Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to want spending cuts rather than more tax rises?

1000 replies

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 10:07

The foundations are being laid for more tax rises in the October Budget.

https://www.ft.com/content/6d43b599-3d7c-471c-88c2-0f056475a840?syn-25a6b1a6=1

AIBU to ask for savings in spending to help balance the budget rather than more taxes.

With welfare spending at nearly £1bn each day, when is enough, enough?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
23
PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:12

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:05

So you're happy for some families to be living on absolute bare minimum and unable to afford 3 basic meals for their family or a home dure to the mixture of inflated housing prices and poor wages but think those who have a lot of disposable income should just... Keep it? While still expecting services? That's someone with an income of 20k should pay the same rate of tax as someone on 200k? That's some kind of fairness to you?

I'm glad not to be you. Very very glad

Yes social security should be an absolute bare minimum. Nothing fancy.

I’m not sure you understand how much tax someone on £20k vs £200k pays in tax.

£20k earnings is an effective tax rate of 10.40%

200k earnings is an effective tax rate of 41.11%

And the person on £200k earns 10 times as much but pays 39.5 times as much tax.

AIBU to want spending cuts rather than more tax rises?
AIBU to want spending cuts rather than more tax rises?
OP posts:
Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:13

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:05

Well I’m pretty much the only one commenting who has put any data or statistics behind their argument. If you don’t like them; put some forward yourself.

Not valid data, not data showing any understanding of the nature of economics across different demographics. Nothing to show the other taxes paid beyond income tax, vat for example, which are paid at a much higher rate of income percentage for those with lower incomes.

No understanding of the fact that those who earn less typically spend a greater percentage of their income, therefore vat is paid to government from the cyclical movement of that money while the wealthy spend a much lower percentage of heir income, saving, investing and hoarding the remainder therefore taking those funds out of circulation.

The economy needs a large number of people on a lower income constantly living hand to mouth to keep itself moving, because money that is saved and hoarded has income tax paid on it then disappears form public funds to the individual for decades.

The fact we all live and die and have a finite time on the planet and you're happy to condemn the many to 'relative' poverty so the few can be wealthy is so utterly baffling. It is also so short sighted, you are 1 accident at work, small blood clot in the wrong artery, as yet undiscovered genetic malady away from being plunged into poverty at all times. Most disability is acquired. And if someone acquires an illness or disability before they manage to save enough to survive that financially well there they are reliant on a system that you want to remove.

That is why I am confident you don't have a PhD. In anything.

Binnyforthewin · 05/09/2026 21:15

HollyhocksandPeons · 05/09/2026 20:58

OMG, what have I just read? What have I just fucking read? 21% of Scottish children live in poverty, data published by the Scottish Government.

In relative poverty. The very definition means that will always be a portion of people in relative poverty. If you took the population of millionaires there would be some who would be in relative poverty compared the population.

EasternStandard · 05/09/2026 21:16

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:13

Not valid data, not data showing any understanding of the nature of economics across different demographics. Nothing to show the other taxes paid beyond income tax, vat for example, which are paid at a much higher rate of income percentage for those with lower incomes.

No understanding of the fact that those who earn less typically spend a greater percentage of their income, therefore vat is paid to government from the cyclical movement of that money while the wealthy spend a much lower percentage of heir income, saving, investing and hoarding the remainder therefore taking those funds out of circulation.

The economy needs a large number of people on a lower income constantly living hand to mouth to keep itself moving, because money that is saved and hoarded has income tax paid on it then disappears form public funds to the individual for decades.

The fact we all live and die and have a finite time on the planet and you're happy to condemn the many to 'relative' poverty so the few can be wealthy is so utterly baffling. It is also so short sighted, you are 1 accident at work, small blood clot in the wrong artery, as yet undiscovered genetic malady away from being plunged into poverty at all times. Most disability is acquired. And if someone acquires an illness or disability before they manage to save enough to survive that financially well there they are reliant on a system that you want to remove.

That is why I am confident you don't have a PhD. In anything.

It’s a bit much tbh. People have different views on tax and spend. Even economists.

Binnyforthewin · 05/09/2026 21:17

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:12

Yes social security should be an absolute bare minimum. Nothing fancy.

I’m not sure you understand how much tax someone on £20k vs £200k pays in tax.

£20k earnings is an effective tax rate of 10.40%

200k earnings is an effective tax rate of 41.11%

And the person on £200k earns 10 times as much but pays 39.5 times as much tax.

Edited

You're wasting your time. Maths clearly isn't this posters strongest subject.

Goota · 05/09/2026 21:17

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:13

Not valid data, not data showing any understanding of the nature of economics across different demographics. Nothing to show the other taxes paid beyond income tax, vat for example, which are paid at a much higher rate of income percentage for those with lower incomes.

No understanding of the fact that those who earn less typically spend a greater percentage of their income, therefore vat is paid to government from the cyclical movement of that money while the wealthy spend a much lower percentage of heir income, saving, investing and hoarding the remainder therefore taking those funds out of circulation.

The economy needs a large number of people on a lower income constantly living hand to mouth to keep itself moving, because money that is saved and hoarded has income tax paid on it then disappears form public funds to the individual for decades.

