Gutted about NI rise

[CarryOnNurse20]

I know we need it and we have so much money to pay off. But we have been scrimping and saving after a hard couple of years. Every penny is accounted for from pay day to pay day. I’m a nurse and my pay has been capped/below inflation my whole career. And now the NI rise means any savings etc we have made will now be gone. I’m gutted.

It’s hard to argue that dementia should be any different. It is different. Dementia patients don’t need expensive medical treatments and medically trained staff. They need staff who can deliver care and quality of life with an understanding of their needs.

The failure to provide adequate public funding to meet those needs has meant our hospitals have been choked with dementia patients who have fallen and broken bones or need other treatment because they were not adequately looked after in the first place. Patients who the staff are not trained to understand their needs and care for.

When my DD had a complex fracture five of the six beds in her ward were taken up by over 80s with dementia who had fallen . They were ripping of their clothes, walking into the middle of the ward to wee or poo and screaming through the night confused and scared. This was a scene far worse that I ever witnessed in the care home where people were calm and content and safe.

We have been paying for that hell.

@CarryOnNurse20

I certainly thing removing the triple lock is a good thing. Pensions are still rising at 2.5% which is way above my 1% salary increase. Given the rising cost of living we are in real terms taking a pay cut every single year.

2.5% of very little (£9000 a year!) is very little. I am sure your 1% is much bigger.

Maybe the CGT exemption on principal private residence should be abolished...That would bring in billions. Not a vote winner though.😬

It would indeed be fairer if one's NI was earmarked as for the individual but that is not the case

Why, so people who've never been able to work are just left on the scrapheap when they get old? It's not about the individual, it's about society as a whole looking after each other.

I dont think comparing 2 fiscally conservative governments is the zinger you think it is, user.

@VanGoghsDog

If it's loaded on the upper rate tax payers who, to be fair, already pay the majority of tax in the UK, then they find tax loopholes. If they add it to corporation tax, then companies move their accounting abroad.

It's not "loaded" on upper rate tax payers. And I'm not sure you're right that they pay the majority of the tax in the UK, might be worth looking at some stats on that.

Re corp tax - putting it on employer's NI is essentially the same.

More than 25% of all income tax revenue is paid by the top 1% of taxpayers, i.e. taxpayers with the highest incomes, and 90% of all income tax revenue is paid by the top 50% of taxpayers with the highest incomes Reality Check: Are lower earners bearing the tax burden? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39641222.

I also agree with PP who said it’s unfair that if someone with 20 years unblemished taxpaying behind them lost their job, they would be expected to sell their house and downsize if needs be to make ends meet (even if they have kids).

It's a heartbreaking situation to be in (and I'm facing an uncertain future myself as we speak - thanks Covid) but in theory, someone of working age should be able to find another job. I guess that's the logic.

@bunnybuggs yes it will be but my expenses are likely to be significantly higher than a pensioner eg mortgage, childcare, travel, NI etc. I appreciate some pensioners still pay rent.

CGT on principle private residences please!

I have made more money through house price gains in the past 3 years than through my job. All untaxed!

I’d lump the costs of social care on inheritance tax or by requiring assets to be sold to fund own elderly care. The general public should not be paying to ensure that assets can be passed on. All it does is increase already existing inequalities.

Covid lead to the biggest jump in billionnaires in 33 years.

It would indeed be fairer if one's NI was earmarked as for the individual but that is not the case

Given that women earn less because issues related to child birth and rearing and are discriminated against due to the old boys network, and disabled people earn less either because they have a disability that prevents them doing as much or because again they are discriminated against how is that fair? Or unpaid carers Also see racism.

That would mean in practice white males would have least problems topping up their accounts but leave others (who shoulder some of the most important roles in society which are often unpaid).

How is that 'fair'.

Society needs to recognise at least some of the barriers here are not the fault of people and they do contribute to society as a whole, despite not being paid as much.

You'd think after the last 18months that some people would have woken up to that fact that its a bloody good job we have supermarket shelf stackers and delivery drivers....

Sick of working hard, being skint and paying for other people

A lot of people over estimate the current requirements to self fund.
If you have care at home your house is not included in the financial assessment.
If you have a spouse, civil partner or dependent living in the house it is not included.
The financial assessment is carried out on an individual basis so e.g. my dad needs care - assets in his name and half joint assets are taken into account so a couple could have £47,500 in cash before they need to pay for care at home or residential.

