Net contributor or Burden on the state?

[Whyareblokesonhere]

Am I being unreasonable to think that the vast majority of us don't believe we are 'burdens' on public money.

I earn reasonable money, around £65k per year, I assumed that would make me a net contributor, after all I seem to be paying tax left right and center, however whilst it's not actually an easy calculation, I realised today that I'm most likely a burden, mostly due to have several children.

Not a big user of anything medical aside from birth but that must skew things significantly. Two car household and household income of around £80k.

So very likely that I'm actually a burden, changes my perspective somewhat.

So AIBU to think most of us assume incorrectly that we are net contributors?

Also interested as to whether you think you are or aren't? Obviously MN is the land of ultra wealthy as we all know so not a scientific study by any stretch!

It’s called reality. You know the one where there is a thing called the economy. And productivity. And finances. And GDP. Not resources produced by unicorns.

I've been a higher earner since 2006, additional rate since 2016, never claimed any income benefits, or lived in a council or social house, I live in a mortgaged hone.

Had 2 DC in the last 7 years, both with non-surgical births, went home on day 2 and same day. Wasn't entitled to 30 hours due to salary level, both DC went to a private nursery. One DC has additional needs which they receive DLA for, however the annual DLA received is probably a quarter of my monthly net pay. DC is at a specialist school, which would obviously increase the amount I take from the system.

However, overall, given everything above, I believe I would be a net contributor.

There was a really interesting talk by David Willetts, ex-minister, a while ago about baby boomers. In that he said that an average person, on average pay, with average life, currently crosses from net contributor to net recipient around the age of 70.
I caught part of a debate on the radio earlier. Apparently one of the founders of Obamacare has suggested that he would not, personally, want medical treatment after age 75 as it is generally extending life, but in poor health and low quality of life. As a boomer myself, fortunately in good health so far, I do wonder if we need a mature discussion about this as I don't see how the younger generations can keep paying out more and more

I think most of the tax is raised by the top few percent and the theory is that if you tax them too much they’ll have the resources and the means to move elsewhere?

No clue how it’s worked out but would think I am a burden. I don’t work, SAHM & HW , don’t pay tax or NI and have been treated in A&E a few times which resulted in a few lengthy stays in hospital. Also had three babies on the NHS. Take medication for life.
DH probably a burden too. He works full time and has for over 40 years but has never earned much, certainly not enough to pay much tax. He has also been in hospital for heart surgery.
Both of us approaching 60. Neither of us claim benefits but I doubt that offsets much.

This is a joke / troll post, right?
This isn't how normal people think right?

Sorry I posted then disappeared (dealing with poorly child).

Appreciate 'Burden' sounds very negative but it was the word used in articles I was reading and assume there is a specific reason for this.

Also yes I just mean financial which has minimal reflection on someone's overall contribution to society.

Personally I wish there was another way, of politics, of society, but don't have the answers, I'd just love something more equal, for all.

Thanks for the replies, I'm finding it fascinating reading the articulate, conversational posts.

And for clarity, against this financial measure I'm absolutely classing myself as a 'burden' which has just made me reflect on even more reasons I should be grateful for all I do have in life

Net contributor - additional rate tax payer, children educated privately and we have private healthcare. Like others I think financial contribution is only one element of contributing to society, I significant number of the so called burdens will be providing unpaid care and doing jobs that are necessary for the functioning of society.

Could you link whatever it was you read?

@RandomCatGenerator it was definitely an article in the Times about why millennials aren't getting more right wing as they age but I can't for the life of me find it now.

@Demonto sorry it should be £600000.

DH is a net contributor (I am just a burden on him 🤣) but we are in the US so options to be a burden are somewhat limited.

(Relatively modest) private school, private nursery, no such thing as public healthcare so employer insurance which we also pay $$$ for, we live in a too big house which seemed like a good idea at the time so pay a ton of property tax.

No, we can't really afford it.

I've read a couple of articles recently that put the cost of educating a child at state school at something like £60-65k from infants to sixth form, so the more children you have, the more burden you have. Each baby costs somewhere between £7-11k, more if there are serious complications.

