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.

Your mum never worked yet you could still afford to live reasonably as a family? That alone completely nullifies your point

Depends on her age. I’m in my late 60s, working mothers were an anomaly when I was a child. None of my friends’ mums worked outside the home nor did mine.

My parents didn't have anything either : dad worked hard but my mum didn't work outside the home. Many of her friends and relatives did though , it was becoming the trend to see women going out to work in the 70s even if it was only part time. ' pin money ' for holidays and home improvements.
That was when the government realized that having two incomes per household meant more money in taxes for them!
It's a fallacy to say that all women stayed at home if they had children , many didn't , not where I lived anyway.
'Latch key children' I knew a few of those growing up.

I'm hacked off too. It affects the poor, not the rich.

Perhaps we need to look at what is actually free.
Is it fair that those who may have chosen to not save, to not work etc etc spent their money on sex drugs and rock n roll as it were will get everything free?
Or should we say x y and z are not free.
Services are limited.
You get yourself to your hospital appointments or else we don't see you.
You miss 3 doctors appointments, then you can't see a doctor at this practice.
You don't follow the procedures you agreed to regarding your child's behaviour, you no longer get help and your child is treated the same as all others and discipline will be administered.
So every one gets access to A B and C but if you want extra, you pay for it

@Onlinedilema

Perhaps we need to look at what is actually free. Is it fair that those who may have chosen to not save, to not work etc etc spent their money on sex drugs and rock n roll as it were will get everything free? Or should we say x y and z are not free. Services are limited. You get yourself to your hospital appointments or else we don't see you. You miss 3 doctors appointments, then you can't see a doctor at this practice. You don't follow the procedures you agreed to regarding your child's behaviour, you no longer get help and your child is treated the same as all others and discipline will be administered. So every one gets access to A B and C but if you want extra, you pay for it

Yes, but we know it won't happen.

Everyone going up in arms about the rise in N I must realise that children and young adults are included in this field of care.

@Greeneyedminx How will this announcement make any difference to children and young adults requiring care? I’ve seen nothing about how the problems in this area will be addressed. Will parents of children with disabilities get extra support? Will they have to stop fighting for everything they do receive? I doubt it.

@Onlinedilema

Perhaps we need to look at what is actually free. Is it fair that those who may have chosen to not save, to not work etc etc spent their money on sex drugs and rock n roll as it were will get everything free? Or should we say x y and z are not free. Services are limited. You get yourself to your hospital appointments or else we don't see you. You miss 3 doctors appointments, then you can't see a doctor at this practice. You don't follow the procedures you agreed to regarding your child's behaviour, you no longer get help and your child is treated the same as all others and discipline will be administered. So every one gets access to A B and C but if you want extra, you pay for it

That sounds like too much personal responsibility for the British public to handle.

Not going to lie, I'm pissed off I can't even get an appointment to see my GP. Had to complain quite sternly to even get a call back from the receptionist!!!!

@Remoteso

I think this is hugely unfair on the youngest & least well off in the country.

On a personal level it really jars that we'll be hundreds a year worse off whilst in laws on healthy final salary pensions don't have to pay an extra penny. And live in a house that's increased by half a million plus in value, mortgage long since paid off.

Agree

@Greeneyedminx

You do know that social care is for all forms of personal care and other practical assistance for children, young people and adults who need extra support.

IT IS NOT JUST FOR OLDER PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP!!!

Everyone going up in arms about the rise in N I must realise that children and young adults are included in this field of care.

It is not purely to save people from passing on their inheritance etc.
Think of the bigger picture, there are thousands upon thousands of children and younger adults who receive social care and probably will for their lifetimes, not just older people who need help at the end of their days.
Think of the costs involved in supporting children and younger adults for their entire lives, not just the costs of supporting someone at the end of their lives.
Would you say stop supporting children and younger adults???
Of course not!!!!!!!!!

it doesn't matter how often this is repeated on these threads, posters just don't see it. the media just show old people. no mention of the disabled young adults.

While lots of pensioners voted Tory they weren't the only ones. The Tory landslide was because they gained lots of votes from people who weren't their usual demographic. There were lots of younger working class people who voted Tory this time.

Let's blame Tory voters irrespective of age.

Sometimes people need a stiff wake up call.
I used to work in education and quite honestly sometimes the parents needed a stern talking to. Very common for this stern talking to to be the first time a parent had been forced to look at a situation that way. Often it was what they needed, nobody else had the guys to tell them the facts. I've been known to tell parents that they absolutely must sort out their poor child's lice infected hair, I've told them what to buy and where to buy it. Yes it is expensive but you can use your child benefit to buy it and you absolutely must do it. Explained that this is what this money is for. Explaining that there is no alternative. Straight talking was surprisingly met with appreciation by most parents.
Not denying it was hard work and if you weren't absolutely clear that your decision was final and absolute whilst being pleasant then you would not get anywhere.

I do hate the Tory bashing to be honest even though I'm not one! I know a 24 year old who voted Tory , I don't know many people who vote for anyone else to be honest or they just don't bother to vote.
It's not all pensioners or older people voting for them. We live in a democracy and we have to go with whoever gets the most votes and ultimately seats in parliament as that is how it works. People just blaming one demographic is silly to be honest. Causes more division and we have enough of that already !

I hate income assessed tax. Where’s the incentive to work and take promotions if you just lose more and more in tax (which isn’t likely to benefit the NHS or social care anyway IMO)?

Also it should be family income that is taxed not the income of one person (who may be supporting the family on one income, whereas a couple who both work but fall into a lower bracket still have a family income they pay less tax on!)

