To think that older, wealthier people should be paying more tax and NI than younger?

[Creambun2]

So various suggestions, which will probably come to nothing, that young people should pay less tax and national insurance than than older people, presumably with a links to actual incomes maintained.

What do you think? I am in favour as I think that young people are being done over really. Unaffordable housing, educations expenses etc etc.

Of course according to many boomer types this is all their fault and they have no money for housing due to buying a coffee and having a phone

“To think that older, wealthier people should be paying more tax and NI than younger?”

They already do!

If we're going down this route (those who use - pay) then might I suggest:

People with cancer and other long-term illness should pay more in taxes (they are using £ billions in treatment and drugs).

Young people with children (particularly two or more children) should pay more in taxes for milking not only the NHS but also our education services.

I've had my tonsils out but I've been paying national insurance and taxes for 50 years so where has all the rest of my money gone? Subsidising the long term sick and families with children they can't afford seems to be the answer.

Sorry to have not RTFT, but couldn't get past the shite that OnionShite was talking on the first page!

You could be earning 12.5k each and thus paying no income tax, whereas the couple next door in the same house might earn 30k each and thus would pay lots more tax than you, despite them having no wealth and you having lots.

So surely they're sitting on the same wealth as your other couple if they're in the same house next door?
You also fail to recognise that they may have possibly lived through very different tax regimes of the 60's & 70's, where the top tax rate was 75-90%. Just because they've been judicious with their spending, you think they should be taxed some more now?

Weight based contributions.

Stand on the scales & get taxed per gram you're over the official "limit".....

Maybe have a tiered healthcare system?

Basic, cheaper treatments for the poor, better, more effective treatments for the wealthy.

Of course, if the poor are willing to volunteer to trial new treatments, they can have those at no extra charge!

Think of all the beagles that'd free up!!

And how exactly are we supposed to pay tax on our houses? It's not like we can liquidate them, unless we sell up or die. If we buy a new house we pay Stamp Duty. You know, that tax on buying a house. If we die, then our family pays inheritance tax. So its tax either way already.

So surely they're sitting on the same wealth as your other couple if they're in the same house next door?

No, there's no surely about it. You're only sitting on the same level of wealth if you both own the house. You've just assumed that both households do, but the entire point of the post is that ownership of property is where most people derive their wealth, not their income, and that the two don't necessarily correlate! You can have a very expensive property and thus have wealth whilst also having a low income, whilst someone else might have more income than you but not the wealth. And this of course is related to year of birth.

So, do RTFT. It'll help.

There are lots of posts that explain why, for example, someone who has wealth now because their home has gone up extraordinary multiples since they purchased it hasn't necessarily been judicious at all. The massive increase in the value of homes also means that lots of people who are have substantial housing wealth now were never remotely high enough earners to pay the tax rates you mention, which only ever applied to a small minority of the population.

Not that they'd be a refutation of my point about wealth v income even for those few who did pay them though. You can still have low income and substantial wealth as opposed to high income and low wealth, however stupid or clever you were in the 70s and whatever tax you did or didn't pay. If we're discussing things that were very different a few decades ago, high rates of inflation making it easier to pay down mortgage debt affected many more people than 95% tax rates.

Age tax is a terrible idea.
The NHS should no longer be a fully free service.
Older folks should be paying towards their social care in a means-tested fashion. I do feel there should be more state-owned nursing and rest homes that should be run at cost and not for profit.
I, also, feel families should be encouraged (via a better paid carer's allowance) to look after the elders where possible with supported opportunities for respite.

I feel quite aggrieved that as a middle income family who has saved and gone without foreign (or sometimes any) holidays to buy a house, and on top of that has (and still is) fully funding three kids through uni (two simultaneous) , that I should have to pay extra tax at the end of my life on top. As well as later retirement.

Even more so, when most of the wealth in this country is in the hands of a select few, and likely to remain so.

I've been paying income tax for 45 years, now own my own home through having no holidays, no car, working overtime and paying mortgage off early. I don't get state pension for another 5 years, bugger off if you think I need to pay even more. Stop free benefits, they should all be means tested, stop throwing money at the voters, why should I pay extra on top of my recent council tax rise whilst my friends sons take a gap year travelling around the States.

Am I fuck willing to pay out even more to fund those whingeing young people whose idea of poverty is not having an iPhone X.

We scrimped and saved like mad to get where we are today, and now things are just beginning to get comfortable, we're faced with a whole load of people resenting us as having had it cushy. Sorry, but lots of young millennial can't even spell 'cushy.'

Erm, I already do pay more. Or would you like more than the 40% of my earnings im currently paying op? (40% means for every £1.00 I earn I pay 40 pence to the government to help run this country)

I am 70 and I think it is ridiculous that we don’t have to pay NI. The older we get the more services we use.

It's time people starting saving for their future care if they can, I have always been paying to help others, I have saved for my own future care, I don't have children, a car, I have private dental and health care insurance. I am of an age where my parents didn't get child allowance, my dad worked his arse off to give us private education and I've been working continuously since 16. I get no benefits except free prescriptions but don't take anything.

I’m 50 and i’m All for it. I graduated owing £300, having had my tuition fees and living expenses (basic, I grant you - One step up from The Young Ones!), got a proper “graduate” job straight away, bought a house for £78k in 1997 which is now “worth” £400k. Not many of today’s generation are so lucky. I’d be happy to pay a bit more tax. It does need to be tax, though; not NI which is easy to avoid if you’re wealthy.