I mean it probably is true that people on £35k should not need to use food banks, but importantly is anyone saying that they do? Or are these claims being made of people who do not earn that.
For example “nursing staff” can also mean healthcare assistants who are paid absolute buttons, very easy to imagine that they could end up in pretty desperate financial situations.
There will be some on 35k who need to. They will almost certainly be single parents with crippling child care costs. Private child care to cover shift work is ruinously expensive.
It's the older generation who are really taking the hit. They just want to go off on river cruises but they end up having to look after the grandchildren.
I like the prejudice in this that a nurse must be a second earner. Shock horror a family of 4 has a nurse as the primary earner. If their partner is on parental leave on the thoroughly ungenerous mandated govt payment then they could conceivably be receiving nothing (or they could just be a stay at home parent like the minister's mum). £35,000 is the gross wage, so there will be a chunky pension contribution taken from it, so looking at £2k after tax. Living in London or SE they will then be looking at minimum £1,000 a month for housing costs, so a generous £1,200 left per month to cover travel costs (maybe £300?), fuel and other utilities (£400?). So already down to £5,00 a month for food and anything else.
But I am sure a privately educated Oxford graduate brought up in the mean corridors of Slaughter & May knows all about this.
Yes what we want is for graduates to "survive" on their wages. Come on kids - upskill and "survive".
NB no childcare costs in my calculation above. Throw those in in London and you start thinking two nurses in London living frugally would be lucky to save less than £10k a year (so only 10 years to save a deposit on a house on an estate in Dagenham).
Isn't the story here that Lee Anderson (aka 30p Lee, who is bizarrely a Tory MP rather than a member of the BNP) has tweeted today that one of his staff survives very happily on a salary of £30K or so. Ignoring that said staff lives in a "room" so not exactly helpful for a nurse with a family. Oh and the staff person is from a, frankly, rich family who sent her to a school at £20K pa fees so her wage is just spending money. I am not criticising the staff person (not least as I give my kids a decent amount each month, as I can as there is no point living without enjoyment) but the sheer lack of comprehension and/or empathy with normal people is rather depressing. A question: for those of you who vote for the Conservative Party; why on earth do you do it? What do you think they do do improve the country (NHS service etc). Or are you so selfish that you don't care because saving a few pounds per week on income tax salves your conscience about how fooked the poor people are?
A question: for those of you who vote for the Conservative Party; why on earth do you do it? What do you think they do do improve the country (NHS service etc).
I THINK THAT WHAT THEY DO TO THE COUNTRY SHOULD BE VERY CLEAR BY NOW AS WE CAN ALL SEE HOW MUCH THIS GREAT NATION HAS BENEFITED FROM THE LAST 13 YEARS OF CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT!!
Or are you so selfish that you don't care because saving a few pounds per week on income tax salves your conscience about how fooked the poor people are?
AH BUT IS THAT MONEY GOING TO THE DESERVING POOR OR… THE UNDERSERVING POOR?!?
0
0
Tone deaf perhaps but £35,000 is more than the secretaries are getting.
1
0
I mean it probably is true that people on £35k should not need to use food banks, but importantly is anyone saying that they do? Or are these claims being made of people who do not earn that.
2
0
For example “nursing staff” can also mean healthcare assistants who are paid absolute buttons, very easy to imagine that they could end up in pretty desperate financial situations.
1
0
There will be some on 35k who need to. They will almost certainly be single parents with crippling child care costs. Private child care to cover shift work is ruinously expensive.
1
0
I think the big factor not talked about is the crippling childcare costs people are exposed to.
Without childcare then you probably should, or could, survive on that wage.
3
1
It's the older generation who are really taking the hit. They just want to go off on river cruises but they end up having to look after the grandchildren.
3
0
I like the prejudice in this that a nurse must be a second earner. Shock horror a family of 4 has a nurse as the primary earner. If their partner is on parental leave on the thoroughly ungenerous mandated govt payment then they could conceivably be receiving nothing (or they could just be a stay at home parent like the minister's mum). £35,000 is the gross wage, so there will be a chunky pension contribution taken from it, so looking at £2k after tax. Living in London or SE they will then be looking at minimum £1,000 a month for housing costs, so a generous £1,200 left per month to cover travel costs (maybe £300?), fuel and other utilities (£400?). So already down to £5,00 a month for food and anything else.
But I am sure a privately educated Oxford graduate brought up in the mean corridors of Slaughter & May knows all about this.
3
0
Yes what we want is for graduates to "survive" on their wages. Come on kids - upskill and "survive".
NB no childcare costs in my calculation above. Throw those in in London and you start thinking two nurses in London living frugally would be lucky to save less than £10k a year (so only 10 years to save a deposit on a house on an estate in Dagenham).
1
0
Yeah childcare is a good point actually, no idea how it’s manageable on lower incomes in the SE.
1
0
There should be two queues for food banks. For those that need it to be alive tomorrow, and those with full-time public sector jobs band 5
1
0
So far as I can tell most nurses aren't on £35K...
6
0
2
0
another silly tory c.unt commits electoral suicide
labour should stop commenting on this daft shite tbh
let them hang themselves
2
0
Affordable childcare is definitely part of the solution. But really it's just another aspect of taxing work less and passive income more.
3
0
nO bEcAusE if YOu tAX paSSiVE iNcOMe tHen AlL the CaPiTAL wIlL lEAvE tHe cOUnTrY aNd wE aLL knOw tHAt wHaT the CoUNtrY nEeDs iS mORe rENTIERS riGht
3
0
Isn't the story here that Lee Anderson (aka 30p Lee, who is bizarrely a Tory MP rather than a member of the BNP) has tweeted today that one of his staff survives very happily on a salary of £30K or so. Ignoring that said staff lives in a "room" so not exactly helpful for a nurse with a family. Oh and the staff person is from a, frankly, rich family who sent her to a school at £20K pa fees so her wage is just spending money. I am not criticising the staff person (not least as I give my kids a decent amount each month, as I can as there is no point living without enjoyment) but the sheer lack of comprehension and/or empathy with normal people is rather depressing. A question: for those of you who vote for the Conservative Party; why on earth do you do it? What do you think they do do improve the country (NHS service etc). Or are you so selfish that you don't care because saving a few pounds per week on income tax salves your conscience about how fooked the poor people are?
3
0
I THINK THAT WHAT THEY DO TO THE COUNTRY SHOULD BE VERY CLEAR BY NOW AS WE CAN ALL SEE HOW MUCH THIS GREAT NATION HAS BENEFITED FROM THE LAST 13 YEARS OF CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT!!
AH BUT IS THAT MONEY GOING TO THE DESERVING POOR OR… THE UNDERSERVING POOR?!?
0
0
Why do you always shout?
1
0
Try raising a family in central London on 35k ya twot.
My NQ London wage in 1995 was 30k and it didn't feel that special and I had no kids then.
Join the discussion