lampkin Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 (edited) Just thought i would say that they put on the average income on the bbc news tonight in coparison to turkey and they quoted "£16,800". funny how the value changes depending on what theyre referring too.. Edited October 3, 2005 by sllabres Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
right_freds_dead Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 now that is a realistic average wage id say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuyingBear Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Just thought i would say that they put on the average income on the bbc news tonight in coparison to turkey and they quoted "£16,800". funny how the value changes depending on what theyre referring too.. Is that after tax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mushroom Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 This average wage thing comes up here and on other forums. A debate then ensues. Can anyone point to statistics that really show the true figure? Presumably something from academia might be more useful rather than some VI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dicky Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 This average wage thing comes up here and on other forums.A debate then ensues. Can anyone point to statistics that really show the true figure? Presumably something from academia might be more useful rather than some VI. The average wage is 61K thats why we can sustain current houses prices at 180K or have I got it the back to front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gone west Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 (edited) This average wage thing comes up here and on other forums.A debate then ensues. Can anyone point to statistics that really show the true figure? Presumably something from academia might be more useful rather than some VI. Average wage is meaningless. It is too highly skewed by the big earners. Median income is what counts as this is what Joe Bloggs sees in his wage packet. According to the IFS, median income was £336 per week or £17472 per annum after tax in 2003/2004. Edited October 3, 2005 by gone west Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 B'llox, that would make around 23,000 before tax, which is about the MEAN average. The median is probably about 18-19,000 before tax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mushroom Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 See what I mean about debate. There again what does average income mean? Does it include any benefits that apply? This average stuff everywhere seems to muddy the waters in favour of the Government and VIs. Particularly the "average money on deposit". Large amount but most in the hands of a few. But hey, average savings per adult of whatever sounds so much better. So, the same with wages to some extent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
29929BlackTuesday Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 B'llox, that would make around 23,000 before tax, which is about the MEAN average. The median is probably about 18-19,000 before tax. Mean IS 'average'! There are3 main stat things: Mean = average Mode = most common Median = middle value Like in the bible the greatest of these is MODE ie most COMMON. Most people in Malvern (here0 probably earn £12 - 15000 if they#re lucky. One millionnaire in the street and heypresto everyone 'earns' £80000. (MEan) OR a Median of £200,000. Only MODE keeps the true really useful figure! Thankyou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HomeAlone Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Mode, median or mean. Whatever figure they use it's still more than I actually earn :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILBB Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 (edited) Median weekly earnings of full-time employees in 2004 for women (£358) those for men (£462) Median weekly pay for full-time employees in the UK grew by 4.7 per cent in April 2004 to reach £422. Median earnings of full-time male employees were £462 per week in April 2004; for women the median was £358. A new Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) has been developed to replace the New Earnings Survey. This is the Office for National Statistics' (ONS) first major survey redesign as part of its statistical modernisation programme. ONS is publishing summary results on the National Statistics website for the UK two months earlier than in previous years. The median annual pay for women increased by 5.3 per cent in 2004 to £18,531. Median annual earnings for full-time employees for the 2002-03 tax year stood at £22,060, up 4.2 per cent on the previous year. Males earned £24,236, up 3.8 per cent. Weekly earnings in London were £541, significantly higher than in other regions, where they ranged from £372 in Northern Ireland to £449 in the South East. The largest overall increase by region was in the North East (7.1 per cent). The lowest increase was in the East Midlands (2.8 per cent). Top of the earnings league in 2004 were 'Health professionals' (median pay of full-time employees of £993 a week), followed by 'Corporate managers' (£643) and 'Science and technology professionals' (£605). The lowest paid of all full-time employees were 'Sales occupations', at £246 a week. The monetary difference between the median level of full-time earnings in the public sector (£453 per week in April 2004) and the private sector (£408 per week) has widened over the year to April 2004; in 2003 the figures were £431 and £393 respectively. The top 10 per cent of the earnings distribution earned more than £825 per week, while the bottom 10 per cent earned less than £230. Edited October 3, 2005 by ILBB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILBB Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 The monetary difference between the median level of full-time earnings in the public sector (£453 per week in April 2004) and the private sector (£408 per week) has widened over the year to April 2004; in 2003 the figures were £431 and £393 respectively. To some extent the huge increases under G.Brown of Public Service pay has been one of the reasons HPI in the regions has increased and held up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gone west Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Median weekly earnings of full-time employees in 2004 for women (£358) those for men (£462)Median weekly pay for full-time employees in the UK grew by 4.7 per cent in April 2004 to reach £422. Median earnings of full-time male employees were £462 per week in April 2004; for women the median was £358. ... The top 10 per cent of the earnings distribution earned more than £825 per week, while the bottom 10 per cent earned less than £230. Before or after tax? Only MODE keeps the true really useful figure!Thankyou Mode is only useful if it is given with a range bounds and percentage. i.e. 30% earn between 23,000 and 26,000 pounds before tax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quokka Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 The monetary difference between the median level of full-time earnings in the public sector (£453 per week in April 2004) and the private sector (£408 per week) has widened over the year to April 2004 Maybe the important figure is here. When the public sector is earning more than the private sector there is something WRONG with the economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gone west Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 (edited) Maybe the important figure is here.When the public sector is earning more than the private sector there is something WRONG with the economy. Not necessarily. If you had 10,000 gifted individuals running your economy, then paying them over the odds would make sense. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Edited October 3, 2005 by gone west Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuyingBear Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Maybe the important figure is here.When the public sector is earning more than the private sector there is something WRONG with the economy. Don't forget public workers also get a £60k interest free bung so they can buy a house. All those in the private sector are non-key workers and do unimportant things like keep the food supply running and non-essential things like keeping the electricity, gas and water networks going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lampkin Posted October 4, 2005 Author Share Posted October 4, 2005 Most people seem to agree that the mean income is around the £17k mark. But even if people earn £23k a year (i think the banks count it before tax?), thats still a 7x mortgage on the average house price? Thats crazy. A friend of mine (earns £17k before tax) would really like to buy a house. He realises he cant, he spoke to his parents about the matter and here are some of the responses: "Go and find a girlfriend to buy with" "Ask for more money from the bank" I was shocked at that kind of advice. My impression of our parents generation is that they are completely narrow minded and have no comprehension of the market today. Most seem stuck in a dream world in relation to house prices. They have this idea that anyone can get onto the housing ladder and end up in a nice 3-4 bed house, is that because it was so easy for their generation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dicky Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 "Go and find a girlfriend to buy with" Whats wrong with this advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AteMoose Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Whats wrong with this advice. Its just plain WRONG, i know people who bought with there girlfriends fell out, and had to buy the other partner out, its a big financial mess.... Sure if you have been seeing somone for years and are going to be together for ever go for it, but find a girlfriend just so you can buy a house together?!? thats nuts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planit Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Whats wrong with this advice. It should say go and find a rich girlfriend!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marina Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Don't forget public workers also get a £60k interest free bung so they can buy a house. All those in the private sector are non-key workers and do unimportant things like keep the food supply running and non-essential things like keeping the electricity, gas and water networks going. Absolutely, whereas public workers do important jobs like making sure their employer's social inclusion policies are socially inclusive. ?????????????????? I wouldn't mind paying for some more doctors and nurses. I pay for more police officers but they only employ invisible ones. I don't want to pay for more teachers - they are useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.