找回密码
 FreeOZ用户注册
楼主: 12qw
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[经历分享] 澳洲年薪10万是什么样的生活水平?

[复制链接]
91#
发表于 24-9-2012 18:58:13 | 只看该作者
数据来源 http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6530.0Main%20Features22009-10?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6530.0&issue=2009-10&num=&view=

前不久看到报告澳洲家庭年平均消费7万澳元左右。
一开始看看觉得挺高的,后来算算也正差不多要这么多。
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS


HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE ON GOODS AND SERVICES - OVERVIEW

In the 12 months to June 2010, Australian households spent an average of $1,236 each week on goods and services. This is an increase of 38% since the previous survey which was conducted in 2003-04. Part of this increase can be attributed to inflation - over the five years since the previous survey, the price of goods and services, as measured by the consumer price index (CPI), rose by 19%. Over the same period, the mean gross household income per week increased by 50% and the average household size increased from 2.53 to 2.57 people.

In 2009-10 the broad categories with the highest household expenditures were:

current housing costs, with average household expenditure of $223 per week, representing 18% of total household expenditure on goods and services
food and non-alcoholic beverages, $204 per week, 17% of the total
transport, $193 per week, 16% of the total.

As in 2003-04, these categories together accounted for half of household expenditure on goods and services. The next highest category was recreation, with average weekly household expenditure of $161 per week, representing 13% of the total.
S1. Average weekly household expenditure on goods and services




DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HOUSEHOLDS

The level and pattern of expenditure differs between households, reflecting characteristics such as income, wealth, household composition, household size and location.


Household Income

Gross household Income

In 2009-10, households in the lowest gross income quintile (the lowest 20% of households when ranked according to gross income) spent on average $559 (152% of their gross household income) on goods and services per week, compared to $2,160 (55% of their gross household income) spent by households in the highest gross income quintile. This difference in expenditure is partly a consequence of household size: households in the lowest quintile contain on average 1.5 persons, compared to 3.4 persons in households in the highest quintile. Lone person households make up 63% of households in the lowest quintile.

Equivalised disposable household income

Equivalised disposable household income provides an indicator of the income estimates with respect to household size and composition, while taking into account the economies of scale that arise from the sharing of dwellings. The composition of household expenditure differs between equivalised disposable household income quintile groups. For example, food and non-alcoholic beverages accounted for 19% of the expenditure on goods and services of households in the lowest quintile, compared to 15% for households in the highest quintile. In general, the proportion spent on domestic fuel and power, tobacco and household services and operation also declined as equivalised disposable household income rose, while the proportion spent on recreation, alcohol, transport and miscellaneous goods and services increased.
S2. Goods and services expenditure by the lowest and highest equivalised disposable household income quintiles




Household net worth

Current housing costs is the broad expenditure group most related to levels of household net worth. Current housing costs comprised 27% of total expenditure on goods and services for households in the lowest net worth quintile but only 11% for households in the highest quintile.

For many households, the dwelling in which they live is the main asset. Households with low net worth are likely to have a high mortgage offsetting the value of the dwelling, or are likely to be renting. They therefore tend to have high housing costs, either in the form of interest payments on their mortgage or in the form of rent. Households with high net worth are more likely to own their own home with only a small or no mortgage outstanding, and therefore only have low housing costs. Only 4% of households in the lowest net worth quintile own their own home, compared to 96% in the highest quintile.

Expenditure on medical care and health expenses tends to be substantially higher for households with higher net worth, accounting for 3% of expenditure for households in the lowest quintile and 6% for households in the highest quintile. In part this may reflect the older ages of persons in the higher quintiles. The average age of the reference person in the lowest net worth quintile is 41 years compared to 56 years for the highest quintile. The lowest quintile has on average more persons under the age of 18 compared to households in the highest quintile (0.7 and 0.5 persons respectively) and the average number of persons 65 years and over is lower in the lowest net worth quintile compared to the highest quintile (0.2 and 0.4 respectively).

In general, the proportion spent on recreation, household furnishings and equipment, and transport rose as net worth rose, while the proportion spent on tobacco dropped substantially.
S3. Goods and services expenditure by the lowest and highest net worth quintiles




Social and demographic characteristics

The level and composition of household income and expenditure is highly related to the social and demographic characteristics of household members. For example, households in the lowest equivalised disposable income quintile were more likely to be lone person households and to receive government pensions and allowances as their main source of income. Households in the highest quintile were more likely to be couple, one family households and to have wages and salaries as their main source of income.

Households in which the levels of weekly expenditure on goods and services was significantly below the average of $1,236 for all households included:
households which rented their dwelling from a state or territory housing authority, with average weekly expenditure of $564
households which relied on government pensions and allowances as their main source of household income, with average weekly expenditure of $613
lone person households had an average weekly expenditure of $646 and lone persons aged 65 and over had an average weekly expenditure of $446
households in which the reference person was 65 years and over, with average weekly expenditure of $726.

