UK to NZ Move with Family of Five
#16
Re: UK to NZ Move with Family of Five
Honestly, not wanting to pick a scrap with you, simonsi, but I got a shock when I saw the poster being told they'd be in the top 3% income bracket and when I knew very well that for a family of five they would probably be in the top of the third or in the fourth quintile, which is a comfy place to be in many areas in NZ but a bit tougher in Auckland and certainly not really a North shore lifestyle income. But a second income could change that hugely.
PS also the OP should bear in mind that income rank of 67% is for the whole of NZ.
PS also the OP should bear in mind that income rank of 67% is for the whole of NZ.
#17
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2008
Location: Epsom
Posts: 1,705
Re: UK to NZ Move with Family of Five
I'm not sure how that site calculates things, but I imagine it depends a lot on how you spend. Some people with 3 kids are a lot more frugal than others and it can make a huge difference.
As an absolute value, family income is family income, doesn't matter how many people are there.
Also work considering the average NZ income is around $45k
$140k would give you a nice lifestyle I think, even in some of the nicest suburbs. Not rich by any means, but enough for rent, food, car etc and enough left over to save, or engage in lifestyle activities
As an absolute value, family income is family income, doesn't matter how many people are there.
Also work considering the average NZ income is around $45k
$140k would give you a nice lifestyle I think, even in some of the nicest suburbs. Not rich by any means, but enough for rent, food, car etc and enough left over to save, or engage in lifestyle activities
#19
Re: UK to NZ Move with Family of Five
I thought it was fairly clear as he asked about whether the income would be enough for them and he talked about getting visas for him and his dependents. Seems a logical interpretation of the post even before the extra info.
I actually used that interactive! I remembered when it was published and discussion we'd had on here using it then, so it was easy to Google. If you input $140,000 and 2 >15s and 3 < 15s into it you get rank of 67%. Quite far from both 97 and 93, which are the two figures you've now given. Not at all sure where you got your figures from ...
I actually used that interactive! I remembered when it was published and discussion we'd had on here using it then, so it was easy to Google. If you input $140,000 and 2 >15s and 3 < 15s into it you get rank of 67%. Quite far from both 97 and 93, which are the two figures you've now given. Not at all sure where you got your figures from ...
However the OP will still be absolutely fine on that salary unless they go wild.
No problem with you making assumptions from OP's posts, just be clear they are your assumptions and not everyone has to make the same assumptions. Not really sure why you are on my case about that aspect?