3 ms·

12k was shockingly bad for London in the early 2000s. You can't really convert currency and/or then apply inflation or try to compare to 2002 US living costs.

by eterm 2y ago

12k was shockingly bad for London in the early 2000s. You can't really convert currency and/or then apply inflation or try to compare to 2002 US living costs. London back then still cost a fortune to live in, 12k definitely wouldn't have been comfortable. Yes, the pound was stronger against the dollar back then, but that's little comfort for someone trying to live in London!

alephnerd 2y ago
Fair point! I guess I was assuming almost $20k a year back then would have been livable back then, like it was for much of the US excluding a handful of cities like NYC or SF at the time. I think minimum wage was around £9k/yr back then so I assumed 25% above minimum wage was acceptable (not great, but acceptable) Clearly not though.
- avianlyric 2y ago
  London is the UKs capital city, and largest most wealthy city. It’s cost of living in more-or-less on par with cities like New York and San Francisco. It’s substantially higher than the rest of the UK, and minimum wage in London has generally been higher than the rest of the UK (either in law, or as a de-facto standard, with companies paying a “London bonus”)
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    > It’s cost of living in more-or-less on par with cities like New York and San Francisco More like Chicago in my limited experience, but the pre-tax salaries are way lower in London than for similar roles in the US. I never understood how people can afford to live in London by the late 2010s/early 2020s. > It’s substantially higher than the rest of the UK, and minimum wage in London has generally been higher than the rest of the UK (either in law, or as a de-facto standard, with companies paying a “London bonus”) Ofc, I'm just assuming London used to be relatively cheaper 20+ years ago and the cost of living ratio was not as bad then compared to today. Like Tower Hamlets seemed to have only started gentrifying in the early 2000s.
- Atotalnoob 2y ago
  If we are doing straight comparisons, London is comparable cost of living to NYC and SF. 20k USD was not livable for either of those cities.
  - IshKebab 2y ago
    Nah London is definitely a bit cheaper than those cities. But yeah even so £12k is very low.
- clort 2y ago
  pretty sure that around 2001/2002 I was earning little over £5/hr. Wikipedia suggest I was being paid more than minimum wage at that time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Wage_Act_1998#/media/File:UK_National_Minimum_Wage_to_April_2016.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Wage_Act_1998...
- taylortbb 2y ago
  > I guess I was assuming almost $20k a year back then would have been livable back then, like it was for much of the US excluding a handful of cities like NYC or SF at the time. You're excluding the reasonable comparables. London is the UK's equivalent of NYC or SF.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
helsinkiandrew 2y ago
There’s a current open role for a “project curator” at just under £30K: https://bmrecruit.ciphr-irecruit.com//templates/CIPHR/jobdetail_7439.aspx https://bmrecruit.ciphr-irecruit.com//templates/CIPHR/jobdet...

by eterm 2y ago

alephnerd 2y ago

Fair point! I guess I was assuming almost $20k a year back then would have been livable back then, like it was for much of the US excluding a handful of cities like NYC or SF at the time. I think minimum wage was around £9k/yr back then so I assumed 25% above minimum wage was acceptable (not great, but acceptable) Clearly not though.

avianlyric 2y ago
London is the UKs capital city, and largest most wealthy city. It’s cost of living in more-or-less on par with cities like New York and San Francisco. It’s substantially higher than the rest of the UK, and minimum wage in London has generally been higher than the rest of the UK (either in law, or as a de-facto standard, with companies paying a “London bonus”)
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > It’s cost of living in more-or-less on par with cities like New York and San Francisco More like Chicago in my limited experience, but the pre-tax salaries are way lower in London than for similar roles in the US. I never understood how people can afford to live in London by the late 2010s/early 2020s. > It’s substantially higher than the rest of the UK, and minimum wage in London has generally been higher than the rest of the UK (either in law, or as a de-facto standard, with companies paying a “London bonus”) Ofc, I'm just assuming London used to be relatively cheaper 20+ years ago and the cost of living ratio was not as bad then compared to today. Like Tower Hamlets seemed to have only started gentrifying in the early 2000s.
Atotalnoob 2y ago
If we are doing straight comparisons, London is comparable cost of living to NYC and SF. 20k USD was not livable for either of those cities.
- IshKebab 2y ago
  Nah London is definitely a bit cheaper than those cities. But yeah even so £12k is very low.
clort 2y ago
pretty sure that around 2001/2002 I was earning little over £5/hr. Wikipedia suggest I was being paid more than minimum wage at that time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Wage_Act_1998#/media/File:UK_National_Minimum_Wage_to_April_2016.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Wage_Act_1998...
taylortbb 2y ago
> I guess I was assuming almost $20k a year back then would have been livable back then, like it was for much of the US excluding a handful of cities like NYC or SF at the time. You're excluding the reasonable comparables. London is the UK's equivalent of NYC or SF.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

helsinkiandrew 2y ago

There’s a current open role for a “project curator” at just under £30K: https://bmrecruit.ciphr-irecruit.com//templates/CIPHR/jobdetail_7439.aspx https://bmrecruit.ciphr-irecruit.com//templates/CIPHR/jobdet...