To wonder why the National Insurance increase was reversed

[Musicalmaestro]

As I thought it was meant to provide much needed funds for social care.

I don't think it's baffling. I live in a very down-to-earth area in the SW that's had the same tory MP for over 20 years and a large part of it is because locals read the right-wing press and think there are too many Polish immigrants/benefit scroungers/no magic money tree etc etc. Rich people want to protect what they have and so do those at the bottom of the scale. I overhear people all the time!

My original hometown in Yorkshire is quite middle class and diverse but also has had problems with grooming gangs and race riots so swings between Labour and Tory every election.

i’m a floating voter and have voted for the main three parties. What always got me on the care caps etc is that they weren’t to benefit elderly people accessing care, it’s a benefit to their kids. You see people on tele talking about an elderly relative going into a care home and having to sell their house and how upset they are about it. Lets be honest if you are going into a care home you probably don’t need your house anymore, your kids on the other hand may very much want it.

So yes if you believe in self sufficiency it would be consistent to believe you should contribute to your own care too. Just to add balance I’m not bothered about the removal of the 45% tax rate so it’s not like I’m a raging lefty and if peoples homes would have to be sold to pay for care I definitely wouldn’t inherit anything as my family aren’t wealthy.

When this increase came in Mumsnet were moaning that the tories were out of touch!

They can’t win!

Let's hope they can't.

When this increase came in Mumsnet were moaning that the tories were out of touch!

Because initially it was very unfair but the gov changed it again.

There is some data from ipsos on this - see attached image.

The table at the bottom shows that the DE group (lowest income) are 53pc turnaround versus th 68pc for AB. So not insignificant, however the propensity to vote tory isn't too dissimilar, 41pc versus 45pc.

So it definitely contributes but isn't the sole reason at all. Clearly it is a wider set of factors which cause this demographic to vote so heavily for a party you could argue is most misaligned with their interests - but is heavily swayed by the dominance of the sun and the daily mail, believing the anti immigration (despite the tories having consistently higher numbers than Labour), management of economy growth (despite on average lower than the previous Labour governant) etc

Also worth remembering that of the 48m registered adults in the last general election, 14m voted Conservative. So whilst some people who didn't turn up would have voted tory if they had done so - only 29pc of the population actually voted for the tories even with the Boris Johnson landslide.

First past the post voting system twists the views of the electorate and should be the first thing the next non tory party should dismantle when taking office.

Data from here www.ipsos.com/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election including the mechanics and some notes around how they estimate certain figures

I thought people hated the NI increase and thought the new social care scheme basically benefited southerners with higher house prices ( omitting to mention those same southerners had paid thousands more in mortgage repayments over the years)
people change their arguments like the wind here.
NI increase was unfair and regressive 6 months ago , now it has been reversed and you would think people would be happy but no. I can’t keep up!

It’s a tough one. The problem we have is an aging population.
The press stoke up hate. Hate towards the elderly, disabled, single parents, immigrants etc etc. So when I can’t get an appointment to see my GP even though I see the eye watering amount of N.I. Not to mention tax that is taken from my salary every month, I get annoyed. Deep down I know that it is because the Tories have cut services to the NHS. They have taken the amount raised by NI contributions and mis used it. However I still feel angry that I can’t access what I am paying for. Who gets doctors appointments where I live? The elderly, who are not paying for it. Yes I know they may have contributed in the past but I can guarantee, the women will not have had to work full time as long as I do. I won’t have the luxury of retiring at 60. I won’t have the luxury of only working part time, I won’t have the luxury of being a man who has a little wifey at home to do the grunt work. So the government hope to appease me by taking less from me. Ok, fine. On a personal level I don’t think it’s the right way to go about things. However, lots of others will disagree.

It's almost like we're not a hive mind sharing one opinion!

Have those Southerners necessarily paid a fortune in mortgage repayments? I would imagine that most of those who are of the age to go into care at the moment would have bought decades ago when prices were more reasonable and have benefitted from huge capital gains.

Because it's a sop to those complaining about every single bill rising during a COL crisis

But without a significant boost to social care, the NHS crisis cannot end. It doesn't matter what its capacity is, if you can't discharge safely, it will overflow

I thought people hated the NI increase and thought the new social care scheme basically benefited southerners with higher house prices ( omitting to mention those same southerners had paid thousands more in mortgage repayments over the years)people change their arguments like the wind here.

Because the funding for care was capped at 100k as opposed to a %. Obviously that means some people with expensive houses benefit more. My parents haven't paid anything like what their home is now worth in mortgage payments.

NI increase was unfair and regressive 6 months ago , now it has been reversed and you would think people would be happy but no. I can’t keep up!

It is regressive but after the outcry they did tweak it again to be less regressive.

Have those Southerners necessarily paid a fortune in mortgage repayments? I would imagine that most of those who are of the age to go into care at the moment would have bought decades ago when prices were more reasonable and have benefitted from huge capital gains

Yes - prices may have been lower, but with interest rates at 15%, monthly repayments were (in real terms) considerably higher.

Exemption from CGT is only if you have bought and sold, or on final sale (which, if at death, would mean IHT for the heirs). So it depends more on how many times you've switched rung on the housing ladder, and that's not necessarily age related

The problem we have is an aging population.

It's a massive demographic shift, there are now more over 65s than under 15s but no one wants to plan for it & much less pay for it.

I was quite surprised they did this as they already raised the threshold in July so quite surprised they have now also lowered the contribution rate.

Yes - prices may have been lower, but with interest rates at 15%, monthly repayments were (in real terms) considerably higher.

a) interest rates weren't 15% for years
b) 15% or 10% of a lower price though

Southerners generally have to pay more for their houses as they cost more to buy in the first place and do need larger mortgages to fund them. I agree people in their 80’s now this may not be the case but will be the case for anyone 50 and younger.
3 bed semi’s in Greater London for example have cost £500k and more for the last 15 years. 3 bed semi’s now are 1 million plus. That’s a lot of mortgage payments over 25 years!

I'm not disagreeing about younger home owning generations in London, I am one!

But I thought we were talking about the generations needing care in later life? Like my parents who payed 40k for their London home in the 80s & they now sell for 1.8m

This. Although what they’ll do to replace the lost funds remains to be seen.

@Wouldloveanother I'm confused by this point as the new tax was going to also be charged on working pensioners (which I thought was fair). Why do you think reversing the NI increase means you won't be paying for social care of others so they can pass on their house as an inheritance to their children?

Yes I agree with this.

There was a very interesting thread on Twitter whereby someone addresses the whole ‘15% in my day’ malarkey versus people have to pay now, and the whole socioeconomic situations surrounding each one.

People are worse off now with even these ‘higher’ low rates and that’s looking like it’s only going to get steadily worse!

But more generally, Why should they young, working people subsidise very rich old people by way of NI when the latter have accrued enough unearned wealth to sort themselves out.

People are worse off now with even these ‘higher’ low rates and that’s looking like it’s only going to get steadily worse!

I don't understand the reluctance to acknowledge it tbh.

A lot of people in this thread are under the impression that they have also cancelled introduction of the care cap.

They have not. The work in this area is pushing ahead and will come into effect in some local authorities in just 3 months time.

A lot of people in this thread are under the impression that they have also cancelled introduction of the care cap.

They have not.

So some are still very disadvantaged