Typical Tory tax hike - a tax that is going to hit lower/average earners more than those on higher salaries. I don’t know why everyone is surprised by this bog-standard behaviour from them.

@countrygirl99 it’s worse than I thought. Sickening when most working age benefits do take into account other household members salaries, savings etc

@echt - setting up trust’s doesn’t cost a “shitload”. I have no idea of the intricacies of the Duke of Westminster’s tax planning but it’s not as simple as putting things in a trust means there’s no tax.

I do think this is disgraceful. NI is regressive on the basis of income, assets and age. Why should the young yet again pay for the old and the wealthy old at that, so they don’t have to sell their expensive homes that (if they need residential care) they don’t even live in? Why is it fair for the burden for wealthy elderly people’s care falls on younger people of lower incomes? It’s ridiculous and just another bribe for the elderly to vote Tory.

At the same time that year the Duke of Westminster inherited £9 billion from his father and paid absolutely nothing as it was in trust 😡. How is that a fair system?

Inheritance tax is 40%. Under Gordon Brown's reforms, trusts have to hand over 6% every ten years. The Duke of Westminster was 25 when he inherited. He could easily live another 60 years. In simplistic terms, the trust might need to hand over the equivalent of 60% during his lifetime.

To be fair, it's not that simple, as many assets are exempt. However the agricultural and property assets that are exempt produce income every year, which is taxed. The government still gets a share.

My dad has dementia. If / when he goes into a care home the £1,500 per week it will cost him will pay not just for his share if the costs, it will subsidise all the local authority funded residents, because what councils pay per week doesnt cover the actual costs for the care they receive. That doesnt seem fair either.

It also seems a bit counterintuitive to disincentivise people from saving for their old age.

I dont actually have a problem with people paying more NI now to cover the cost of the care they may need later. Things like dementia dont just strike home owners. I do have a problem with the current generation of retired folk being subsidised by those of us who are working now.

So, in conclusion, I dont think the current system but dont entirely like what's being proposed either.

I may be naive and insensitive but why on these boards are there regularly people talking about all the pensioners living off the state pension? Were these pensioners not able to work and save? Did they have a workplace pension? What proportion of pensioners is this?

I am under no illusion that there will be a state pension when I get there in 30-ish years time. I am budgeting for it to be no more than about £10 a week max no matter what we pay in now.

At the moment social care for the elderly is like an inheritance tax by lottery, rather as if the government said “we’re going to reduce the basic rate of income tax to 5%, but we’ll choose 1 in 7 people at random, and they will be taxed at 95%” . Because there’s no upper limit, it can’t be insured against. They’ve said any capping of amount paid won’t happen till after 2024, at which time it will no doubt be kicked into the long grass again.

If everyone is agreed that inheritance is a bad thing, then perhaps limit it to £23000 for all, and take the rest for raising minimum pay. Not this mealy mouthed thing of inheritance is good for me but not for anyone who have a parent with dementia.

We all knew something was going to have to pay for Covid. This is the way they justify it publicly. All the other stuff (by stealth) will slowly rear it's ugly head if it hasn't already

If I were Netflix, Apple Music or any one of those numerous "£10-15 per month services" many of us have, I'd be more worried. I'll be cancelling a couple of those to make up any shortfall. Job done.

[quote CayrolBaaaskin]@echt - setting up trust’s doesn’t cost a “shitload”. I have no idea of the intricacies of the Duke of Westminster’s tax planning but it’s not as simple as putting things in a trust means there’s no tax.

I do think this is disgraceful. NI is regressive on the basis of income, assets and age. Why should the young yet again pay for the old and the wealthy old at that, so they don’t have to sell their expensive homes that (if they need residential care) they don’t even live in? Why is it fair for the burden for wealthy elderly people’s care falls on younger people of lower incomes? It’s ridiculous and just another bribe for the elderly to vote Tory.[/quote]
Yes, but eventually we will be left with three or so generations who have been massively shafted by the Tories. We will not forget when we are voting. I won't. My hope is that as their pool of voters get smaller we might actually get a political system that makes sense and isn't about divide and rule.