In contrast, households in which the level of expenditure on goods and services was significantly above the average included:
couple, one family households with children; for example households consisting of a couple with their dependent and non-dependent children only, had an average weekly expenditure of $2,046
multiple family households, with average weekly expenditure of $1,621
households purchasing their home (with a mortgage), with average weekly expenditure of $1,594
group households, with average weekly expenditure of $1,531
households in which the reference person was aged 45 to 54 years, with average weekly expenditure of $1,502
households with main source of income of wages and salaries, with average weekly expenditure of $1,476.

Household characteristics can also help to explain the variation in the composition of expenditure. For example, housing costs accounted for only 8% of total expenditure on goods and services of those households who owned their home outright while households renting from private landlords spent 26% of their total expenditure on housing.


Location

The level of expenditure varied across states and territories. The highest average weekly household expenditures were recorded in the Australian Capital Territory ($1,536) and the not very remote parts of the Northern Territory ($1,500). The lowest expenditures were in South Australia and Tasmania at $1,044 and $1,064 per week respectively.

Expenditure also varied between capital cities and elsewhere. The average weekly expenditure of households located in capital cities was $1,310, compared with $1,107 in areas other than capital cities. Canberra ($1,536) had significantly higher weekly expenditure than the average for all capital cities.


Households in financial stress

A key element of people's living standards is the amount of discretion they have in their spending on goods and services to meet their needs. While ABS measures of income and wealth provide information on the main economic resources available to households to support their material command over goods and services expenditure and statistics can describe people's associated consumption patterns, these measures do not necessarily tell the full story of how households are coping financially. For example, households may go without key goods and services, or seek financial assistance from others, to meet financial commitments or to maintain other expenditure. The extent to which this occurs can provide an indication of the overall financial stress experienced by households.

The reporting of financial stress does not necessarily imply that a household has low income. Nevertheless, financial stress indicators decrease as equivalised disposable household income increases. For example, 64% of the lowest equivalised disposable income quintile have at least one indicator of financial stress while only 20% of households in the highest quintile reported an indication of financial stress. The ability to afford a holiday for at least one week per year and the ability to afford a night out once a fortnight are the most commonly reported indicators of financial stress at 25% and 19% respectively.


CHANGES SINCE 2003-04

In the 2003-04 HES, income from non-cash benefits was collected, but not included in total income or expenditure estimates. However in SIH 2007-08, non-cash benefits were included as part of standard income measures to align with international standards. The values for non-cash benefits have been included in the expenditure measures for the first time in 2009-10. There have also been improvements made to the collection of salary sacrifice data and its incorporation in expenditure aggregates. As a result of these changes, total goods and services expenditure using the new basis is $1,236, compared with $1,198 using the previous basis. The most significant difference is for estimates of expenditure on transport where the estimate using the new basis is $193, compared with $163 using the previous basis. Transport, current housing costs, household service and operation, recreation, miscellaneous goods and services and superannuation and life insurance are the categories which are impacted by the new inclusions for expenditure. See paragraphs 10 to 13 of the explanatory notes for further information.

The overall increase in average weekly household expenditure on goods and services between 2003-04 and 2009-10 was $343 (38%). Over the same period the price of goods and services, as measured by the CPI, rose by 19%.

The broad expenditure categories recording the largest increases in dollar terms in average weekly expenditure were:
current housing costs (selected dwelling), up $80 (55%), due in part to increased mortgage interest payments, up $35 (75%) and increased rent payments, up $32 (68%)
food and non-alcoholic beverages, up $51 (34%)
recreation, up $47 (41%)
miscellaneous goods and services, up $37 (46%), partly due to increased spending on education fees for primary and secondary schools, up $10 (107%)

A large part of the $54 (39%) increase in transport expenditure is due to the inclusion of non-cash benefits and salary sacrifice expenditure. Excluding these aspects transport has increased by $23 (up 17%).

At the more detailed expenditure items level, some of the most significant spending increases over the 6 year period were on internet charges (paid as account) (up 152%), pay TV fees (up 95%), interest payments on mortgages (up 75%), meals in restaurants, hotels, clubs and related (up 68%), child care (up 84%), rent payments (up 68%), meals out and fast foods (up 50%) and recreational and educational services (excluding holiday expenses) (up 50%). See detailed tables included as Excel datacubes on website for more details.
S4. Increase in average weekly expenditure on goods and services, 2003-04 to 2009-10

[ 本帖最后由 trisun 于 24-9-2012 19:00 编辑 ]
回复  

使用道具 举报

92#
发表于 24-9-2012 19:48:34 | 只看该作者
年薪过10万的见过不少,没见他们过的多轻松。钱多了,口气凶了,欲望也大了,一想到政府分分钟都在掏自己的钱包补贴别人,就不舒服,要想尽办法把它拿回来。
金钱是魔鬼,大部分人的修为还没到能够驾驭她的水平,算来算最后终于被她牵着走,忘记了自己来澳洲的初衷,忘记了生命中还有很多其他美好的事情。

