What do people class as a high salary

wallyMe

smash wrote: »

Irish people seem to have an attitude that if someone has something more than them, then they have too much. It makes me sick to be honest. Someone makes money = they earn too much and should be taxed. Someone has an SUV = They're an asshole, why can't they drive a micra. etc etc

Not really, I think its just politicians and people working in the public sector.

Ray Palmer

smash wrote: »

Someone has an SUV = They're an asshole, why can't they drive a micra. etc etc

In fairness I think they are a holes because they don't need them in the city not because they have the money to buy them.

smash

Ray Palmer wrote: »

In fairness I think they are a holes because they don't need them in the city not because they have the money to buy them.

Who cares. It in no way affects your life.

syklops

maguic24 wrote: »

You're a lot better off than most people! Try providing for 2 on the minimum wage and you can tell me what a struggle really is!

Oh I know I've done it.

Ray Palmer

smash wrote: »

Who cares. It in no way affects your life.

A person driving an SVU with bull bars as most do increases dangers to everybody on the road. Poorer visibility due to the height of these vehicles. So yes it does effect me

homerjay2005

techdiver wrote: »

This must mean that anyone that purchases a decent house in Dublin (not just SCD) must be on a high salary??

You can't get a decent 4 bed semi in a half decent area of Dublin for less than 350,000 - 400,000+!! Who is buying these places?

Myself and my wife can't afford those prices (unless we are willing to stupidly stretch ourselves like many did in the bubble years), even though I would be considered by some here to be on a "high salary"....

i happen to live in a standard 3 bed in one of these nice areas..blackrock. the house i am renting for €1400 would cost me €2600 a month in a mortage.

for the "shame" of having to tell greedy people i am "only renting", i save €1200 a month...

i know what means more to me to be honest.the sad thing is, keeping up with the Jones is too important for alot of people in Ireland and it appears, some posters here.

smash wrote: »

Irish people seem to have an attitude that if someone has something more than them, then they have too much. It makes me sick to be honest. Someone makes money = they earn too much and should be taxed. Someone has an SUV = They're an asshole, why can't they drive a micra. etc etc

hang on, hang on. people are entitled to spend money as they please and if they have it, so what.....BUT, there is an element of people in this country who borrowed to live and lived off fake money....ie money/wealth that wasnt based on actual cash but that of the banks. these people ruined the country and then other people kept up with them to keep face.

i know a family in this locality who wanted to send their child to private school of 11k a year, but had to take out an 89k loan to buy two new cars and furniture for their house. the maths doesnt add up.

techdiver

gurramok wrote: »

I said alot, not all. And 300k was the limit, if we put in 400k as you had originally stated, the list grows further to 187. First hit is a 4bed house asking 345k in Castleknock!

Plenty of desirable areas in the list within the city limits. You never stated your salary for yourself or your wife, it must be high to look at 400k houses!

No, you are missing my point. I was saying I can't afford those prices! What I consider a decent family home is what is comparable to what can be purchased in other parts of the country for half the price of what is being asked in Dublin!

BTW, combined gross salary of €90K. Maybe I'm over cautious, but I don't consider it a wise financial move for us to borrow €300,000+ on that salary. My calculation for prudence is 2.5 times the first salary + the second salary which would be €170,000. Those are sane levels of borrowing. (Have you seen some of the crap for sale at those price points??)

So I once again state if we are high paid, our prudent borrowing levels should be enough for a house that matches our so called "status"?? If not then we are not high paid which is my argument.

smash

homerjay2005 wrote: »

hang on, hang on. people are entitled to spend money as they please and if they have it, so what.....BUT, there is an element of people in this country who borrowed to live and lived off fake money....ie money/wealth that wasnt based on actual cash but that of the banks. these people ruined the country and then other people kept up with them to keep face.

i know a family in this locality who wanted to send their child to private school of 11k a year, but had to take out an 89k loan to buy two new cars and furniture for their house. the maths doesnt add up.

And this has nothing to do with my statement.

wallyMe

techdiver wrote: »

No, you are missing my point. I was saying I can't afford those prices! What I consider a decent family home is what is comparable to what can be purchased in other parts of the country for half the price of what is being asked in Dublin!

