To think the proposed NI increases for social care are unfair?

[shouldbeworkingmore]

I recognise that social care needs funding but think that this proposal unfairly targets the younger generations. Plus we already have income taxes by stealth as the thresh holds have been frozen & wage stagnation is likely to continue for the next decade.

I really think that some of the biggest questions in the way we run our country should be addressed by coalitions, not the government. The NHS, social care, triple lock pensions, inheritance tax, house prices. These all need addressing for the long term benefit of the country, but won’t be addressed as it is politically damaging to do so.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

I don't get it. I really don't.

• We, everyone working, need to contribute more to the whole gamut of social care.
• NI is ringfenced monies specfically for that.
• OP thinks that paying more via NI is somehow unfair

How else should we pay it?
Via general taxation, where it won't be ringfenced?

What about those who aren't "working" but have higher incomes than those who are?

I.e. pensioners with gold plated occupational pensions?

People living on investment income, such as from property rentals, share portfolios, etc.

Lots of "non workers" have incomes higher than average earning workers, yet don't pay any NIC.

How is that fair?

Recent "taxes" have disproportionately hit workers, i.e. workplace pensions, NIC, student loan repayments, child benefit clawback.

@Whycangirlsbesonasty I agree

@MatildaIThink that's depressing

@MatildaIThink

Those are horrific figures.

But we got our borders back.

@Whycangirlsbesonasty

I really think that some of the biggest questions in the way we run our country should be addressed by coalitions, not the government. The NHS, social care, triple lock pensions, inheritance tax, house prices. These all need addressing for the long term benefit of the country, but won’t be addressed as it is politically damaging to do so.

The problem is coalitions consisting of whom? We already have the problem that too many people only act in their own short term interest. Getting them to think long term or about other people is nigh on impossible.

The triple lock needs to go, inheritance tax needs to be abolished, the tax system needs to raise much more revenue from a much wider range of people. We need to invest more in education and healthcare. House prices will sort themselves out if we deal with the supply and demand issue, but if we ignore population growth there is nothing we can realistically do.

However Conservative voters will generally vote for taxes not to rise because they do not want to pay more and Labour voters will generally vote for tax rises on people who earn more than them, because they do not want to pay more. Whilst both groups of voters will demand the government spend more on them.

I know this is a little off topic. However, my son is in supported accommodation, having lived for three years in residential care, and my mother (in her nineties) has a carer every day. The carers and support staff are dedicated and highly skilled people (you need a specialised skills set to talk down a seriously mentally ill young man or to dress an elderly lady in a way that retains her dignity). However, the staff who perform these roles are on the minimum wage.

Both companies who provide the support are private, but my son's funding comes from a joint health and social care budget. However, I do not think the carer's pay would be greater if they were employed by the LA.

Caring and support work needs to be valued so much more. I work and I pay taxes. I would willingly pay more tax if this enabled an increase in the wages of those people who provide the care and support to the most vulnerable in society.

I am pleased with the decision but feel a tax increase may be more appropriate.

The retired population tend to vote Conservative. The younger working population tend not to. HTH

@thereisonlyoneofme

Where do you think the money should come from then ? People keep moaning about the state of social care and the NHs but dont want to pay for it. Why does it unfairly impact younger generations, people over 30 do work as well you know.

I expect the op meant people of working age.

It isn't just pensioners who may require social care, however it mainly is. I am a retired person and paid my whack in my working life, still pay a little income tax. I haven't needed any help and hope I never do but I wouldn't think it unfair to access it if I did. I certainly don't begrudge any of my contributions going towards helping others. Having said that I do not trust the government to manage our contributions fairly or wisely but that's nothing new.

@tattymacduff

Can there not be a calm, sensible debate without this language?

Someone upthread talked about "oldies" rattling around in their big houses. Others are saying that pensioners should be hit harder with council tax to force them to downsize. That is not a calm or sensible debate, it is bigoted though.

IMHO ageism is alive and very, very well, and gets nowhere near as much acknowledgement and action as other forms of discrimination. Older people can be easy targets because many can't speak up due to frailty, illness, etc. I used to work in Social Services, and local authorities used to own their own care homes until sometime around the 1980's. They weren't always the best places, but at least there was no profit element involved. I'd love to see residential care brought back into NHS and/or local authority control, but this is as likely to happen as Boris Johnson becoming celibate.......

