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?

If you are real then you've lived a privileged and very naive life.

My parents were shit (and I assume still are shit, I'm no contact now). No way will I be assuming any sort of responsibility for their care when they're elderly, financial or otherwise. I don't care where they go, as long as it's nowhere near me.

Wes arresting was on Radio saying that maternity compensation is actually greater than maternity care.

most elderly care homes and increasingly, children’s homes are private. The money is going to the private sector and the owners are making massive profits, basically.

Blimey. Imagine being so hard hearted that you begrudge children in care being looked after.

If you're paying nearly 50% tax, you're doing ok. Don't be a scrooge.

This is the issue, it’s the way these private contracts are being thrown out left right and centre. I was talking to someone who had inside knowledge on how so much council money is mishandled. Same at central government level too.

It’s not even necessarily corruption as such all the time but more incompetence or a don’t care attitude to how they spend the public purse. I had the misfortune to be unemployed for a few months back in 2015 and the amount of nonsense contractors the DWP has working to “get people back into work” is really something while the actual Job centre is not well resourced.

Yeah that’s the thing. Not everyone had good parents that they want to help. Also a lot of millennials are struggling financially and might not have as much money as their parents did at their age.

I mean, I think that, long term, we aren't going to see the kind of tax funded government support that society has seen over this last century. Population decline, the increasing old age dependency ratios, the instability and swings that we have seen in politics that will increase as the money tightens means that I think that family and family structures will once again become the last line of support for dependents and the vulnerable.

That talk of fairness and quality of life will be second fiddle to rhetoric about survival of the fittest when the double whammy of climate change and the social changes precipitated by a dwindling and unstable population bites.

And yes, I expect that women will shoulder the caring burden while those who don't have a solid family safety net will be completely exposed to this new ruthlessness.

Yes and would not be available to care for older relatives.

Parents having children older including fathers affect the overall rate of disability. this is no one’s fault. Part is choice, part not affording stable housing to have children. from a society point of view more children amc then adults need social care. I’m actually one. I am actually part of it (but due to miscarriage). Also I may have died in previous generations without medical treatment. I’m more likely to need care in old age

www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/genotes/knowledge-hub/the-paternal-age-effect/

Yep. I know people who have buy to let properties and are applying for a change of use so they can open children’s homes. The license is a couple of grand, but the projected profits are massive.
Let’s not be angry at the vulnerable people needing care here.

Ah right.

now I know you’re taking the piss.

good one 👍

A lot is to do with the ageing population. There are 42% more pensioners now than in 2000. As the largest voter group this age group has also successfully pressed government to disproportionately increase spending on them. Through pension protection, increased healthcare costs etc.
as a group today’s pensioners voted for low taxes when working so we now pay more to support them.
i think inheritance tax changes will be key to unlock the £5.5 trillion in wealth that will be inherited when today’s pensioners die.
but this isn’t popular among those people banking on this to fund them

Very naive question op.
There is no test to pass before "breeding ".
A person abusive nature may not be apparent.
Most bullies are also very charming
It s how they take people in
Adult social care? Would you be giving up a professional job or moving cross country to become full time carer for your parent with dementia and double incontinence?

Come on now

What makes you think that that policy change would be supported by the electorate when the largest generation is pensioners and the second largest population are those who stand to inherit from these same pensioners?

I used to work in social services and would add to that a lot of abusive parents have narcissistic tendencies. Just like many other women - they love the positive attention and praise having a baby bump or pushing a pram gets them and the idea of being called a “mum” or “Dad” which does carry some social status and connotations of ‘respectable member of society”

Nothing inherently wrong with someone liking all that, the issue is when that is a significant motivator for having kids but they don’t actually like parenting or children, that’s when it’s a problem.

I grew up with someone who was adopted, there were two other adopted kids in the house, foster kids and 4 biological kids. Most of them now say they were abused by their parents. You might think but why did they even bother having /adopting all those kids?

But the thing is everyone in our community used to think the parents were so wonderful for “taking in unwanted abused kids”.

