What happens when the baby boomers die?

[LargeSquareRock]

Sorry about the title, but that’s literally it. I’ve wondered this since I was a child.

Obviously we are about to enter a 20 year spike when a smaller number of tax payers support a higher number of elderly people in healthcare and elder care.

What happens in 20 years when the spike is over? Do we have empty care homes, plentiful housing and easily available health care?

I really have no evil agenda asking this- demographics has always fascinated me.

They are called ‘the silent generation’ OP

What will happen to the property? That and all our assets will be distributed as per the instructions in our wills.

You are in Australia, you say, so I dont know their position. Here around 2/3rd of pensioners are now paying tax, more than the youngest generation. GenX is bigger now than the remaining baby boomers - so cant see any massive changes happening in the next 20 years.

Gen X will have better pensions and pay even more tax - and will be moaned about instead.

But how much tax are those pensioners paying. It's a bit of an irrelevant point if some of them are only paying a few pounds per year. We need to see how much tax the average pensioner is paying, and upper/lower quartiles, etc for such statistics to have any meaning.

And how many of the young you are referring to are still in full time education, so again, comparison of statistics is meaningless.

https://news.sky.com/story/over-70s-now-more-likely-to-pay-income-tax-than-those-under-30-13327868#:~:text=Over%2D70s%20paid%20%C2%A319.1,increasingly%20reliant%20on%20its%20retirees.&text=More%20retired%20baby%20boomers%20are,since%20the%20pre%2DCOVID%20period.

And btw the under 30s receive more in benefits than baby boomers did at the same age.

It’s going to be housing benefit because of the lack of council houses and private rental costs.

I’m 66 and receive State Retirement pension and private pension. I pay about £220 pm in tax

Care homes are only built in areas of need, no point investing in something that will lie empty, same as most development.

At 68, I pay income tax of about £900 per month. I have my state pension, a very small private pension, my £6k pa earnings from employment plus the dividend income from the half share I hold (for tax reasons) in the business my DH still owns and runs. And on top, I pay council tax and VAT, as do we all, as well as insurance premium tax on every insurance that is required, and aviation tax if I go on holiday.

I don't resent it but I am a more significant contributor than my DC who is struggling to become established in a career. We have been/are fortunate and so I don't complain. But the tax take from the ordinary middle rankers is at an all time high. When I told my accountant I was pregnant, she said "Well that's £500k you won't earn in the next 10 years."

Late 70s and I pay very little tax. I had irregular, low paid work through lack of childcare, Married woman’s stamp (a mistake in hindsight), some years of NI missing, but a modest occupational pension added to my even smaller State pension just takes me over the tax threshold.

However my DC, DDIL & DSIL are all higher rate tax payers. As @anyolddinosaur said, they’re heading for much better pensions. Plus, their generation are set to inherit more than previous ones, due to increased home ownership in my boomer generation.

Over-70s paid £19.1bn in income tax, compared with £18.3bn by under-30s, as Britain becomes increasingly reliant on its retirees.

But if you look at that by age range it's pulled down because of the under 20s which would be expected as many won't be full time due to education. 25-29 yr olds are paying mean tax of 4.4k which is higher than the over 70s.

It's also to do with wage stagnation & triple lock plus changing demographics. There are fewer young people.

@ALovelyCupOfNameChange Not just housing benefit - education costs as baby boomers generally were not still in education past 18, 16 for some. Also universal credit, baby boomers not in education were expected to do any work going so fewer neets.

Not just housing benefit - education costs as baby boomers generally were not still in education past 18, 16 for some. Also universal credit, baby boomers not in education were expected to do any work going so fewer neets

Are you saying that no boomer grew up and has received housing benefit, social housing, universal credit, family allowance, etc as an adult? That doesn't make sense.

@Shakenandstirredup Obviously not. Under 30s now get more back from taxpayers than baby boomers did at the same age. i.e. up to age 30. Universal credit didnt exist then and income support expected you to take any job that was available. No free or even tax free childcare either. There was so much stigma attached to benefits that when family income supplement started in 1971 take up was only about 50%.

Can you link to that as I've never read that?

When I was at school, my school friends were "claiming" to leave school at the end of term in fifth year, somehow managed to get themselves a council funded flat for the Summer, and then they started college or sixth form in September (which was always the plan) and had to vacate their council funded flat because they were back in education. So, there WERE benefits and abuses of benefits back then. I knew several of my school friends who did it. In fact my first boyfriend did it, and we "enjoyed" a Summer in his flat until he had to vacate it and go back home to live with his parents! Funny how he engineered a fake massive argument with his parents (or so he told the DHSS/Council) to get the flat as he couldn't possibly continue living at home, but then funnily enough as soon as he lost his eligibility for his flat (started college), the fake massive argument was completely forgotten and he moved back in with the parents, happy ever after. It was the same then as it is now, people know how to play the system, people talk, and soon the abuse becomes widespread.

Boomers were also the post war generation. Far more jobs, less people and the luxury of being able to leave a job in the morning and get a new one in the afternoon. I don't like the work for work's sake rubbish. Being in a job just to earn money is NOT good for you and you should actually gain something for yourself out of it that isn't monetary.

Interesting in the light of NHSE being dismantled for providing jobs that aren't needed as they are duplicated elsewhere. Where are they going to put all those people? Reminds me of the 80's teenage dig a hole in the road and fill it in again YTS'.

I've always read that boomers have got more out of the system the they put in which makes sense.

Take the state pension for example which is 11k ish a year. So 20 years of that is 222k. Which means you would have to have earned 52k or the equivalent for 20 years to have paid enough tax & NI. But we know that only 3.5% paid 40% tax rate In 1991–92. And that's before you factor in healthcare, education, police etc.

Now obviously there isn't a pot and the money is paid forward but with the changing demographics it's becoming a real
issue. We already have more over 65s than under 15s.

There was much more social housing the 80s when MT introduced right to buy.

Surely this is why we absolutely need all these young people trying to get here from other countries to work. I've never understood the 'close our borders' argument when people are moaning there is a lack of young people in Britain working and paying taxes.

Surely economic immigration is great boost to level out our skewed demography.
As well as a boost to our skills base, our cultural wealth and our tax income?

I was asked at interview (for a Personal Assistant job) in 1985 what my plans were for marriage and children and how I'd make provision for any putative children if I got the job. Where we lived (rural Somerset and 80 miles from my parents) there was no childcare, any nurseries were only in the major cities, you expected your parents or siblings to care for your children when you went back to work.

I was born in quite a large city in 1960. There weren't even any PLAYGROUPS anywhere nearby, and my mum was a SAHM from necessity, she gave up work whilst expecting me because that was what you had to do, unless you had family support for childcare.

According to Chat GPT:

By 2050, the UK's population is projected to become more ethnically diverse, with ethnic minorities making up a significant portion of the population.

Ethnic minority projections
2050: The proportion of ethnic minorities in the UK is projected to increase to 40%.

I suppose my worry is that voting blocks will coalesce around ethno-national groups and Westminister will be very Sectrarian and that there will be a fracture of social cohesion.

ChatGP is a writing ai thing, isn't it? not a source of knowledge......