I'm childfree and have been fortunate enough not to have made many calls on the NHS. I've worked so far for 43 years and paid tax every year. Higher rate for about 15 years. I'm semi-retired now: working part time and living off one of my private pension plans. I'll retire at 66 and will continue to be a tax payer. I've paid fairly large sums out in Stamp Duty and CGT over the years. Never received any benefits. I think at the moment I'm probably about even, but presumably at some point during my retirement I'll become a burden.

Oh, forgot to add that I consider it a privilege to pay tax. I think me and Polly Toynbee are the only ones.

Yes, I read that too and I agree. I've recently learned that someone in their 90s, with advanced dementia, has been in hospital after a fall for a month because a suitable care home can't be found. I also have a friend who, after a catastrophic accident caused massive physical injuries and brain damage, has been kept alive for 12 years so far, at £200k a year, and will probably live for another 25 years. She should have been allowed to die the day the accident happened, but the medical establishment viewed her as a challenge and decided to throw everything they could at the situation to keep her alive. The US company that built the care facility in which she now exists has built several more similar facilities here in the UK since she was injured.

Burden.

I’ve been ill all my life and could only work a short while as an adult. I’ve cost the NHS so much and I feel very guilty about it a lot. I’ve also lived longer than expected so that’s added to the amount I’ve cost. I don’t feel like I’ve been able to give back or contribute much at all really.

The state needs people to exist. I see my children as part of my contribution rather than a burden. In other European states I would get tax benefits for having a few of them. It'll happen here as well eventually - the replacement rate isn't high enough and immigration brings its own problems.

Then I put my own education rather than that of my children as part of my cost.

So, op, I would be more optimistic in your shoes.

The general calculation is around £50k pp I think to tip into net contributor.

For the nhs we all usually do quite well and are net contributors until the last two years of life, when the NHS ends up throwing money at keeping us going.

There is a lot of research available on all this. It's interesting.

I earn about £50k (so just below the 40p threshold) and have no kids. My only contact with the NHS is covid boosters. I ride a bike so while I don't pay fuel duty etc. I'm also not wearing out the roads. I'd imagine that I'm roughly even with the state on an annual basis.

That said, surely my education is something that the state has paid for, how long will it take to effectively repay that investment back to the state in tax? At some point I will draw a state pension and incur other costs relating to old age. How much will I need to pay the state now so that it can afford to look after me then? Yes I know that it doesn't really work like that, I'm paying for the last generation, and the next generation will pay for me but it's an interesting philosophical quandary.

So I think that nearly everyone will be a net burden over the whole course of their lives, and that because there won't be enough contributors to match this the entire Ponzi scheme will collapse eventually.

Burden, and hate it! Triggered with severe OCD aged 5, that got worse as i got older. By 15 i ws completely housebound, had to drop out of school, and have been on disability since my 16th birthday. Throw in developing depression and PTSD, i've never been well enough to work. With the few scraped GCSE passes i got, and no work history, even if i was magically well tomorrow, i'd struggle to get offered a job.

I can only hope donating my organs when my time comes, makes up somewhat,.

A person can’t be valued on what they contribute in taxes or what they rely on to live or be healthy the scope is too narrow and meaningless.

Hah shows what I know then! Neither in school yet so maybe currently around zero? Or maybe I'm kidding myself completely. It's easy to think that if you're not on benefits you must be contributing but clearly there's much more to it than that.

One day your kids will be paying for you, with inflation going up you will be more of a burden than any baby boomer ever will!

The taxes you pay are only part of your contribution though, there are all sort of work that are unpaid (caring particularly) that saves the state money.

Also don’t forget that if you work, your labour allows you employer to generate wealth (some of which is taxed) and grows the economy as a whole.

The point of taxes is to pool risk and benefit, none of us know if we might fall on hard times & need the state to protect us. Also it’s hard to measure the benefit of public services, for example roads. Education has a personal benefit & an economic one (an educated workforce).

TLDR: looking at your status on a cash-based net basis doesn’t make any sense, that’s not how public finances work!