A significant amount of people take more then they contribute

[Bluesheeps]

i appreciate mumsnet takes you out of your social circle.
But I find there’s s mad level of entitlement.

Or it could read as a significant amount of people were unlucky enough to not have their fair share in life compared to others who got lucky. Therfore, they have had to claim the bare minimum that they are entitled too whether that be housing, benefits or medical care.

The huge level of inequality that exists is incredibly sad and it isn't those who aren't net contributors who make those decisions.

Yes, educated or sane people would assume they meant the rich.

Ah but you see the only taxes that count are the ones that come directly from a wage. Never mind VAT or other sources of taxation - we don’t talk about the tax that people wealthy enough routinely avoid/offset. We have to be sad that some don’t feel like they’ve won enough in the lottery of life and never ‘get anything back’.

I think OP was referring to the 'I pay my taxes...' brigade. They may well pay their taxes, but are unlikely to be a net contributor. Not that many of us are.

Also a cleaning job is gruelling labour

Yes, the wealthy thrive off the labour of others.

The Royal Family live in inconceivable luxury and privilege because their distant relatives were brutal exploiters.

Most of those who govern us bark and holler against "shirkers" and "scroungers" and praise food banks, and then nip off to feast on subsidised gourmet food and cheap alcohol at tax payers' expense.

Billionaires get rich by paying the bare minimum in labour and taxes and fire anyone who asks for more.

Anyone who protests in a way that threatens the status quo is locked up by the king's henchmen.

It really is a messed up way to distribute the world's resources but it's been going on for so long, people think it's normal, and actually try to blame the poorest for wanting a bit more than crumbs.

I saw OP mentioned council housing earlier, sorry if it has been addressed

The entitlement of people moaning when they get a first floor not a ground floor for example

Lots of people have been in dire situations to finally end up at the top of the council housing list. I proudly live in council housing- I'm now disabled and clearly taking more than I contribute, but I also have to provide a home for DC but I wasn't disabled when I first got a council property- that was due to being homeless and a care leaver

I think for some perhaps they hear entitlement and for others perhaps it's the first time in a long time they've had choices - and you don't really get those choices until you've fought to get them often for years. Sure, if you have never been there - you might hear entitlement. I hear people figuring out that they are allowed or as deserving as someone else to have a stable roof they can afford for their family. And if anyone turns down a first floor expecting a ground floor without valid reasons then they just lose out altogether- it's not like people turn round and go oh sorry here you go

Contrary to popular belief though it's often not an easy free home.

Council housing is supposed to be for everyone. It's only because lots was sold off and is now in the hands of for-profit landlords that it's having to be rationed and allocated according to need.

Also, it's far from being free and the profits made from the rents go back to the treasury, so tenants effectively pay extra to the public purse on top of taxes. Which is more than can be said for private owners or renters.

Hear hear, @Begsthequestion.

God willing and a following wind means we will all live past our retirement age and aging, being what it is and what it brings means we will all be drawing more than we've contributed. I'm T2 diabetic and this means I have been getting 'free' prescriptions for years. Of course I know they're not free. I've also had a TKR which cost in excess of £17,000 on the NHS. As we come even more 'aged' we will need more care. It's unsustainable

Yes - in the long term, 'Right to Buy' has been an unmitigated disaster.

What about unpaid carers? What about those who volunteer for services that should be provided by the state? As others have said there are more ways of contributing to society than paying taxes.

Unfortunately in the society we live in today where what you earn is the only thing that matters for many people those contributions are ignored.

Many of the so called "takers" also work in low paid jobs without which society would cease to function and ,as others have also said ,enable some of the "net contributors" to enjoy the kind of lifestyle they have.

Most people are contributors, that's for sure. Much our their contribution is hidden in other people's profits.

I'm verging toward the 1%. I'm not a parasite. I have volunteered through much of my life. I pay alot of tax. Its not that nothing is ever enough for me. I'm just in a sector that pays alot. Should I work less and in turn pay less tax just so that I am not a parasite?!

This.

We are paying into a taxation system for insurance that risk shares so that in the unfortunate event that we do need help from the state - having a baby, educating them, having an accident, being unemployed, major health condition, cancer or disease. For the most part those that take out of the system live on much less and have a lower quality of life and longevity. As a higher rate tax payer I've definitely paid in more than I've taken out and I know where I'd rather be.

Depends what you count and how you count it, surely? In addition to direct tax, workers in the private sector create profit for the bosses, which is then taxed. We all pay VAT. Women's unpaid labour in the home creates wealth (for others) and social benefit. As an adoptive parent, I have relieved the state of the enormous costs of raising a child in the care system.

The world doesn't revolve around you or your child.

Other people exist and their situations play a part too.

I'm very happy to pay more into the system than I take - I have been so lucky to have good health and to be financially stable enough to not need benefits etc and I am pleased that my tax money is helping those less fortunate.

When you look at the economics of the "fat cats" at the top of governments and certain companies and organisations, many of them take an awful lot more than they give. They pay a very low % of tax compared to the rest of us, siphon off funds, even public money, to off shore accounts and make sure riches remain in their circles.

A few very wealthy people contribute a lot, but this is few and far between.

I say this as someone who earns over £100k and pays a very large % of my income in tax each year. I don't resent it going to pay for those who need it, but I hate that corruption means that very wealthy people pay less proportion of their income than I do and in some cases are siphoning off public funds to line their own pockets.

It's also in their interest that we see the poor as the biggest sponge on society, but in reality it's them.