To think we are becoming a much poorer country?

[Felixss]

I keep seeing on threads increase taxes on the rich , increase salaries, increase nhs spending and increase benefits. People are acting like we are still hugely wealthy and everyone wants to come over. Poland is predicted to overtake us economically. I can earn twice my salary abroad and I'm thinking of leaving. Where is the money going to come from with a shrinking work force and low investment in new technology? AIBU to think the UK is hugely declining ?

We’re a country fueling gross inequality, and the government keeping the low earners quiet by handing out just enough to prevent rebellion. Covid fuelled a support mentality.
its the middle income families which suffer the most with no support and no motivation

Lol. Yeah, genius. Except the small matter of the 4% of GDP it has cost us every year, compounding. 😂😂 The quadrupling of the balance of payments deficit which has trashed the value of the pound, and put a rocket under inflation. The fact that we had economic benefits exceeding our EU contributions by an order of magnitude during every year of EU membership. Not to mention the fact that 10 or so of the poorest regions in the EU that received the highest EU grants were... drumroll.... in the UK.

Those pesky facts again.

Also there are probably way more single parent families now. They are more likely to need government support because they're poor.

They have higher rates of poverty largely because of the UK tax system which penalises them by charging them more tax that a two parent household with the same income. Fix the tax code to level the playing field and far fewer single parents will need any benefits because they'll be able to keep enough of their own earnings to support themselves.

What's the average difference though? I'm sceptical that it's all down to the tax system.

It's much more normal for families to have to get by with two incomes. Hard when there's only one person earning the income.

I completely agree. What else explains the rise of people like Johnson, Cameron and Hunt?
A penis and a posh voice will get you anywhere in this country.
As for the tax thing...one of the reasons that JK Rowling is a Queen is that she insists on living here and paying all her taxes, when a lot of people with vast wealth think she's a mug.

Fix the tax code to level the playing field and far fewer single parents will need any benefits because they'll be able to keep enough of their own earnings to support themselves.

What "earnings" might those be. Ah yes they're the most likely societal group to be minimum wage earners, so they'll get to keep the crumbs of that job in care work, retail, dinner lady at the school where their children are so the sum total of bugger-all then.

The above is based on threads on this very site, where we see the reality of those families' incomes and having to make choices at the supermarket because they're down to their last £20 that week.

You only need to look at our current PM, the best of a very poor bunch.
A firm Brexiteer with a tax avoidance wife.
Until there is integrity at the top of Government, the slide into impoverishment will continue.

I agree!

We shouldn't stunt the ambition to be successful by branding people so divisiveky. Surely it should be in the gift of each family to work towards a commensurate income if they choose to, so they build security for their family which then flows through society. £100k family income isn't the definition of being "stinkin' rich" It would have been in the 1950s and 60s when you could buy a family home for £4,000.

We need to stop putting people down for getting success through education and making good choices. It shouldn't be a race to the bottom.

As was said previously, it doesn't mean the people who have incomes in six figures or so who 'made good choices' (although that's very disparaging to the rest of us). It means the people who've done bugger all but one of their ancestors made a king happy and now they get to go to Eton and think that inherited wealth makes them capable of running the country, for example.
What has Zac Goldsmith done to qualify him to be a minister except have a billionaire as a father?
£100,000 earnings isn't enough to be called rich these days. As Phil Collins said 'I remember when a million pounds was a lot of money '.

The difference can be huge.

For example, a couple with a £50k earnings and two children may receive £17.5k+ in universal credit plus child benefit for two children of another £2k plus Council tax support of nearly £2k. Their net pay after tax is £3504 per month. £173 child benefit. £1454 UC and £154 council tax support based on average costs in my area as an example. With no disabilities or health needs and normal nursery expenses (I just ran it through some calculators).

A single parent earning £60k - so actually earning more of their money - will have net pay of £3654 per month. No UC. No child benefit. No Council tax support, nothing.

So the couple have an earned household income of £50k and their net income per month is £5285. A single parent with an earned income of £60k still receives far, far less net income, only £3654. The couple receive 69% more net income, for earning less. That is HUGE. And they obviously have 48 hours per day to share childcare and earning between them, so the single parent will likely have even higher expenses in terms of childcare etc while also trying to do everything alone. No sensible country compounds the inbuilt disadvantage by also taxing single parents more on the same household income. It's insane.

The system is set up deliberately to penalise single parents, hence the extremely high rates of child poverty in single parent households in the UK. This is why other countries levy taxes on a household basis: not only does it improve childhood outcomes and health and reduce poverty and therefore increase future productivity, it also is cheaper for the taxpayer because our system creates long-term welfare dependency because it is almost impossible for single parents to provide adequately for their children when the tax system penalises them so heavily.

