Where are those people's families and where is my tax going?

[AmusedTaupePlayer]

Nearly 50% of my income vanishes in tax and NI, and I’m seriously wondering what I’m getting in return. The streets are filthy, the Tube’s a mess of delays and breakdowns, and my child’s school can’t even fix leaking ceilings.
GP appointments? Impossible. Police follow-ups? Hit and miss.
I asked my councillor, and he said most of the money’s going to social care — mainly for elderly people and kids in care. Fine, but it makes me ask: where are their families? Why is the state carrying so much, and why does it feel like we're footing the bill for a system that’s barely working?
I’m not trying to be cruel — just frustrated. Is anyone else getting the same response from their council? Or any better answers?

The rise in benefits is in part, due to a terrible health service, a desire to keep unemployment rates down and an assessment system that people can game.

All done or made worse under the Tories.

But the main issue is low wages, topped up by in work benefits.

How can it be right that e.g supermarkets are making billions in profits, yet pay large numbers of their workers low wages who then claim benefits in order to be able to live?

So.... I get Child Benefit x3, UC, Scottish Child Payment x3, Child Disability Payment for two of my children (one is an adult now). We are hardly rolling in the cash🤣

And Carer's Allowance as two of my DC are disabled.

Would you prefer it if I chucked them both on the rubbish heap? Would that save a bit of cash?

What planet are some people on???

Tesco reported a pre-tax profit in 2023/24 of £2.29 billion. This is a significant increase from the previous year's profit of £0.88 billion,

Their capitalisation - ie the value of their shares, which are held in people's pensions etc is 26.50 billion.

So in 2022/23, the Tesco shares in your pension went up by 3%. That's less than you could get in an instant access account, and definitely a real terms loss given the 11% inflation that year.

2023/24 was better. 10% return on the Tesco shares in your pension, and only half of that inflated away. So 5% real terms gain in return for risking your money. That's about 0.6% more than you could have got by sticking your money in an instant access account, risk free. Woohoo - shareholders are so lucky!! Oh wait, still in loss across 2 years though.

Of course, you could increase food prices in order to pay the workers more. But that's a bit circular and pointless, since those employees also need to eat.

People expect more and more to be given to them. Government spending is relentlessly increasing year-on-year. Health spending for example has increased by 3.8% average per year in real terms for the last 50 years, a cummulative 5-fold increase.

The only way that's possible is if productivity increases. Ie for each and every one of us to create more value from our work than we did last year. Yes, that includes you. 'Someone else' won't fix it.

What's the actual income though? Do you get housing costs/council tax benefits on top?

It’s their own doing. Driving out tax payers and the NI policy. So yeh it’ll be cuts to welfare with Labour.

No housing help as MF. That was paid off years ago - we are in our 40/50s. DH works full time and I am carer to two of my four DC. If only I had had a crystal ball to have known I would have had children who had additional needs....

I have chronic health conditions myself so just getting through each day is exhausting in itself and I am sure there are many more out there just like me. As for pensions, I don't dwell on this as I just take each day at a time.

Rather than having a go at those on the bottom of the heap, direct your anger at those at the very top. The Jeff Bezos' of the world...

DH's income falls just below £40k. Tiny compared to many out there!

Welfare cuts are going to happen one way or another. The maths simply don't math. If it doesn't happen now, then the pressure will continue to build, and it will be worse and more dramatic when it happens.

It's a bit like Brexit. Both political parties tried to 'wish away' the negative consequences of immigration on living standards. Because that didn't chime with their belief systems. They accused people of being bigots for bringing it up and did nothing about it. Eventually, Brexit happened, with all the damage and cost that came with it. It could have been avoided if previous governments had had the courage to face an unpalatable but inescapable truth.

Welfare cuts are going to happen one way or another. The maths simply do not math.

And herein lies the problem. People are still wedded to the idea that national budgets are like domestic budgets and we just have to do the maths and all will be well.

This is a fallacy. It is not about maths but about economics. This is a different thing altogether. Economics should be taught as a core subject at school.

The maths being the shrinking number of people funding the ever-increasing Welfare budget. This isn’t sustainable

Especially given the speed that Welfare budget is growing.

Other government spending is also increasing year-on-year in real terms - all funded by those same few - highly skilled and hence mobile - people.