IR35 had little impact on most true contractors.
That is a straight out lie.

You pay NI until you retire so all workers, especially higher earners (who tend to be older) will pay more. So this young persons impact only, is nonsense.

As an 84 year old who pays a bit of tax, I think everyone should contribute. Government doesn't want to tax the elderly because that's where they get a lot of votes - not mine I hasten to add. It's political.

Younger working people have always paid for the elderly.

Why should today’s younger people be any different?

[quote EstuaryBird]**@JaneKing75

I don't know if that's true, I left home at 16, worked in a call centre at night and went to university in 1994. I wasn't the only one at all. Very few on my course had parents chipping in for anything at all

You’re talking about 1994, I’m talking about 1972. They’re not comparable. Different times, different experiences.[/quote]
My father , working class , went in 1964 . He claimed JSA in holidays and lived off his grant otherwise. He said he was pretty broke but it was more money then he’d ever had before.

My mother went in 76. As did her two sisters . Middle class but my grandmother has told me she couldn’t afford to contribute. They all lived of their grants and worked through the holidays (and paid board at home!) They were unusually progressive parents which no doubt helped all 3 get to uni but the idea that in the days of grants people couldn’t afford uni isn’t accurate. Social attitudes I’m sure held working class people back but the money was there.

And for the person comparing the high tax wage at the time with student loans now… Comparing a high tax on a job you did for a few years to £40,000 debt at 21 with 6% interest which effectively leads to a career long 9% tax is just apples and oranges .

Yanbu, this combined with the cut to universal credit is just going to make things worse for the lowest paid

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Dementia is seen as a cash cow for care home owners

No doubt, but folk can't have it all ways. Far fewer suffered dementia years ago because they didn't live long enough to get it, but now they're kept alive way beyond what would have been a natural lifespan it's become an epidemic

Nobody's suggesting actually killing off the elderly, but in a society where death's become something to avoid at all costs there'll be consequences

This is so true. The death of someone over 100 is now seen as a medical failure. It’s madness.

I do think that the system needs an overhaul, whilst there are companies operating purely for profit, and a real disparity in the care available depending on postcode and income, increasing funding won't actually do as much as it could do if it was in conjunction with changes.

Not sure what the answer is, I'm happy to pay more to ensure everyone receives the care they need, but I'm not sure just adding £££s into an ineffective system is the best way.

As a young person I'd rather pay extra into social care now so that I can rest assured that the elderly in my family are being taken care of if they need to be, instead of me having to stop my life to care for them fully.

Younger working people have always paid for the elderly.

Why should today’s younger people be any different?

No one is arguing to not pay any tax or NI though so I'm not sure why you think younger people don't think they should pay for the elderly?

@Coogee

Younger working people have always paid for the elderly.

Why should today’s younger people be any different?

Because the elderly didn’t want to help the young- did they object to uni fees, piss poor early years provisions- the boomers took and took and took!

@Petronius16

As an 84 year old who pays a bit of tax, I think everyone should contribute. Government doesn't want to tax the elderly because that's where they get a lot of votes - not mine I hasten to add. It's political.

It's not political along party lines. Labour increased NIC twice, and since they don't get the core Pensioner vote, they didn't do it to protect pensioners.

@NekoShiro

As a young person I'd rather pay extra into social care now so that I can rest assured that the elderly in my family are being taken care of if they need to be, instead of me having to stop my life to care for them fully.

That’s not as a young person that’s as a person who doesn’t want to look after their family- I have no elderly relatives, why should I pay in that case?

I actually disagree with the fundamental consensus that more money needs to be thrown at Social Care. Funded social care is the highest level of response, and should be retained for those totally unable to take positive control over their conditions. That's not to say there's no help available - far from it. Communities have a large part to play to support the most vulnerable, to engage older people who are suffering from social isolation. Charities offering condition-specific support and social groups, mental health support activities and interventions.

There's overreliance quite frankly on the most disproportionate level of care - funded care - and this is what needs to change.