The Budget

We need an economist here to sort us out! Otherwise it's comparing apples with pears.

'Top 10%' is different from 'Top 10% of earners'.

Based on nationwide property values I'd be up with the big boys ...... but based on income I'm definitely lower down the food chain!

No soon read carefully 151k is the household income of the top10% of earners. What I am trying to do is to compare those at the bottom household income I.e.the minimum wage with those at the top. Although to be honest I am not sure it is meaningful, because those with high incomes generally have access to other wealth.

No. Sorry. It was from 2012, so I thought it would be out of date. I dont tend to read links too far back.

Didn't you read my link?

I have seen figures bandied about that the top 5% is assets over £450,000 or thereabouts.

But I think that we are talking at cross purposes here.
Have you got a link whitewave? Saying that the top 10% income wise, earn over £150k still seems high.

The figures come from the ONS. We aren't talking about wealth. Of course there are miriad other ways of wealth accumulation but we are ignoring that

This is a question for Radio 4's More or less.

Ana I expect there's no exact science here!

It could mean that 90% of the population have so little that it doesn't take much to be in the top 10 %.

Yes Ana. Not counting the mortgage part of it of course.

And in case anyone is wondering, no our earned income is not above 150k per annum!

Sorry, 2012.

www.theguardian.com/money/2012/dec/03/richest-10-uk-households-40-per-cent-wealth-ons

'The entry level into the top 10% of wealthy households is currently £967,000 in net assets, the ONS said, while membership of the top 1% comes with assets of £2.8m or above.'

From a 2011 Guardian article.

So anyone owning a house worth £151,000 or over is in the top 10%?

That doesn't seem right. There must be an awful lot of people in that top 10%...

soon is correct - when the press talk about the top 10% it includes assets such as property, savings and pensions.

soon . No that figure is earned income. If it included assets anyone with a house would be included. If your income from business in the form of drawings or profit after tax being paid directly to you is ,151k or more than how lovely you are rich!!!!!!

How can it include assets such as houses? My house is worth more than £151,000 but I'm sure as hell not in the top 10%!

It includes assets, such as houses and businesses. Our business is in a sector that is not doing well nationally, in any way.
So yes, we are in the 10%, but our income is totally tied up with our self employed business. And all businesses are different.

So fou d out that top 10% household income I.e.medium is £151000. Now must work out if that is after or before tax plus how many people that represents
Busy today getting ready for walking hol in the Dales

Any grans offering to admit to being in the top 10%?

Thinking about the government attempt I g to change the narrative with regard to child poverty. It actually makes no difference where the line is drawn because we know that it is almost impossible for a family to live on the minimum wage where both parents work. So really they can set the child poverty line where they like - most people will understand the actuality behind the figures. Perhaps it is time to look at the richest say top 10% and see how they are managing in this time of austerity. Not sure how I will do a budget for them though as their world is out with my experience. Perhaps a gran could help me with ideas!!!!

I though goalposts got moved rather than changed?

How can an idea be a fact??

One of the more harmful ideas is the fact that they are going to change the way that child poverty is assessed.
The reason statistics are collected is to monitor the scale of a problem and measure progress over time.
If you change the statistical base, you try to change the perception of the problem. You distort measurement over time by creating a discontinuity. You also try to create a changed response.
It's the same with collecting NHS or unemployment statistics. Change the goalposts and people forget where they were originally.

secure.38degrees.org.uk/page/m/74c07a40/2d1c5aab/796cb8f4/4631d13b/133944146/VEsD/

To ask Cameron if he would very kindly not put poor hardworking families into greater poverty.

A lot of them will be working for the council or government departments, on part-time work.

Did you notice how Camoron attacked the Labour party by saying they wanted a low wage economy?
It's mainly Labour councils who are paying the living wage.
Going to be interesting to see how many employers attack him, downtoearth, and withdraw donations to the Tory party.

I watched PMQs too Whitewave and thought HH was good. As she pointed out those on minimum wage would have to have a 25% rise on the day that they cut the Tax Credits to put them in the same position and that is not going to happen, is it? Although companies like the big supermarkets could and should be doing it, small businesses would struggle.

She also made the point that although the Conservatives chime on about not leaving our "children" in debt in the future it seems to be OK to put children into poverty now.