BTW, combined gross salary of €90K. Maybe I'm over cautious, but I don't consider it a wise financial move for us to borrow €300,000+ on that salary. My calculation for prudence is 2.5 times the first salary + the second salary which would be €170,000. Those are sane levels of borrowing. (Have you seen some of the crap for sale at those price points??)

So I once again state if we are high paid, our prudent borrowing levels should be enough for a house that matches our so called "status"?? If not then we are not high paid which is my argument.

Try and get a job in a cheaper area, 350,000 houses in Dublin are 90,000 in most other counties.
I don't know why people would bother buy houses in Dublin. Also not that hard to commute up and down from some other counties

homerjay2005

smash wrote: »

And this has nothing to do with my statement.

of course it does...not all those people you think others are jealous of, are high earners. they are just people who like to look like they are rich.

where i live, the place is full of SUV's, posh kids and what not, but theres a new house on the market pretty much every day as people can no longer afford them.

techdiver

wallyMe wrote: »

Try and get a job in a cheaper area, 350,000 houses in Dublin are 90,000 in most other counties.
I don't know why people would bother buy houses in Dublin

Unfortunately in my area of work I might get a job in Limerick/Athlone etc, but the problem arises when/if I loose that job, 95% of the jobs are in Dublin. I have learned over the year that any job in MNC area is pretty much temporary.

I would love nothing more than to re-locate to a "cheaper" area, but there is a high risk of doing so. I would rather rent in Dublin where the jobs are, than move jobs and buy a house with the specter of potentially loosing my job some day and having no choice but to move to Dublin again.

Ray Palmer

wallyMe wrote: »

Try and get a job in a cheaper area, 350,000 houses in Dublin are 90,000 in most other counties.
I don't know why people would bother buy houses in Dublin

Mainly because it is their home with friends and family. Then you have the whole aspect of their being work here.

90k house in the country how close is that to the shops and schools? Are your kids going to grow up with their sole friend being a donkey:D

gurramok

techdiver wrote: »

No, you are missing my point. I was saying I can't afford those prices! What I consider a decent family home is what is comparable to what can be purchased in other parts of the country for half the price of what is being asked in Dublin!

BTW, combined gross salary of €90K. Maybe I'm over cautious, but I don't consider it a wise financial move for us to borrow €300,000+ on that salary. My calculation for prudence is 2.5 times the first salary + the second salary which would be €170,000. Those are sane levels of borrowing. (Have you seen some of the crap for sale at those price points??)

So I once again state if we are high paid, our prudent borrowing levels should be enough for a house that matches our so called "status"?? If not then we are not high paid which is my argument.

Yes you are trying to be prudent in borrowing less. Thing is your combined salaries are quite good, and in order for ye to buy that more expensive house(350k) without borrowing more, ye simply have to save and wait. No other alternative available other than waiting for that 350k house to drop to 200k.

syklops

maguic24 wrote: »

You're a lot better off than most people! Try providing for 2 on the minimum wage and you can tell me what a struggle really is!

I've done it. I know what sort of struggle it is.

techdiver

gurramok wrote: »

Yes you are trying to be prudent in borrowing less. Thing is your combined salaries are quite good, and in order for ye to buy that more expensive house(350k) without borrowing more, ye simply have to save and wait. No other alternative available other than waiting for that 350k house to drop to 200k.

Still can't consolidate the fact that we are high paid (with savings and still saving) and still cannot afford a house.

There must be a three brackets for earnings so. (tongue in cheek )

Normal (in everybody's mind - "me")
High (anyone who earns "more than me")
Super High (people who earn more than me and can afford a house in Dublin)

I think this thread has demonstrated that there cannot be an arbitrary definition of "high earner". I can imagine many of the people advocating a third rate of tax on "high earners" are themselves "high earners" and just don't even know it!

Like a turkey with an identity crisis voting for Christmas.