[ 本帖最后由 zhewenmao 于 24-9-2012 21:17 编辑 ]
回复  

使用道具 举报

93#
发表于 24-9-2012 19:52:05 | 只看该作者
我是真心佩服那些视金钱为粪土的回复。
什么时候我才能达到这个境地呀,估计下辈子吧。
回复  

使用道具 举报

94#
发表于 25-9-2012 08:50:55 | 只看该作者
the media house price is about 550k in Melbourne.
the media household income is about 60k.

don't think most people can afford houses......
回复  

使用道具 举报

95#
发表于 25-9-2012 16:41:36 | 只看该作者
如果一个人10万,两个人就20万,一起生活的话可以在富人区买屋哦。当然其实还是属于澳洲的中层生活,你也知道这里的中层是庞大的,所以社会才能相对稳定。 15万家庭收入基本上所有的福利都被剥夺,税收也很很高,例如孩子去托儿所的钱,税收也进入一个新的层次,所以很多有15万以上家庭有孩子的得人通常老婆在家带孩子,有头脑的话可以做点小生意,弄个Negative gearing,把税收给拿回来。

一个人10万其实跟一个人收入六万基本上没有什么生活质量的区别,一年多剩个一两万,十年后就多个洗澡间而已。

你说呢?

评分

参与人数 1威望 +20 收起 理由
西澳海豚 + 20 你太有才了!

查看全部评分

回复  

使用道具 举报

96#
发表于 25-9-2012 23:25:33 | 只看该作者
國內我不知道-----沒住過。

在澳洲10W就是一般生活水平,不用想太多,省吃儉用個幾年,還是買得起房子的。
回复  

使用道具 举报

97#
发表于 26-9-2012 00:54:36 | 只看该作者

10万绝对一般水平

如果有家有孩子的话,因为人总要未雨绸缪,单身可以赚多少花多少,有家有孩子就要省着花,我远远超过10万了,也没车没房
回复  

使用道具 举报

98#
发表于 27-9-2012 17:14:08 | 只看该作者
此事见仁见智

我家,特例中的特例,因为我,老婆,都非常俭朴,不是一般的俭朴。

所以,年家庭收入10 万我们就可以过的很舒服。买房就供到退休,不行就儿子继续供。贷款不要影响到生活质量。

我不懂为何 10 万还有那么多纠结
回复  

使用道具 举报

99#
发表于 27-9-2012 17:17:42 | 只看该作者
就算失业了,一家四口,福利每两周至少 1500 以上,足够了
回复  

使用道具 举报

100#
发表于 30-9-2012 20:40:06 | 只看该作者
去年全家一年5万,今年多个人上班,一年十万,觉得没什么变化。生活还那样。所以在澳洲不必追求高工资。过得开心就好
回复  

使用道具 举报

101#
发表于 2-10-2012 09:31:17 | 只看该作者
说3w10w生活质量一样的,那是赚10w还按照3w收入过日子然后把多的钱放银行。
每年多几万块钱可以多做很多自己想做的事情,去想去的地方旅游, 增加很多自己想要的消费。
生活在澳洲也不是餐风饮露过日子的,除了阳光空气和海水,食宿条件,旅游,消费,不是生活质量的一部分吗?
这种贴子一说存钱买房大家都很bs,但大家觉的在几家人合租的房子里住一个小房间煮饭洗澡都要排队钉个挂钩要考虑扣bond金
和单独住自己的房子生活质量是一样的吗?

[ 本帖最后由 zzoz 于 2-10-2012 09:34 编辑 ]
回复  

使用道具 举报

102#
发表于 22-10-2012 22:26:51 | 只看该作者
追求什么生活方式,就需要配套的条件,金钱
回复  

使用道具 举报

103#
发表于 28-10-2012 15:08:05 | 只看该作者
原帖由 dragut 于 27-6-2010 00:42 发表
10万澳元,税后7.5万,一家四口日常开销水电煤电话宽带衣食行1500澳元一个月,用于非恩格尔消费的钱57000。
在中国年薪40万,税后30万,一家三口日常开销水电煤电话宽带衣食行4000一个月,用于非恩格尔消费的钱25万 ...


我的感受是澳洲的10万比国内的40万要稍好那么一点点(几乎没太大的区别,因为在这里不敢用人工)。但是在澳洲夫妻两个要一年找到10万块所掉了的白头发要比中国找40万少的多得多。不知道各位是否有同感。
回复  

使用道具 举报

104#
发表于 28-10-2012 19:11:20 | 只看该作者
cc the result, thx.
回复  

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | FreeOZ用户注册

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|FreeOZ论坛

GMT+10, 21-4-2024 00:17 , Processed in 0.060353 second(s), 34 queries , Gzip On, Redis On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表