Why won't any political party focus or help the squeezed middle

[Winterday1991]

Off the back of another thread, has got me thinking about the next general election.

Why is there not a party that will focus on the middle earners in the squeezed south east , where both partners work full time, who are struggling juggling mortgages, cost of childcare and self fund everything and are over threshold for any help or subsidies ie child benefit, cost of living payments, free childcare via universal credit?

We are a middle/highish income family and are just so sick of paying into the system and getting nothing back! The amount of tax we pay is insane, certainly not anywhere near value for money. Labour just seem to want to focus on single parent families and those on universal credit.

Any party who focuses on the middle will surely win the election?

They sound like people who need a lot of help and I wouldn't wish to be like them. They probably do have some sort of mental health problems which may not be immediately obvious. DH's sister has never worked (or at least she thinks she is working as she writes online but earns very small amounts and is supported by her mother) and I know she claimed UC. She certainly has more access to the NHS and free prescriptions than I do as a working person as she actually can attend appointments during the working day. She does have issues that mean that she isn't like a healthy person..But yet I can think of nothing worse than her life because what I do have is agency. Health and the ability to work is the most important thing and way more important than a few hundred extra pounds a month

and people's mindsets.

95k is NOT 'the squeezed middle' and even those who are in the squeezed middle are still better off than lower earners topping up with UC.

Then I say you are a cheeky F because we earn £24k together with benefits and won't be entitled to it when my eldest is in year 3 next year. Oh well at least I have morals I suppose!

You are wasting your time here. The incentive for those paying for everything to work more isn’t there. Lord knows how everyone thinks it’s all going to be funded with state dependency at its highest ever. The CHB cap is one such problem - you will be worse off for working more at points. The 100k threshold is another. Loss of personal allowance and child care hours, you’ll be about 10k per year worse off per child. You’ll need to earn 150k to break even. People won’t do it. Instead of these people working more and the government reaping the 40-45% tax and ni - they get nothing as people stop at certain points. Absolutely mental.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. I don't blame people on benefits but most people on benefits don't earn 60k and then deliberately give up work to claim free meals whilst those of us on low wages and UC aren't entitled to them. If you can't see why this is morally wrong, although perfectly legal, than that is on you.

Well said

Goady fucker.

If you can earn your normal amount why not? My issue is that then you would be earning 60k and be entitled whilst families on a lot lower would not and who might need it. You don't need them. I work btw before you presume I don't.

The benefit cap is £423.46 a week per couple outside of London. HB is included in the calculation as is CB.
Obviously ( and rightly imo) carers and disabled people are not plus working over the required hours mean you are not either.
Re free school meals in primary all kids get free school meals anyway in England

I don't agree with the CB cap but free school meals are intended for struggling families and not families on 60k sort of saleries. If you can't see that is wrong then...

Until year 3.

Yes I meant infant not primary

Interesting. What’s your view on the loss of personal allowance and the loss of childcare at 100k? Do you agree with that? Those are the people who pay the most tax - yet the stop working or use pensions. Why? For every child they are about 10k per year worse off in net take home. It takes to about 150k to clear the same. The tax system is mental. If people actually want a functioning welfare and public services system they need to stop with the politics of envy. This shit show is actively damaging the economy when we have a state we are getting further and further into debt to fund. Op has a huge point; people are too short sighted to see it.

Maybe, but she seems pretty happy. The father of one of the kids is a really good guy. I know him and he puts in a lot of effort and pays for pretty much everything, which I'm assuming is why she has so much money left in her pocket.

I must admit it grates on me sometimes. I used to occasionally take a THC gummy in the evenings as it really helps with my ADHD (didn't get on with stimulant meds). Mainly helps calm my racing thoughts and helps me sleep.

I can't touch it now as I get regularly tested at work. The tests are a joke IMO as they don't test for the active ingredient which is out your system in a couple of days. Instead they test for a long lasting metabolite in the liver, meaning that you can fail weeks after the active ingredient has left your system and the effects have worn off.

It's kind of like sacking somebody on the basis they got drunk three weeks ago, which is why many companies now use swab tests instead which actually test for the active ingredient and hence only cause you to fail if you've ingested in last 24-48hrs.

I was round there with my friend a while back on my week off. The kids were with the dad and the sister was swanning around smoking a big joint and going on about this 'amazing lemon haze' she'd just had delivered. I was really struggling with my sleep at the time and I must admit it did piss me off a bit that she gets to swan around in a proper house smoking weed all day while I work my arse off to live in a flat and have to kowtow to loads of pointless rules to keep my job.

Oh dear the bitterness. I actually would like to work more but a day of childcare is almost a full days salary and my shifts aren't guaranteed. I actually have to work weekends opposite my partner's work and never see my eldest much then. A lot of presumptions in your post. Why not look for another job then without all that hassle? Pretty sure you can get an NHS job or something without giving up your job to claim free meals which as the threshold is so low you won't get with a job ten minutes down the road. Oh and I doubt you pay for my UC.

I live in a 2 bedroom flat too (we do own it) and don't have a car. My DH is on 75k, pays higher rate tax and also has crazy narcissistic managers. We bought a flat in zone 3 London as we both work in financial services and knew our jobs are London centric so didn't want to spend a lot of money on commuting even with hybrid work. Living in zone 3 means that DH can cycle to work and has £0 in transport fares. I suppose he could feel pissed off because there is probably someone out there in a house paid for with housing benefit and with more bedrooms. But he has never felt this way because life is too short to be jealous of people who qualify for benefits. People on benefits are reliant on the government to a large degree. They are far more vulnerable. Your friend is also more dependent on her ex partner which is probably quite humiliating

DH was unhappy with his manager so he quit his job and is starting a new one in October. He has the ability to increase his pay and to upskill.

I can see why some will see it as unfair but 100k is a hell of a salary (to most people anyway). I don't really have a viewpoint either way but seems a bit crass to bemoan paying childcare when most people can barely afford it on very low salaries. UC might help towards it but you need to have the money in the first place.

£95k is not squeezed unless
You have put unnecessary pressure on yourselves. My household income is £41000 and I would suggest I am
Middle income / not one benefit though and too much for UC. I had to borrow money from my 87 year old dad to get to work last week.
I am voting labour. The tories have made my life so much harder

Ahh and here is the problem. You won’t work more because of childcare. Yet you expect someone on 100k to actively be about 10k a year worse off (per child)to pay for theirs. Hypocrisy or what. That is the exact problem this country has right now. The net contributors which are reducing at an alarming rate as it is are changing economic behaviour. All the while - people on UC say they can’t work more because of xyz. Yet, they think it’s reasonable that people work more to actively be thousands worse off per year. Absolutely batshit. This is why there isn’t enough money to fund the system anymore.

In addition to a previous poster who mentioned the household benefits cap, housing benefit covers rent not property ownership, the vast amount of earners in the income brackets we are talking about are homeowners and therefore the loss of income to mortgage is not actually a loss of income, it is an investment.

It is not won't work more but can't. I do extra work when I can. If a teacher thinks it isn't worth it working after paying for childcare you can't blame minimum wage workers either. I just don't agree with somebody claiming something one year when they aren't actually entitled as I presume they will still be earning 60k. Sorry but I don't have sympathy with your 100k earners. I think most would rather have that problem than struggling to pay bills.