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?

Being reliant on benefits is not a walk in the park. You are at risk of them being stopped or changed. You can't do overtime or get a promotion to boost your income, they do not rise in line with inflation. Plus you get slagged off on mumsnet by people who don't know what they're talking about.

I come from the north, live in the south. While I didn't use the term, the reality is house prices can be starkly different whilst (for instance) for many public sector jobs the salaries are the same wherever you are in the country

(And yeah I would do anything to move back north, but my children''s dad lives here and can only work here and it would not be ok for their parents to live hundreds of miles apart)

Seriously you need to do some calculations. You really won’t get as much as you think. I know you think you know it because you worked in a benefit office some years ago but UC isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. I work with the DWP for my job and do many applications for UC (and other benefits).

So do I need the benefits because I can earn 60k or should I work my ass off to be no better off and never see my babies?

7k extra a year, plus presumably more options to increase earnings isn’t nothing. But I agree that’s your choice. Someone else will take your job and pay the tax on it.

Again, the judgement that Gin made was about deliberately dropping salary for a short time to get free school meals (although it doesn’t seem like that’s the plan anymore).

When your babies arrive you might enjoy some time in a hotel in the week 😂

He works full time. He also has another job so three jobs in total. If we didn't need it we wouldn't qualify. On that note I am off to work!

Erm, the “squeezed middle” does exist outside the South East, you know?

I suspect OP only specified South East because the CoL is significantly higher than many other areas of the UK

I don’t know why you’re getting such a shit time; it’s this change in economic behaviour which should worry everyone reliant on the state. The chancellor has been told, the ONS are shouting it from the roof tops. There are real issues with the tax system. So short sighted.

Anything over 100k now goes into a pension in this house. Got a nice little bonus government took over 70%. Yeah sod off with that. Instead of the government getting 40 and 45% of those higher earnings - they now get 0%. Economics of a tin pot country that. Borrowing colossal amounts to fund the biggest state reliance in history as not enough people paying in. Those who could pay more are now not because the penalty is too high. Government are reluctant to change it - despite knowing the facts as the electorate are too dumb to understand the nuances and the ultimate cost.

Well if you think you can pay all your bills, run a car, have the same standard of living as you do now and bring up twins for just over £2K a month then good luck to you, but I guarantee you are going to be in for 1 heck of a shock.

Someone else will take your job and pay the tax on it.

We hope.

This is what complicates things, we live in a society without enough workers and there are substantial disincentives to working/more sometimes. Going on two part time jobs to get UC is a particularly extreme example, though I suppose baby twins mean you're an outlier on childcare costs, but it's true that one 60kish income with multiple DC is one of those points (there are many) where you're particularly disadvantaged by the way the tax and benefits systems work and intersect. And fiscal drag means more people are going to be in this position, meaning there's the potential for more of them to make decisions that involve working less and paying less in. It's worth us as a society being aware of this.

I live in an Outer London borough. I work full time (50 hr week on average) and earn 46k. I am a single parent, though no longer have childcare to pay. I do not own my home, my rent is £1,350 pm.

I am not entitled to any UC, FSM, free prescriptions, rent help etc etc. So other than the short term benefit of childcare contributions, how exactly is it better off to be on UC?

And you still think we are better off? Currently waiting for money to get new work shoes. You are a piece of work.

I couldn’t give a flying F if you work or not. 🤣 I’m simply suggesting you actually check as you’ve made basic errors about UC.

I work and pay taxes, so does my husband. I don’t see it as “paying for other people”. We pay into society and for services. We don’t claim UC. I don’t judge those who need it, I am happy to ensure people have food on the table. 🤷🏻‍♀️

You have a joint household income of £95k, OP, and you're struggling? Bloody hell.

I don’t know why you’re getting such a shit time; it’s this change in economic behaviour which should worry everyone reliant on the state. The chancellor has been told, the ONS are shouting it from the roof tops. There are real issues with the tax system. So short sighted.

Very true.

I think the two low paid PT jobs is likely to be an outlier, too much of a change for most people. But getting your income a bit lower, not so much. Possibly people putting more into their pensions to avoid higher tax and losing out on certain benefits isn't a bad thing- maybe more people making better provision for their old age outweighs the benefit of them paying extra tax. However, if they're instead choosing to work less, not to get that extra shift or whatever... that has wider implications. Very short sighted not to acknowledge that. Especially as fiscal drag plus inflation means the number of people at these bottlenecks will numerically increase.

Does she rent though? You won't be entitled to housing help so you won't get as much as you might think.

Yeah it’s true. You need to hit 150k to have the same take home as 100k because of the cliff edges. So people drop days, put more in pensions, don’t work as much as they could. These issues are very well documented but the government are reluctant because of the British Public. Not exactly the brightest bunch. Waaaaaaaaahhhhhh tax the rich, you don’t deserve free childcare ad infinitum.

No understanding what so ever about who pays for the highest state reliance on record and the policies which actively stop these people contributing more, it’s absolute insanity. A more productive society means more money for all.

Yes, that has been a thing for a very long time. These sort of decisions exist at very high income points, very low and in the middle. It's the tax system and the bottlenecks, plus how they intersect with other things like child benefit and then also high costs of working like childcare and commuting.

What's maybe changed is people feeling more squeezed at higher points in the income graph than previously. So someone who 5 or 10 years ago might have rationalised work arrangements where some of it didn't pay as worth it in the long term is less likely to be willing or able to do that now.

I’m not prepared to comment on anyone’s personal circumstances as that’s not my place. And to be honest I’m unsure why you think that you should ‘get’ anything other than your salary for being in full time employment.

That being said, I strongly believe that whatever we may think of an adult’s choices, their dc should never have to grow up in poverty. So given that you have used yourself as an example, if you choose to give up a secure job with a reasonable salary I believe that your infant twins should not suffer as a result and that society should step in to help support them. However that support likely will not give them the same opportunities and standard of living that they could have enjoyed should you choose to return to work in your secure role.

I do think that the above is largely irrelevant though as most of those in receipt of benefits may not have the choices that you have. They may be carer to a disabled child or have far less earning potential than £60K so it’s comparing apples and oranges really.

It's worth us as a society being aware of this

I agree that it’s always worth being aware of things like this. I also can believe there are a few years when working full time at that kind of salary range is tough you break even than elif you weren’t.

TBF, crotchet’s situation is rather taking over the thread and by the sounds of it their earnings are quite a bit lower than the OP.

As I said earlier, I think the balance is wrong and it is causing fiscal drag. Tax ideally would be higher on capital gains etc and lowered accordingly for income from work