The fact we all live and die and have a finite time on the planet and you're happy to condemn the many to 'relative' poverty so the few can be wealthy is so utterly baffling. It is also so short sighted, you are 1 accident at work, small blood clot in the wrong artery, as yet undiscovered genetic malady away from being plunged into poverty at all times. Most disability is acquired. And if someone acquires an illness or disability before they manage to save enough to survive that financially well there they are reliant on a system that you want to remove.

That is why I am confident you don't have a PhD. In anything.

What's wrong with investing? We need investments in an economy.

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:17

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:12

Yes social security should be an absolute bare minimum. Nothing fancy.

I’m not sure you understand how much tax someone on £20k vs £200k pays in tax.

£20k earnings is an effective tax rate of 10.40%

200k earnings is an effective tax rate of 41.11%

And the person on £200k earns 10 times as much but pays 39.5 times as much tax.

Edited

Yet the person on 20k takes home 17k and the person on 200k takes home 170k. Every additional penny of tax removed from the lower earner takes them closer to the point where they can't afford basic necessities. You'd go a long way to get to the point someone on 200k couldn't afford basic necessities.

A s before you start about cost of living and private school in the South East as though those are basic necessities for a high earner rather than massive luxuries they choose. It's nonsense.

If basics for any human is considered a single bedroom and basic tinned food and a bare minimum of heating to sustain life then those basics remain the basics for the higher earner so anything above that level IS a luxury.

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:17

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:13

Not valid data, not data showing any understanding of the nature of economics across different demographics. Nothing to show the other taxes paid beyond income tax, vat for example, which are paid at a much higher rate of income percentage for those with lower incomes.

No understanding of the fact that those who earn less typically spend a greater percentage of their income, therefore vat is paid to government from the cyclical movement of that money while the wealthy spend a much lower percentage of heir income, saving, investing and hoarding the remainder therefore taking those funds out of circulation.

The economy needs a large number of people on a lower income constantly living hand to mouth to keep itself moving, because money that is saved and hoarded has income tax paid on it then disappears form public funds to the individual for decades.

The fact we all live and die and have a finite time on the planet and you're happy to condemn the many to 'relative' poverty so the few can be wealthy is so utterly baffling. It is also so short sighted, you are 1 accident at work, small blood clot in the wrong artery, as yet undiscovered genetic malady away from being plunged into poverty at all times. Most disability is acquired. And if someone acquires an illness or disability before they manage to save enough to survive that financially well there they are reliant on a system that you want to remove.

That is why I am confident you don't have a PhD. In anything.

Absolute waffle and conjecture. You have shown absolutely no data for your economic ‘opinions’.

OP posts:
Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:18

Goota · 05/09/2026 21:17

What's wrong with investing? We need investments in an economy.

Reread what I wrote.

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:20

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:17

Absolute waffle and conjecture. You have shown absolutely no data for your economic ‘opinions’.

You are suggesting VAT is conjecture?

Hoarding of wealth is conjecture?

These are basic economic principles of which anyone with even the most basic financial knowledge is aware. Given the quality of your sources you've provided no evidence for your extremely poorly thought out points either. Which you'd know, of you'd ever actually been taught to read any kind of statistic, as you would have to be, of you had a Phd

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:20

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:17

Yet the person on 20k takes home 17k and the person on 200k takes home 170k. Every additional penny of tax removed from the lower earner takes them closer to the point where they can't afford basic necessities. You'd go a long way to get to the point someone on 200k couldn't afford basic necessities.

A s before you start about cost of living and private school in the South East as though those are basic necessities for a high earner rather than massive luxuries they choose. It's nonsense.

If basics for any human is considered a single bedroom and basic tinned food and a bare minimum of heating to sustain life then those basics remain the basics for the higher earner so anything above that level IS a luxury.

No, the person on £200k takes home £117,786.68 having paid £82,213.32 in IT / NI.

That is more than their ‘fair share’.

AIBU to want spending cuts rather than more tax rises?
AIBU to want spending cuts rather than more tax rises?
OP posts:
PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:23

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:20

You are suggesting VAT is conjecture?

Hoarding of wealth is conjecture?

These are basic economic principles of which anyone with even the most basic financial knowledge is aware. Given the quality of your sources you've provided no evidence for your extremely poorly thought out points either. Which you'd know, of you'd ever actually been taught to read any kind of statistic, as you would have to be, of you had a Phd

It really is irrelevant how much VAT or any other taxes you might contribute when it is being dwarfed by the welfare and BIK you are receiving.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/supporting-documents-for-spring-statement-2025/impact-on-households-distributional-analysis-to-accompany-spring-statement-2025

AIBU to want spending cuts rather than more tax rises?
OP posts:
Goota · 05/09/2026 21:24

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:18

Reread what I wrote.

It was some weird not very well thought out rant.

Goota · 05/09/2026 21:24

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:20

You are suggesting VAT is conjecture?

Hoarding of wealth is conjecture?

