AIBU to think that most people with children who

[Hedgeblog]

say the phrases in regards to paying taxes such as

"I pay your wages mate (to anyone who works in the public sector)" or "I don't want MY taxes to pay for benefit scroungers" etc. are totally mistaken.

In fact the majority of people in the country barely cover the state costs of their own childrens education let alone their NHS bills, tax credits, child benefit, subsidised rail fares etc through their own taxes.

It costs the state 5K to educate 1 child of school age per year, add in NHS costs and you get the picture.

I hear this expression quite often it really grates on me. I know our society doesn't work on a zero sum basis but really unless your earning over #50K are in good health and don't have kids stop spouting on you pay everyone's wages!!

you have to earn over 26k to pay more in taxation that you use in services yourself. unsurprsingly its around the average wage i.e. one half subsidises the other.

well I paid taxes for a good decade before I had kids, and being young and healthy didn't need the NHS for much more than the occassional smear (still don't, been to A&E once in my life, not keen on antibiotics etc), so by that logic I started in a positive balance before I had kids and started not quite breaking even?, and then once kids are all educated I'll still have a long working life ahead of me till retirement?

just asking how that fits your logic?

(do not use that phrase though)

I had a good salary prior to kids too and we're a 2 parent working family

YANBU. It's worse when people on benefits say it though.

its USUALLY people on benefits who say it , police men/women I know say its usually 14 year olds and long term unemployed who tell them they pay their wages

Well until I am made redundant in March our family income more than pays for what the state spends on us. Not begrudging that fact at all - but it is fact.

But I do know what you mean OP. People seem to be blind to the benefits they get - either in things like education or actual cash like child benefit.

TheReal, that makes sense but disgrees with a recent thread which claimed no one could ever hope to pay enough in taxes EVER to even cover the NHS care they received.
I did ask where the money came from then, as it all has to balance. Didn't get a reasonable answer but did end up feeling quite stupid,

The realtillyminto

I don't think that is accurate if you have children. Tax on a 26k salary would be around what 5-6K?? I think, it doesn't even touch the costs of education, maternity services, GP appointments, other NHS costs during the childs first few years, child benefit, nursery subsidies, free travel, then your own NHS costs, roads, library, state pension! Even with one child that is well over the tax taken, hence that person is not actually paying for benefit scroungers!!

No, you're right. People have no concept of how much they cost the state at all. You had a couple of children on the NHS? 10 grand each, and thats with no complications. Your childrens schooling, 14 years of it, their doctors and prescriptions and opticians and all That. Your share of police and courts and street lighting, and traffic wardens and a million other things that you don't consider.

You certainly aren't paying for the lifestyles of those on benefits.

YANBU I HATE it "I'm paying for her to blah blah." It's the HEIGHT of selfish ignorance and a good part of what is wrong with this country. People think they an only be responsble for themselves...the mark of a decent country is how willing it is to care for the needy and vulnerable.

the op said it in relation to people WITH CHILDREN because education and NHS costs tip it over the balance so they're not breaking even, I just think its better to think of it over a life time if you're to really consider whether people (with or without children) break even or not

not necessarily saying they do SPB, just that by the OPs logic I would over a lifetime, maybe not for the next couple of years but I give it a good bash while I have young uns (work full time, don't claim benefits I'm entitled to but don't need etc, don't waste my GPs time with colds or miss appointments)

26k is an average. if noone ever pays for all their NHS care, who pays for it? i cannot see how that can be true.

some people must pay more than they use & some people less. so on average, a person earning 26k pays for his/her NHS treatment.

mr/ms average must pay for all their (NHS) care.

by the same logic I don't think the OP was correct to say that someone earning 50k NOW is covering their own and others expenses, it might be a peak and they might end up physically and mentally burnt out and dependant in 10 years time.

its got to be considered from cradle to grave

and maybe people with children drain less at the other end of life if their children help with their meals and care later?

I just had a thought that I suppose most people can't be paying in as much as they are taking out, hence the mahoosive deficit!

That's so funny that police you know say it's people on benefits that often claim to have paid their wages.

In answer to Reduce recycle, I think you'll find that NHS costs in later life will zero out the extra you may or may not have paid before or after children. Just things like blood pressure tablets are extortionate. We just never see the bills.

If I'm perfectly honest, I'm more concerned about the £10k missiles we seem to be firing at people in other countries than benefits.

DH was watching the news about 18 months ago and they were in Afghanistan or some where else we were merrily bombing at the time and during the 5 minute 'bit' they released 3 missiles (only one was headed towards the target) at £10k.

So in that 5 minutes they managed to spend more than your average DM benefit scrounger receives in a year anyway!

Yes, it's an awful phrase.

If we bring in more than another family on MN, for example, are we meant to grudge them their NHS care? Or vice versa?

That phrase just speaks of greedy self-interest to me.

ah come on now, surely its obvious that a small amount of very large earners pay massive amounts of tax into the system? Plus indirect taxes and so on. It's not exactly a simple sum but pretending that you must pay enough cos, like, how else does it add up is just daft. Sure, you might even it up in the end, but when you add in all the smaller things you get from the system, its not very likely for most of you.

Presumably a lot of the money the country has comes from taxes on business.

Hedgehog "bed blockers" are a MASSIVE expense on the NHS. if an older person has a family who'll check in over the weekend before their package of care starts on monday then thats a hospital bed free for an extra 3 days!
You directed your OP at people WITH CHILDREN, now it doesn't always turn out this way but someone with children is a bit more likely to have private support in old age than someone who has noone but similarly aging and frail friends

some people must pay more than they use & some people less. so on average, a person earning 26k pays for his/her NHS treatment.

I think it's a bit more top heavy than that, doesn't something like 80% of all tax revenue come form 10% of the country. That would lead me to believe that 90% of the country are actually not paying their way.

I think it's a lot more people even over their lifetime taking out more than they pay in. I think it would probably surprised the best of us paying a lot in!

I once tried to work out whether I paid my own wages, the theory being that I worked in a respite home for disabled people, who paid for the respite care using money from the government (don't know which... DLA?) which I pay my taxes to...

And then I went cross eyed and got back to work.

Anyway, I like a society that gives in to the pot and is redistributed to those who need it. It's just the ignorance of people who use the expression I mentioned I used in my original post.

26K? Really? Hurrah! Does that mean I can take the high moral ground with public servants? Now, where's that Tory MP of ours....

So Hedgeblog are you a Benefit Scrounger since you don't like people saying that? And is it ok for those who earn > £26 to say it?

Somebody pays it somewhere; it's a dumb thing to say, agreed, but the same people are probably tossers in other ways too.