The UK population now has debts of £1.3trillion ($2.5tn) — more than £28,000 ($55,000) for every adult in the country.

In a new survey, most of Britons say they would need at least £100,000 ($200,000) to make a real difference to their lifestyle. They would use it simply to get their finances back on track.

In the survey, of more than 2,000 savers and spenders by National Savings and Investments, more than 60 percent estimated £100,000 as the very least they would need to improve their lifestyle.

At the other end of the scale, only 6 percent would be satisfied with a £1,000 ($2000) windfall. Commentators say a culture of “keeping up with the Joneses” is to blame, with many of people “going large” on holidays and expensive restaurants.

Higher earners too are not content. One in ten said a windfall of £2million ($4m) would be needed before they would really notice the difference.

John Prout, sales director at NS&I, said the figures reflected a change in national spending habits with more of us treating ourselves to everyday luxuries.

‘When Premium Bonds were launched in 1957, £1,000 was a life-changing amount and for many it meant security and a comfortable future. But foreign holidays and eating out, which used to be considered a luxury, are now a part of normal life. It is not surprising that the amount needed to have the same effect has shot up over the last 50 years.

“However, for a significant number, a windfall is now less about looking forward and more about a way to get back on track financially, and pay off past indulgences.”

Steven Sonsino of the London Business School believes that more companies should allow employees to try out new methods even if they fail.

He says, “Too many senior executives and owners of small businesses have their set way of doing things and end up micro-managing.” This can lead to paralysis in the business through fear of making mistakes.

The best businesses, small or large, encourage workers to try out new ways of doing things whatever the results. This invariably makes the business more successful.

Robert Myatt, Director of business psychology firm Kaisen Consulting confirms this : “If you talk about risk-taking then come down on people like a ton of bricks, it will send out a completely contradictory message.”

The ideal situation is to allow experimentation within reason. In many ways, the people who do the job will know more about it than you do, and what will work, and what will not.

The question of the ideal age to start a business is bouncing round the blogosphere today.

Venture capitalist Fred Wilson started it, and his view is that most entrepreneurs form their companies in their thirties. There are a few who are older, but many are younger. Matt Mullenweg is a good example. He started WordPress at the tender age of just 19.

Nick Denton at Valleywag speculates, “My guess: older entrepreneurs fail less often, but succeed less stunningly.” He goes on, “Even if there were evidence that young entrepreneurs are more likely to strike out, risk-hungry investors will still fall for youth”.

As Fred Wilson says, “… only one of the entrepreneurs in our current portfolio is older than 45. And he’ll probably be starting companies until he dies. It’s what he does”.

Anyone over 40 it seems should consider bootstrapping their startup. In their thirties? Ditto, unless there are pressing reasons not to.

Below 30, the world is your oyster, it would seem. Like everything else, it all comes down to the individual involved.