A good article on the issue - http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/high-earner-ireland-755580-Jan2013/

homerjay2005

techdiver wrote: »

No, you are missing my point. I was saying I can't afford those prices! What I consider a decent family home is what is comparable to what can be purchased in other parts of the country for half the price of what is being asked in Dublin!

BTW, combined gross salary of €90K. Maybe I'm over cautious, but I don't consider it a wise financial move for us to borrow €300,000+ on that salary. My calculation for prudence is 2.5 times the first salary + the second salary which would be €170,000. Those are sane levels of borrowing. (Have you seen some of the crap for sale at those price points??)

So I once again state if we are high paid, our prudent borrowing levels should be enough for a house that matches our so called "status"?? If not then we are not high paid which is my argument.

to be honest, on those wages, you could easily afford 230k-250k mortgage....and thats not even pushing yourselves.

depending of course on your rates and length/terms, you could be comfortable in paying back about €1600 a month without it stretching you at all.

techdiver

homerjay2005 wrote: »

to be honest, on those wages, you could easily afford 230k-250k mortgage....and thats not even pushing yourselves.

depending of course on your rates and length/terms, you could be comfortable in paying back about €1600 a month without it stretching you at all.

If the recent past has thought us anything is that Irish people are all too willing to over borrow.

2.5 times the main salary + the second salary should be the limit. If everyone stuck to those limits, including the banks we wouldn't be in the mess we currently are and prices would reach a sustainable level.

Even at those prices (230-250K), i don't see anything near good value for what you are getting.

bhamsteve

techdiver wrote: »

Still can't consolidate the fact that we are high paid (with savings and still saving) and still cannot afford a house.

There must be a three brackets for earnings so. (tongue in cheek )

Normal (in everybody's mind - "me")
High (anyone who earns "more than me")
Super High (people who earn more than me and can afford a house in Dublin)

I think this thread has demonstrated that there cannot be an arbitrary definition of "high earner". I can imagine many of the people advocating a third rate of tax on "high earners" are themselves "high earners" and just don't even know it!

Like a turkey with an identity crisis voting for Christmas.

A good article on the issue - http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/high-earner-ireland-755580-Jan2013/

I'd say €90k gross for a family should be enough to give you a good quality of life, unless your expectations are unrealistic or your financial choices poor.

R0ot

100k before tax in my eyes is high

techdiver

bhamsteve wrote: »

I'd say €90k gross for a family should be enough to give you a good quality of life, unless your expectations are unrealistic or your financial choices poor.

Hope for the best... prepare for the worst!

Don't get me wrong, I know I have a decent quality of life and I appreciate it every single day. I come from a working class background, and grew up in a local authority house, so I have perspective and I know how lucky I am.

I just think the phrase high earner is a bit too much of a blunt instrument. It's all fine and well being a high earner when your purchasing power is eroded based on your geographical location.

Living in Dublin with high costs is completely different to living in the Midlands. Comparable earning in both locations does not equal comparable standard of living.

I think I am now coming across as some sort of moaner, which is not my intention. Just trying to argue a point.

NuckingFacker

We need a €800,000.00+ category for BOI Directors. They'd consider 125k poverty.

homerjay2005

techdiver wrote: »

If the recent past has thought us anything is that Irish people are all too willing to over borrow.

2.5 times the main salary + the second salary should be the limit. If everyone stuck to those limits, including the banks we wouldn't be in the mess we currently are and prices would reach a sustainable level.

Even at those prices (230-250K), i don't see anything near good value for what you are getting.

i totally agree with you by the way, i just think you are being over cautious. and i also full agree with your value issue, i believe the true market value of houses in Dublin is still about 40% over what they should be.

sadly however, with the property propaganda that exists in this country, they are unlikely to ever drop....the government, banks, NAMA, developers and the other biggoted c*nts wont allow it.

laoch na mona

60+ is pretty ****ing high 100+ is disgusting

bhamsteve

techdiver wrote: »

Hope for the best... prepare for the worst!

Don't get me wrong, I know I have a decent quality of life and I appreciate it every single day. I come from a working class background, and grew up in a local authority house, so I have perspective and I know how lucky I am.

I just think the phrase high earner is a bit too much of a blunt instrument. It's all fine and well being a high earner when your purchasing power is eroded based on your geographical location.

