To want a budget which puts young people and families first

It would have to be done over a period of time, but we should recognise that employEES NI is just another word for tax, so it should gradually be incorporated into income tax. This would also mean that pensions and income were taxed at the same rate.

Even better if employERS NI could also be moved into income tax, but this might be more tricky to sell.

Schools should be at least partly funded on how many classes they need, rather than how many children.

I very much doubt that

Increase it so that people aren't taxed like they are now and then given benefits to top up their income.

They will increase the age

So according to you we should just ignore the ones who carnt and leave them to choose between heating, food or prescriptions! Shame on you

Err, where did I say this? Blanket free prescriptions for the over 60s will be gone in the next decade though.

No it hasn't. Most inherited wealth is house prices that went up through no effort at all on the part of the owners, (some even had tax relief on their mortgage payments) or interest and share price increases on savings in ISAs, which are tax free.
Or the really rich with trust funds.

I agree - it's normal to be in a house share in your early 20s. I was in house shares on and off into my mid 30s due to moving around for work and being in expensive cities. Expecting your own place (as a single adult) at 24 is unrealistic unless you are in a cheap place or on a high wage and that's nothing new. My older relatives went from sharing a room at home to sharing a room with a work colleague then getting married. People have much higher expectations these days - student accommodation has en suites as standard and that's a very new change, halls all had shared facilities when I was there.
A budget focusing on balancing the books would be nice, rather than ideology and future vote winning. Relatively speaking the mid & lower earners pay less tax here than in Scandinavia - if we want a high service country we have to have high taxes all round. And yes to a copay model for the NHS - that's how most of Europe does it.

Totally agree with this one. Increase personal allowance to £20k before basic rate tax kicks in this would give those starting their working lives a chance to build up savings to get themselves established with housing and transport. Then increase the 40% threshold to £65k which would then encourage some professions eg doctors to remain as full time employees.

So according to you we should just ignore the ones who carnt and leave them to choose between heating, food or prescriptions! Shame on you

They manage it in other countries

Will probably cost more to administrate the whole thing

That stamp duty idea is ridiculous. What percentage of buyers have kids under 18? I think that will create a huge hole.
I'd reform inheritance tax.
Not clear about your reasoning on the pension thing - I doubt there will be a rush to buy as that would already be happening as it exists.
How are all these to be paid for by the way? £10 charge to see GP is the only thing you added in the plus column (unclear about pension), but you've taken billions out.

They were protected because they vote Tory. That's all.

The size of them too

95% of prescriptions are dispensed free of charge. If charging for appointments followed this model, only 5% of appointments would be paid for.

That's patently not true though. Triple lock, free prescriptions, bus passes, WFA - none of these are about people being able to "fund their own retirement" they're literally benefits!
They were protected because they vote Tory. That's all.

And present fathers who don’t pay.child support. There are plenty of those. Don’t forget them!

They are protected because any functional state wants workers to be able to fund their own retirement instead of needing to rely on benefits / handouts.

*To me putting young people first isn’t around tax incentives to get on the housing ladder and is more fundamental:

• education properly funded
• children’s centres, social services, EdPsychs etc. all properly funded
• College and uni lecturers properly funded so students have in-person, quality higher education
• Proper apprenticeship schemes offering a range of career options
• etc.

People may never be homeowners for a variety of reasons and that is not a benchmark of ‘having achieved’. We can give them the best start at least.*

All of this, and then I'd add in proper mental health care through funding for CAMHS, easy access to neurodiversity assessments and actual support following diagnosis. I'd massively diversify the offer for children with additional support needs into adulthood. I'd also improve supports for care experienced children and young people through to early adulthood.

Clearly you didn’t properly comprehend my post. You fail the IQ test.

Well said, @YellowAsteroid

So your theme seems to be, make life more expensive for those who have paid into the system all their lives, whilst rewarding those who haven’t contributed anything with perks previous generations never had, and now have to finance?! Yeah, that sounds fair…🙄

The state deciding if you can have children? I think your idea is a lot worse than OP's.

Of course it's a bad idea to prioritise one group but that's exactly what the Tories have done the whole time they've been in power. Pensioners have been protected the last 14 years or so. It's time to redress the balance at least a bit.

Over 60 here😬. Thanks. Scrap heap here I come, despite having worked and contributed all my adult life. I think it's a very bad idea to prioritise one group of people against another. I could say what I really think of your ideas but probably better that I don't.