The NHS isn’t going to be magically fit for purpose as a result of extra money. It haemorrhages cash and staff, the whole system needs to be re-designed.

Social care includes round the clock care for people with no rehab potential. I think tax payers should be able to choose which parts of social care they want their money to go to.

@Blossomtoes

If the Opposition woke up, they’d get Andy Burnham back into parliament and elect him leader as fast as they could. I reckon he’d overturn that landslide at the first opportunity.

I agree. Think he is great.

@the80sweregreat

I do hate the Tory bashing to be honest even though I'm not one! I know a 24 year old who voted Tory , I don't know many people who vote for anyone else to be honest or they just don't bother to vote. It's not all pensioners or older people voting for them. We live in a democracy and we have to go with whoever gets the most votes and ultimately seats in parliament as that is how it works. People just blaming one demographic is silly to be honest. Causes more division and we have enough of that already !

Ok we’ll all unite behind the tories then? 🙄

@Livelovebehappy

People are going on about wealthy pensioners, who when young lived in an entirely different society to now. My mother didnt work, but we went without holidays, clothes (hand me downs from cousins), cars (bus everywhere). And never had a meal out. They have of course benefitted from the housing boom in the 80’s, but that’s life. They got lucky in that respect. No private rentals back then, just council housing, so the reality was that most people had to invest in housing, and getting mortgages was far easier, as no credit referencing. People starting out now have the house, the car, the holiday, the trappings of modern life. And to go without these things would be unthinkable for a lot of young parents starting out now.

There were private landlords.

If your mother had worked then that second wage could have paid for things like holidays and new clothes. So your family chose to only have one person earning and to therefore live more frugally.

But it's really unclear what point you're trying to make to be honest.

No, it's not a case of uniting , it's a case of stopping bashing certain demographics!
No point to it. The voters up North lent Boris their votes , but it's pointless me getting upset about this when that was how it was in 2019.
Maybe Labour should employ some decent spin doctors and out their messages and get the working classes back on board!
They could take a few tips from the Tories who are much better at winning elections than they are !!

@the80sweregreat We live in a democracy and we have to go with whoever gets the most votes and ultimately seats in parliament as that is how it works

if only seats did go by who got the most votes (proportional representation) which would be much fairer and reflect the votes of everyone. Have a look at the balance of seats if every vote actually counted for the party you voted for:

www.electoral-reform.org.uk/how-the-2019-election-results-could-have-looked-with-proportional-representation/

I live in an area where its been a Conservative MP since 1910, over 100 years. Other than moving area to a swing area, with the first past the post system I don't feel like I have a vote!

Also it should be family income that is taxed not the income of one person (who may be supporting the family on one income, whereas a couple who both work but fall into a lower bracket still have a family income they pay less tax on!)

Absolutely not!
Women tend to be the lower earners so what you're saying here is that women should pay more tax based on their partners wage.

No. Everyone is an individual and we cannot and should not force people to share finances. It's bad enough that child benefit has to be based on the family income.
How would you prevent financial abuse which already happens?

Not all families have two married adults in them either, how are you going to define it? What about when the kids get jobs? If one person is a top bracket tax payer and their 16yo gets a paper round, that 16yo will pay 50% tax on your scheme.

If your mother had worked then that second wage could have paid for things like holidays and new clothes. So your family chose to only have one person earning and to therefore live more frugally.

There was very little childcare available in the 60s and early 70s when I was a child, so unless you had family locally who were prepared to look after the children, it wasn't really a choice. Plus it was expected that mothers stayed home and looked after the children, that was the done thing. They were very different times which it sounds like you know little about.

@RockingMyFiftiesNot

If your mother had worked then that second wage could have paid for things like holidays and new clothes. So your family chose to only have one person earning and to therefore live more frugally.

There was very little childcare available in the 60s and early 70s when I was a child, so unless you had family locally who were prepared to look after the children, it wasn't really a choice. Plus it was expected that mothers stayed home and looked after the children, that was the done thing. They were very different times which it sounds like you know little about.

I was born in the sixties and my mum always worked. We didn't have family locally. I went to playgroup from age about two. There were childminders as well, though less 'formal' than they are now of course.

Being old doesn't give you the right to be rude you know.

Also, your mother could have worked once you went to school - my memory might be hazy, and I might know very little about my own childhood, but I'm pretty sure I went to school. We're talking 1960's here, right? Not 1860's?

@thecatsthecats

Possibly an unpopular opinion, but I think it bizarre that older people expect to hang onto their homes as well as take up a new home in a social care setting.

I will only need one home when I'm older, and care also. Having an asset I can sell to fund that is perfectly logical. Sad, but then so is lots of stuff associated with aging. You're entitled to be sad, but expecting to pass on thousands and have your care funded is taking the piss.

Bring on euthanasia. I want the freedom to die, and to live well before that.

(caveat, yes yes, lots of different circumstances etc)

You say that as if all older people feel the same way. I don't. I am perfectly content with our house being sold when the last one has left it and to pay for care in our old age. I'm not the only one either.

I also wonder if you asked young people if they will be happy to have their home sold to pay for care, what they would say. They would all be happy would they?

A battle between the generations helps no one. Let's not make it a young versus old thing because it isn't.

@VanGoghsDog but your comment I quoted was extremely unkind. Where I lived, there was only one nursery, which was school hours so unless you could work in those hours there was absolutely no childcare. My Mum worked too but only once we were at school and she could work around that. Not everyone could. And it really was seen as wrong for women to work before children started school - again can only speak about where I came from, possibly different in other parts of the country.