Living in Dublin with high costs is completely different to living in the Midlands. Comparable earning in both locations does not equal comparable standard of living.

I think I am now coming across as some sort of moaner, which is not my intention. Just trying to argue a point.

Based on wage alone you would be considered by many as a high earner (as in higher than average). That is not to say that you are wealthy. Very few people become wealthy as a wage slave, that requires inheritance, housing booms, lucky investments etc.

smash

laoch na mona wrote: »

60+ is pretty ****ing high 100+ is disgusting

Yea, and 2ltr cars are fcuking huge!!!!! :rolleyes:

Jesus Christ...

laoch na mona

smash wrote: »

Yea, and 2ltr cars are fcuking huge!!!!! :rolleyes:

Jesus Christ...

its more then most have isn't that what a high wage is

Ray Palmer

laoch na mona wrote: »

60+ is pretty ****ing high 100+ is disgusting

Disgusting?? What is the highest wage you think people should get?

Brain surgeon should get paid what?

MD of a company with 100+ staff?

As already been pointed out 60K is not massively higher than 40k after tax.

Roger_007

I think that we have the wrong idea about high salaries. Provided everyone pays their taxes the more people we have on high salaries the more tax they will pay and the less tax the rest of us will pay provided that these people work in the private sector. It is easy to forget that 80% of the direct tax is paid by the top 20% of earners. E.G. Suppose we had an extra 5000 people earning €1m or more, that would bring in €2.5 billion in direct tax and probably another €1 billion in indirect tax. As far as I'm concerned, the more people we have on high salaries, the better, i.e. the less tax I will have to pay.

bhamsteve

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Disgusting?? What is the highest wage you think people should get?

Brain surgeon should get paid what?

MD of a company with 100+ staff?

As already been pointed out 60K is not massively higher than 40k after tax.

I agree with him. I'd rather live in a more egalitarian world. It is not such an absurd concept, just a different set of beliefs.

Ray Palmer

bhamsteve wrote: »

I agree with him. I'd rather live in a more egalitarian world. It is not such an absurd concept, just a different set of beliefs.

That isn't an answer.
It has been proven that people don't take risks for no reward so innovation slows

bhamsteve

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That isn't an answer.
It has been proven that people don't take risks for no reward so innovation slows

What do you mean, that isn't an answer? We are not all motivated by wealth and material possessions.

Ray Palmer

bhamsteve wrote: »

What do you mean, that isn't an answer? We are not all motivated by wealth and material possessions.

The question about what you think others get paid has nothing to do with your desire for wealth or possessions. So informing me you want the system to make a more egalitarian world isn't an answer.

belcampprisoner

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/10023286/Facebooks-Sheryl-Sandberg-paid-26.2m-in-2012.html

Steven81

The more you earn the more pressure you have, do you want to climb the next step and earn maybe 10k more and be bringing home work and stress to the family, i know some managers who have to answer phones and e mails from 8am to 8pm mon to sunday and respond, others who get constant phone calls all evenings after leaving work, is that worth it, i dont think so.

As a reader said it depends on your expenses and for some people they only have intentions on going to the top.

homerjay2005

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Disgusting?? What is the highest wage you think people should get?

Brain surgeon should get paid what?

MD of a company with 100+ staff?

they should get the same as people who do the same job, in other countries around the world.

Steven81 wrote: »

The more you earn the more pressure you have,

absolute nonsense...the majority of people on top money, have people who take all the stress for them and get paid alot less than they do. modern managers should be called delegators. the more you earn, the less you do i find.

Fart

I think I need to get a new job. Take home of 17k working nearly 40 hours week and I'm 25 :eek:

I would consider 20k nice for me. Worthless degree .

