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.

NI is not paid on rental income or dividend income, only on income from work

Exactly so how can people argue that it's fair?

@Marieg10 & don't forgot what he has to pay in living costs from what he has left over & look forward to a retirement age of 70 plus?

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Where do you think the money should come from then?

Everyone

But it will come from everyone who's working, no matter what their age
As for the retired (of which I'm one) IMO the pension triple lock needs removing, along with some of the jam such as winter fuel payments unless on certain benefits

Agree. DH and I are retired and both luckily paid into private pensions, no mortgage etc. DH also receives the State Pension but we were shocked when he received the £200 heating allowance as well. We'd much rather the government spent the money on people who need it.

@SofiaMichelle

This is going to be very costly for a lot of people, not just 'the young'.

It's an extra 1% on everything over £9,500.

So someone on £109,500 I'll pay an extra £1,000 per year.

That's not insignificant.

Higher earners pay less after a certain threshold. Your maths are out. Lower or average earners will get shafted, as per usual.

There are some fundamental questions as to whether people want to see a free at the point of use service or one that people pay for. My parents have come round to the idea that they would rather pay for care if they need it and have a nicer experience and choice than have something dire. Previously they had been of the mindset that it was unfair to use the equity from their house but now they are of the mindset that it is money there to be used for care if needed.

I’d like to see care workers being paid more and for care staff to be treated better.

I don’t disagree with paying more tax but I do disagree with it being via NI. Income tax would seem fairer. There would be options around increasing capital gains as well.

I'm 65 and a socialist through and through. Me and other old gimmers I know would rather gouge our own eyeballs out than vote Tory so please don't assume this!

I can't believe how much 'young' people hate 'old' people on here. We don't all have large pensions and live the life of Riley. Up until last year I was on my knees changing nappies of 7 year old SEN children at my old primary school but had to leave as my body couldn't always get up afterwards and am currently on no income at all. Not that I'm looking for sympathy just another side to the story.
When I started work in the 70s the basic rate of tax was 30% and our mortgage interest was 15% but that was life. Also we didn't have NI but NHI so I assume it all went on the NHS. Agree it's hard for our children but we are such a consumer society now and things that just used to be for the rich are part of life for everyone so it's hard to have everything you want. I would support a rise in tax or ni for all but while we have nicompoops in charge it won't go where it's needed so would be a waste.
Thinking about Brexit, wasn't it Johnson who said the NHS would profit by 300 million if we left? Might have the wrong figured there but it was the major point on which a lot of people voted OUT I believe.

You do realise that younger people access social care as well? In fact given the social care costs for younger people with disabilities and some with learning disabilities which can come in at thousands per week I'd argue those costs might be higher than retired people! Those are also people who are likely to never have contributed themselves.

Also younger people have strokes and other disabling illnesses too.

The increase is to cover everyone.

Its stupid that people who have big pensions don't pay NI. Plenty of them will have more income than a lot of working people.

Selling up to downsize is not so straightforward. Smaller houses particularly bungalows are expensive because there aren't enough of them and not everybody wants to live in a flat having had a house and garden.

You don't always get much money out of moving to a smaller property so lots of people won't bother.

it should be an additional tax that everyone pays including the retired. Very unfair burden for working age if NI.
I like the idea of a new 1-2 % tax on income including pension income over say a minimum amount so the burden is shared among all age groups - not just the under 65's.
Retired people still gain as fewer years to pay it - and they could benefit greatly from it if it avoids them selling their home when the time comes.

My DH 70 next month and he still pays substantial tax on income.
If one of us needs care we hopefully can fund direct but DS has agreed he would pick up any slack to avoid house sale as he and DD would benefit later on.

Also those saying that the young have always paid for the elderly.

The problem is going to be, that at some point probably my son's generation, there is not going to be anything left in the pot for them as elderly people. Then what do we do? Most of us will be dead, so won't care, but if we start with something in place now, where the children of today are not going to be left with nothing, we might be able to save something. As it is, the next generation is going to be screwed and the government don't give a toss

Lower or average earners will get shafted, as per usual.

Exactly

Someone who earns 200k pays £650 NI a month so would lose £65.

Someone on 50k would pay £40

Someone on 30k would pay £20

It is not an equal burden & that before you address the fact that people have an income without paying any NI

People seem to have a lot of faith that there would a direct correlation between a NI increase and seeing an improvement in the social care we recieve as a result? You are all either far less cynical than me or far too trusting.

@princeofpersian

Do you think the opinion of an ageist racist carries much weight?

@coconutmonkey I guess they are basing it on past performance? 🤔

Its the right thing to do IMHO.

@Gimlisaxe

Also those saying that the young have always paid for the elderly.

The problem is going to be, that at some point probably my son's generation, there is not going to be anything left in the pot for them as elderly people. Then what do we do? Most of us will be dead, so won't care, but if we start with something in place now, where the children of today are not going to be left with nothing, we might be able to save something. As it is, the next generation is going to be screwed and the government don't give a toss

It’s also not about ‘the young ‘ and ‘the elderly’ on a personal level. As all those pensioners voting against ‘the young’ have happily funded their own children’s uni fees, house deposits etc. Any effects in wage cuts etc for these people aren’t that hurtful because their parents bail them out. For example - I had to save and save and save for my share of a house deposit. DP got his handed to him by his parents. Any money they save on care will go to the next generation - DP. Just not to the general population.

It’s about people not wanting to give to others plain and simple.

@CoronaPeroni & @moohoop you're completely missing the point.

Also @Gimlisaxe (great username btw) I agree with you! Constantly asking for more money when you don’t have more people being able to pay and more people needing it will result in a collapse. As the latter outpaces the former. A big levelling is needed rather than squeezing a bit of spare change from workers

Young hard working immigrants who care for their own parents are tired of being taxed to pay to care for elderly English whose own children don't care for them.

The argument that the young are paying for the elderly doesn’t hold water. Although retired we are still paying income, and council tax. So we are still paying for children’s education even though we are long past that. My DD is an International teacher so her DDs getting private education . DS no children but as an engineer he pays substantial tax/NI .

Now I've read it properly it isnt the fairest way at all. It needs to be put on income tax so older people with bigger pensions pay it too.

@shouldbeworkingmore

Lower or average earners will get shafted, as per usual.

Exactly

Someone who earns 200k pays £650 NI a month so would lose £65.

Someone on 50k would pay £40

Someone on 30k would pay £20

It is not an equal burden & that before you address the fact that people have an income without paying any NI

I think you do not understand how NI works. It is taxed in stages, so the person earning £200k would have paid all the same that the £30k and the 50k would have paid, PLUS the 2% above the £967 per week

That is on top of the 45% tax and the 60% tax due to losing their personal allowance.

So to say the high earners will be impacted less is dis inegenuos.