These are basic economic principles of which anyone with even the most basic financial knowledge is aware. Given the quality of your sources you've provided no evidence for your extremely poorly thought out points either. Which you'd know, of you'd ever actually been taught to read any kind of statistic, as you would have to be, of you had a Phd

What wealth is hoarded? This always confuses me

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:25

EasternStandard · 05/09/2026 21:16

It’s a bit much tbh. People have different views on tax and spend. Even economists.

There's having a view but it's an intense lack of understanding or even deeper thought that stands out in the op. Even the wishy washy 'oh yeah it's cost money to police pip but you'd soon claw it back....' when any basic numbers on the fact show how much that spending to increase the staffing required to do that simply adds to the bill while not getting the money into the pockets of those who need it. Which is what op wants. She wants the poor barefoot in hits without electricity and a workhouse lifestyle before she will accept a definition of poverty. At which point she'd likely stand in the street complaining about the smell of the great unwashed who she's unwilling to have the country to pay to heat water to wash.

Ridiculous

QforCucumber · 05/09/2026 21:25

Wow - can tell you’ve never visited many northern cities if you truly believe there’s no child poverty in the UK. That bubble you live in must be very comfortable.

for reference - I agree there are a lot of savings to be made, and that yes the finance/admin/HR sections for example in our local council where DH works seem to have double the staff members per 100 staff than the private sector co I work for, he’s been there 15 years and struggles to figure out what many of the office staffs roles are, some are seeming just seeing out their careers until retirement. However - I also grew up in a home where my only meal daily was at school, double lined my pants with toilet roll as there was no money for sanitary ware, was evicted from our home and stayed, 5 of us, in a single room apartment above a takeaway at 10 years old because the mortgage wasn’t paid when my stepdad lost his job - and this was 28 years ago. Poverty absolutely exists, and it’ll be closer to you than you think.

Binnyforthewin · 05/09/2026 21:26

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:17

Yet the person on 20k takes home 17k and the person on 200k takes home 170k. Every additional penny of tax removed from the lower earner takes them closer to the point where they can't afford basic necessities. You'd go a long way to get to the point someone on 200k couldn't afford basic necessities.

A s before you start about cost of living and private school in the South East as though those are basic necessities for a high earner rather than massive luxuries they choose. It's nonsense.

If basics for any human is considered a single bedroom and basic tinned food and a bare minimum of heating to sustain life then those basics remain the basics for the higher earner so anything above that level IS a luxury.

That post is absolute bullshit. You need to learn how the tax system works! I'd stop telling other poster that there financial awareness is limited if I was you. You are in danger of looking like a fool.

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:26

QforCucumber · 05/09/2026 21:25

Wow - can tell you’ve never visited many northern cities if you truly believe there’s no child poverty in the UK. That bubble you live in must be very comfortable.

for reference - I agree there are a lot of savings to be made, and that yes the finance/admin/HR sections for example in our local council where DH works seem to have double the staff members per 100 staff than the private sector co I work for, he’s been there 15 years and struggles to figure out what many of the office staffs roles are, some are seeming just seeing out their careers until retirement. However - I also grew up in a home where my only meal daily was at school, double lined my pants with toilet roll as there was no money for sanitary ware, was evicted from our home and stayed, 5 of us, in a single room apartment above a takeaway at 10 years old because the mortgage wasn’t paid when my stepdad lost his job - and this was 28 years ago. Poverty absolutely exists, and it’ll be closer to you than you think.

She will only believe children are in poverty if they are dickensian street urchins unfortunately.

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:27

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:23

It really is irrelevant how much VAT or any other taxes you might contribute when it is being dwarfed by the welfare and BIK you are receiving.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/supporting-documents-for-spring-statement-2025/impact-on-households-distributional-analysis-to-accompany-spring-statement-2025

Edited

Would you be a dear and explain that graph to me?

Goota · 05/09/2026 21:27

Do we not expect able bodied adults to make their own way in life

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:27

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:27

Would you be a dear and explain that graph to me?

read the link.

OP posts:
EasternStandard · 05/09/2026 21:27

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:27

Would you be a dear and explain that graph to me?

Why would someone with that question?

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:28

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:27

read the link.

I'd like your take on it

RumPidgeon · 05/09/2026 21:29

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 10:40

Complete cut to foreign aid.

25% cut to the civil service.

25% cut to all welfare.

Reinstate a child benefit cap (3 children).

Mandatory in person PiP review for all claimants.

Scrap triple lock, winter fuel allowance, free TV licence, free bus passes for the elderly.

Motability only for UK manufactured cars, basic models only.

Cut House of Lords down from 1000 to say 200.

I don’t agree with a complete cut in foreign aid. It’s our soft power and stops more of the hordes arriving at our shores.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on everything else. Also: if you choose to have a disabled child (diagnosed in utero in timing with abortion laws) you should pay for the surplus healthcare, education and upkeep yourself. Too many people making choices that drain the public coffers but don’t want to pay for it out of their own pockets. Everyone has the right to make choices but they should pay for them accordingly.

Typo*

PinkFruitbat · 05/09/2026 21:29

Velumental · 05/09/2026 21:28

I'd like your take on it

I’m sure you can figure it out yourself.

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.