BrokenArrows

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That is apparently less than the median and average

http://www.salaryexplorer.com/salary-survey.php?loc=81&loctype=1

It is pretty odd that an average wage amount would be considered high

The problem with the average is that the extreme earners mess up the figures. Someone earning millions pushes up the average as they represent the average salary of maybe 50 people.

crazygeryy

i would tend to look at it on a weekly basis.if your earning more than 1000 a week that to me is high.that's about 52 grand a Year.

helimachoptor

homerjay2005 wrote: »

they should get the same as people who do the same job, in other countries around the world.



absolute nonsense...the majority of people on top money, have people who take all the stress for them and get paid alot less than they do. modern managers should be called delegators. the more you earn, the less you do i find.

That's not realist Ed, a doctor on Fiji is not going to earn the same as a doctor in the US for example.

On your second point id agree to an extent but ultimately if the company doesn't perform and the shareholders/board are any use the MD is gone

ardmacha

Work for Germans and you can get 90k and a car
http://www.graduates.aldirecruitment.ie/

Grayson

I think when yiou can afford to support yourself, have your own place, a nice car (Not a porche or anything) and can afford a large holiday with a few long weekends away... and still have some money to put into savings, you are well off. Anything over that is a high salary.

I chose the above example because that is very comfortable. At that point you are quite well off and don't have to worry about money. Anything higher is unnecessary

homerjay2005

helimachoptor wrote: »

That's not realist Ed, a doctor on Fiji is not going to earn the same as a doctor in the US for example.

On your second point id agree to an extent but ultimately if the company doesn't perform and the shareholders/board are any use the MD is gone

thats fine, but a doctor in Ireland should earn the same as the EU average and this is not the case. likewise our politicians, MDs and public sector are all above what our EU counterparts are earning.

a doctor here will earn 4-6 times what doctors in Poland and Romania will earn and three times what the average rate is in Portugal for example. the same then applies for all other public services such as teachers and council workers.

People really have some strange opinions on what is a high salary, some people suggesting 25k is high :rolleyes:.

People are talking about "getting" by on x amount etc and someone would be "fine" on x amount. A high salary means you are not fine, it means you can afford a nice house and an above average car (if you want them). You can go blow money on luxurys and still be saving money at the end of the month etc. This is high not people who can manage.

I get more from my student funding than one or two people are claiming to earn from a full weeks work and I count what I get a pittance. I've friends in their mid 20's on salary's from mid to high 30's to nearly 70k, building houses, driving very nice cars, going on multiple holidays etc and none of them are in anyway rich by any means so when I say you need to be on over 100k to be on a high salary you can see where I'm coming from.

seven_eleven

Must be some serious earners on here, seeing the amount of people turning their noses up at 60k a year. Christ almighty.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Low 6 figures is seen as comfortable, I'd class a high salary as 250k a year or over.

seven_eleven

seven_eleven wrote: »

Must be some serious earners on here, seeing the amount of people turning their noses up at 60k a year. Christ almighty.

Nobody is turning their nose up at it. Its a good wage but don't be under the illusion that its a high wage, even a single person on 60k wont have a much higher standard of living than someone on 30k. They will have a more comfortable time but wont be able to throw the cash around which in my opinion is the definition of a high salary.

seven_eleven

Annie Worried Ping-pong wrote: »

Nobody is turning their nose up at it. Its a good wage but don't be under the illusion that its a high wage, even a single person on 60k wont have a much higher standard of living than someone on 40k.

Are you sure? A single person, living in an apartment, on their own, no mortgages, no huge fuel bill......I don't know about that.
Then again, I've never been in that position.

seven_eleven

seven_eleven wrote: »

Are you sure? A single person, living in an apartment, on their own, no mortgages, no huge fuel bill......I don't know about that.
Then again, I've never been in that position.

It will obviously be higher just not massively. They wont automatically buy the place for instance, where as a person really on a high salary most likely would.

A person on 60k will probably think as much about spending 1000 euro on some luxury item just as much as someone on 40k whereas again someone on a truly high salary would probably by a better version and not really give it much thought.

fasttalkerchat

60k crosses into the high bracket. Anything above 80k is excessive in the long term.

fasttalkerchat

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

60k crosses into the high bracket. Anything above 80k is excessive in the long term.

Earlier we had disgusting now excessive? Really what goes on in people's heads to call above 80k excessive, whats excessive about it. No amount of money is excessive imo if you can get it fair play to you.