Aging population and falling birth rates mean fewer working people supporting a large population of older people with complex needs, life expectancy has increased for the boomer generation, who due to their size have significant political power. This generation are now getting to an age where they have increasingly complex needs and they want to preserve their assets to pass on rather than shoulder the cost of their care.

Add to that a lack of investment in infrastructure and housing over the last 18 years, and very little economic growth over this time too, and what growth there has been has been concentrated on the very, very rich. This has meant that most people have had flat or declining living standards, plus the tax system has dragged more people into higher tax rates, COVID plus Ukraine war has increased inflation.

It’s a really complex situation and there aren’t any easy solutions.

100%

It was well and good when like expectancy was 65-70 but not when it's 80+. When there was 5 tax payers to every retiree not the 3 or nearly 2 per retiree as we are heading towards.

You could pat someone on the back retiring at 60 and not begrudge them their bus pass, free prescriptions etc. You knew that they might need a hip replacement or a heart bypass. However their social care was often not huge. Now we are expecting to fund care homes, lengthy hospital stays (bedblocking due to no community facilties) whilst keeping the triple lock for potentially 20-30 years post retirement. Yes the elderly have worked hard all their lives but it can't be at the detriment of the tax payer who are currently funding that lifestyle.

'These days, for better or worse, more women work' is what you posted. The implication is that it's all going wrong because women no longer do these roles.

Ugh that’s shocking. We really need to get a grip on this. Not only from the angle of saving money but also from a welfare point of view.

I used to work with children in care and no way should children’s home be run by those who just see it as a “business opportunity”. Those kids need real compassionate care and consideration.

LD is where the majority of social care budgets go. Some Adults need 2:1 on a 24 hr basis some 3:1 but they try to avoid that. The lifespan of these clients is that of an average adult. The money for older Adults does not come close.

As often happens on MN, the first reply is spot on. OP’s questions have very obvious answers.

I work with council social care teams as part of my job (although I'm in the private sector) and have been told that if the "wrong" family moves to the area, it can cost the council £250k they hadn't budgeted for in support and intervention and the eventual legal bill of having the kids removed.

Shocking and depressing and a big factor in why I've dropped a day at work. I don't lose that much take home pay, but pay a lot less tax.

@AmusedTaupePlayer there are two parts to the equation. The first is how much we pay, and the second is how it is administered.

The UK has one of the lowest rates of tax of any of the European countries (and many others outside of Europe), so we are actually contributing the bare minimum , if even that, to the amount that we need to meet the expectation of the population.

Then you get to how what the government do have gets administered. Successive governments have tried to balance the books in various ways as they know that putting up tax is not an election winner, despite the fact that more is required than comes in. So we have had underfunding of varying amounts in varying places. I.e. NHS gets more, policing gets less.

IMHO most things require a major overhaul to correct which takes time, and each government is only concerned with winning the next election.

You only have to look at the criticism the current government are getting to see how it pans out. In fairness, they haven't done themselves too many favours either, but you see the point.

The population appear to want champagne service for lemonade money, which is a problem regardless of the colour of the tie of whoever is sitting in the chair.

Absolutely. The government really should have prepared more for this a long, long time ago. The older generation are literally the “baby boomers”. At the time that birth rates boomed and then began to decline again, they should have foreseen a large elderly population and a smaller working population coming in a few decades time.

Hopefully they’ve learnt from their mistakes and will avoid having the same issue when the Millennials and Gen Zs are elderly, rather than expecting the system to be supported by the less populated Alphas and Betas.

What provisions have you made if you suddenly become sick or disabled & not able to work?

What will your children do if you can't look after them? Even if you have friends & family will they still be there for them into adulthood if they are sick or disabled themselves.

What would you want us as the tax payers around you if you got say terminal cancer or a devastating diagnosis like early onset Alzheimer's or a severe stroke.

A friend of mine had a severe life changing stroke in her early 30's with a 3 month old baby & a 2 year old. The bill was picked up by the tax payer. She needs round the clock care, her DH has to give up work.

What should we have done? Stuck them out on the street to beg in a slum somewhere?. Would you want that for yourself & your children? Do you honestly have enough savings & insurance to cover your family in that situation.