Economic analysis will still point out the burden and the situation we’re in with very high borrowing and lower tax take.

Not to mention that the current Labour government are alienating that very same group of highly skilled - and hence mobile - people who are funding the whole show with divisive rhetoric designed to stir up hatred against them.

Not smart.

But when your DHs income is topped up by DLA, SCP and child benefit (around £1,300 depending on level of DLA), plus whatever UC you’re entitled to, it’s a decent income - as it should be because by caring for your children instead of being out working you save the system hundreds of thousands in care fees.

@user1476613140 anger? What 'anger'? It was a basic question related to your answer.

The payments in government borrowing have gone down in the last 40 years as a percentage of expenditure.

People feel shocked by the borrowing, but they are thinking in terms of domestic budgets - governments have other priorities and duties than simply balancing the books.

What is missing is a society that accepts and embraces the principle of communal responsibility to care for and support each other and the willingness to pay the price (in taxes) to achieve this and reap the individual reward when their turn comes (e.g. needing child care, health care etc.) . Scandinavia manages it, not because the maths is any different, but because the attitudes are.

No one is thinking about domestic budgets. I only see that line on mn these days.

Debt servicing is high.

There are trillions in pensions, SM's make up a very small part & of course we managed when SM profits were far far smaller and less people relied on top up benefits.

No its down to me to increase productivity, as you put it, its down to business & govt's to have policies and structures in place to ensure a happy, motivated workforce, something sadly lacking in the UK.

There has been a marked change in the UK over the last 10 to 20 years, majority are expected to work harder for less in real terms wage rises.... so people just do the min they can get away with... i believe there is even a term for this, quiet quitting.....

Health spend? 3.8 % in RT? That unfortunately doesn't take into account an aging and increasing population, more demand/poorer health, higher equipment costs nor that medical inflation runs much higher than CPI, ignoring that RPI is higher. Wonder why that change happened???

Why Health spending is increasing is irrelevant to whether it's affordable.

And yes, it is down to you.

If people quiet quit, they can't expect increasing - or even level - state services... always funded by 'someone else'.

The Scandinavian countries have far higher tax for average earners, and less tax than the UK for high earners. And far fewer means-tested exclusions. Everyone pays in - and takes personal responsibility - and everyone benefits.

But that is how canvassing political parties encourage the public to think. It is not just on mumsnet at all.

No they don’t. We keep voting in parties that play down or don’t even mention the cost of high borrowing and debt servicing. We now have Labour.

There are trillions in pensions, SM's make up a very small part

Well obviously. But the pp called out supermarkets as having unreasonably high profits which she thinks should be given to the workers. My post was to show how the profit only seems huge because the capitalisation (how much money is invested) is really, really huge. And the profit needs to be shared out between all those investors as a return on the money invested.

When you consider the percentage return on that investment, and compare it to other things they could do with that money - right down to an instant access account, which has the lowest return of all, because there's zero risk - it isn't at all unreasonable.

Unless you think investors (including your pension fund) should hand over their money for nothing - just to subsidise shoppers and employees?

Unless you think investors (including your pension fund) should hand over their money for nothing - just to subsidise shoppers and employees?

But if workers don’t earn enough to live without significant top up benefits we’re robbing Peter to pay Paul. If wages were set at a living standard, the pull on the public purse would be less, the incentive to work would be greater and tax receipts through income tax and VAT would increase. We’ve backed ourselves into a corner to stabilise the markets at the cost of poor productivity and dependency on the State (ie tax payers) to make up the difference. And now it’s proving unsustainable.

If productivity doesn't increase, then standards of living can't sustainably increase either.

And that includes the 3.8% per year health increase you are so dismissive of, let alone the 50% Welfare increase in the last decade.

Productivity hasn't increased in several decades.

Nail on the head. Statistics show that we have a proportionally smaller pool of workers as a proportion of the population and an increasing number of people relying on the state to fund benefits, healthcare, social care, etc. It's clearly not sustainable.

The only way that's possible is if productivity increases. Ie for each and every one of us to create more value from our work than we did last year. Yes, that includes you. 'Someone else' won't fix it.

Nail on the head. It's always the same "Someone else" should pay more tax! Never themselves, but someone else. Same with working, it's always someone else who should increase their hours, never themselves!