are wealthy, they have an abundance of money. How they spend their wealth is a different matter.

    How do you know how much money they have without knowing their outgoings?


  • Options
    #207
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 24,715 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    Only 24% of people earn more than 50k. 105k is a huge amount of money, most households wouldn't get next nor near that amount. Is there anywhere we can find out the % of couples earning 100k+?

    Plenty of households would be pushing up and around 100k. A person on 60k and a person on 40k is not that rare. I know plenty of households on 100k gross or more and they are just normal households nothing special or wealthy about them.

    Also the percentage of people earning over a certain salary has nothing to do with earning a 100k being wealthy. Just because a lot of people earn less than 50k does not mean earning over 50k makes you wealthy it just makes you a bit more comfortable.


  • Options
    #208
    Macavity.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,745 ✭✭✭Macavity.


    Not wealthy at all.


  • Options
    #209
    imitation
    Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭imitation


    Whats the definition of wealthy ? For me its a comfortable lifestyle where its not just a case of having what you need but also what you want in some reason. I also think its a situation where having a job is optional (for a few years at least). To qualify for that, its not about earning x a year, but more a case of having hundreds of thousands saved.

    What i think you'll find is that while people who earn 100k-200k can have a mighty fine lifestyle, they are also often tied to their jobs and what they earn by mortgages, loans, assets, child minders (if there a couple) that must be maintained. At the end of the day pulling in 8 grand a month after tax is great, but if you want the lifestyle you'll still need a big loan that needs servicing. Add to that fact that many jobs at that level can be hard work and long hours, it doesnt seem anywhere the same as being as a Paris hilton type.


  • Options
    #210
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Crystal Zealous Bath wrote: »
    Plenty of households would be pushing up and around 100k. A person on 60k and a person on 40k is not that rare. I know plenty of households on 100k gross or more and they are just normal households nothing special or wealthy about them.

    Good for you. That doesn't change the fact that both the incomes you mentioned exceed the average wage in the state. Moreover your experience is just that, yours. Countless people in this state may know no one with a permanent job.
    Crystal Zealous Bath wrote: »
    Also the percentage of people earning over a certain salary has nothing to do with earning a 100k being wealthy. Just because a lot of people earn less than 50k does not mean earning over 50k makes you wealthy it just makes you a bit more comfortable.

    I'm going to use the word wealthy in the general, lose way you have. If what the majority of the population earns doesn't influence what is considered 'wealthy' what on earth does?

    As a general point, some people on this thread seem to want to have it both ways they are both arguing that we can't possibly know if a couple who earns 105k are 'wealthy' because we need more information yet they then proceed to argue that this couple are positively not 'wealthy' in the same information void. That is not consistent. 105k between two is like it or lump it, agree or disagree a high income in this country, it is substantially higher than the average wage.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    SaveOurLyric
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭SaveOurLyric


    Candie wrote: »
    An average salary of 52.5k each isn't wealthy, it's better than the industrial average but it can't be described as wealthy.

    Less than one in a hundred people in the world are wealthier than them though.


Advertisement