Not sure what planet you're on but no, that's not the case at all. Got any evidence to back up this bigoted ignorance?

Exactly. In fact using my example just posted, a single parent would only just get to the net income that a couple receive for earning £25k each if the single parent earned £100k!

Think about that. They have to earn twice as much as two people put together to get the same net income. That is shocking. And anybody who thinks that is "rich" is taking the absolute piss.

For example, a couple with a £50k earnings and two children may receive £17.5k+ in universal credit plus child benefit for two children of another £2k plus Council tax support of nearly £2k. Their net pay after tax is £3504 per month. £173 child benefit. £1454 UC and £154 council tax support based on average costs in my area as an example. With no disabilities or health needs and normal nursery expenses (I just ran it through some calculators).

Lol.

Where I am a couple each working minimum wage for 40 hours a week with 2 dc would only get child benefit. So £40 a week. £1512 each giving them £3024 net plus your £173 child benefit.

A couple each earning £50000 a year would still get the child benefit but would also earn £3023 each a month, or £6026 net +£173.

A single person earning £60000, would have a take home pay of £3508 a month. They would also have a single person discount on their council tax.

https://www.stafftax.co.uk/gross-to-net-salary-calculator

I based it on standard tax allowance and no student loan.

It's also worth bearing in mind that because the cost of childcare is more than minimum wage, many low income families don't have 2 full time workers, 1 is quite often part time.

For universal credit they would be entitled to £1120 a month, less 55p for every £ they earn. Assuming they are working 60 hours between them the deduction is £1488 meaning they would be entitled to £0 universal credit. That gives them a monthly net of £2756.

https://www.gov.uk/universal-credit/what-youll-get

I don't think you've really understood my post at all given the random stuff you posted, but if you can explain what you mean that would be helpful.

You appear to have got very confused regarding individual salaries and household income, which was the entire point of the comparison I made. 🙄

And no, there was no student moan in the calculations I made. I think you've clearlynot understood what I posted.

And obviously a couple can decide that one person works less or not at all so then their net income falls. 😆🙄 But if they do that it should be obvious that then their outgoings are a lot less also than those of the single parent because the couple will have very little/ no childcare expense! So eithet the single parent is hammered by way more tax on the same income as a household with two incomes with only half the time to earn the money, or they are taxed in a similar way to a couple who choose to have a parent earning nothing and having no childcare expense while the single parent has to pay it.

Either way it's an insane thing for a country to do because it increases poverty, health issues, lower educational scores, increases long-term welfare depenency and basically has shit ougcomes AND has been proved to cost taxpayers more. It's dumb. But I suppose it's not suprising that the UK has dumb policies when you look at the voting records for the last 5 years at least.

Student moan. Ahahaaa that made me laugh. At least some sunshine in the very depressing world of talking to people who do not get economics.

This

Although I agree this is a depressing country to live in ATM.

I was pointing out that the figures you quoted were incorrect. A couple earning £50,000 wouldn't be entitled to universal credit as you claimed. The single person earning £60000 would still take home more than 1 person earning £50000, any child benefit they lost would be similar to the single person rebate on council tax. The single parent should also be receiving financial support from the absent parent in most cases- obviously there are some outwith the norm-or the absent partner is a twat.

Childcare can vary depending on the provider, some single parents work with the other parent to put the dc interests first, regardless of their feelings about each other, some use family or friends. Some two parent families pay for full time childcare. Some families choose for one or both parents to restrict their income level so they can work around their dc needs.This is down to the choices each family make should not be considered when deciding tax brackets.

The figures are not incorrect. They are calculated with UK tax allowances/ thresholds and with benefit calculators online, verified with two different ones.

I Included the links in my post to the tax calculator I used.

Re the benefits, you missed the deductions due to salary, which brings the amount to £0.

Which calculators did you use?

I suspect the failure of government to make absent fathers pay child support has a lot to do with it.

Where I live, deadbeats can be hauled into court, and paycheques can be garnished, based on the quaint notion that the taxpayer should not be required to pay for food or other necessities for other people's children.

I'm sure that can happen under UK law too: the issue is that (leastways the impression that I pick up here) is that the CSA is so chronically underfunded that you have to pay them to get them to carry out their statutory duties.

Also, and I could be wrong, but I understand UK family courts prefer to award custody to one parent: meaning one disgruntled parent with a big liability. That will increase non-compliance.

Seems the top knobs agree with the OP and (as government have told them to) are voting with their feet. I seem to recall the Tory doctrine is we need these megapaid execs because of their skills.

On the plus side, I presume their departures leaves a vacancy for someone top move upwards.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/24/brexit-blamed-chief-execs-leaving-british-companies/