Is your household contributing net tax ?

[Pingufireengine]

Following on from the awful disabled people are a drain on society threads...

For those that have children, have you considered this?

Roughly 55-60% of all households aren't net contributors to tax.

That's not to say the households that don't make a net contribution are in receipt of benefits.

Having children entails the following:

(This is per child)

Maternity care on NHS/midwifes,
Birth/delivery £3000-10000,
Post Delivery Care,
Health Visitors,
Statutory Maternity Leave,
Free prescriptions during pregnancy and after birth for 1 year,
Child gets free eye tests, glasses, prescriptions, dentist until 16/18
Child benefit until 16-20
Free nursery hours £2000-7000 per
Free School Milk £30-40
Free school meals: £400-500
School is £7,690 per
Sixth form/college/higher education £4,843

Student loans for university £30,000-50,000+

Yes the loans are paid back, but the initial offset is footed by taxpayers. And around 27% of full-time undergraduates starting in 2022/23 will repay them in full. They forecast that after the 2022 reforms this would increase to 61% among new students from 2023/24.

So instead of looking to blame those who are disabled for being a drain, look elsewhere, and better yet, instead of the disabled, pensioners, the working poor...we should look towards those are govern us, avoid tax.

The UK pension is the lowest in Europe, our wages are low and have stagnanted, working rights and conditions have eroded.

The UK looks asset rich, but it's only a small number who are generating huge wealth for themselves. There are parts of the UK poorer than the poorest parts of Poland. In fact, Poland is predicted to be wealthier per person than the UK in just a few years.

Maternity care is awful, the NHS is broken and on its knees, social care is non existent.

We've had austerity for 14 years, then Brexit, then COVID. Our country is in desperate need of investment into our creeking infrastructure.

And the revenue provided by tobacco companies doesn't balance that out?

I'm not sure how else to say this. You can say should all you want but it's completely unworkable and utterly unenforceable.

We can't even get hundreds of thousands of fathers to contribute for their children where they actually do have a legal duty to let alone where no such duty exists when they are adults. You just aren't thinking this through at all.

Fraud involving disabilities benefits is tiny in comparison to tax evasion and its so tiresome to have to have to keep stating this. It's a distraction tactic, nothing more.

Yes it's impossible to have a sensible conversation when forcing individuals to care for others potentially against their will is proposed.

Unbelievable.

Well carers save us millions so their contribution would appear to far exceed the average person's.

What we have with the tories then!

I’m disabled and if eventually my condition gets so bad that DP ends up my carer, I wouldn’t see it as him saving the state thousands of pounds. In the same way I’m not saving the state thousands by raising my children and not putting them into care. I realise that sounds bad but I don’t think this type of fantasy economics helps.

That would come under the banner of not thought through by certain posters. Along with rape victims, abused children/parents, estranged families, people in casual relationships where contraception failed....

Frankly bizarre that anyone could suggest it.

It's not fantasy economics. Its a lack of understanding of the law on your part. You are legally required to care for your minor children unless you seek to terminate that duty via court and the associated costs that entails.

Your DP has no such duty to you.

If you became so disabled that you had high needs and required a care package or residential care if your partner chose to provide this support instead he would indeed be saving the tax payer a fortune.

It's absolutely disingenuous to claim otherwise

Never mind the kids, what about the old bastards like me who have the temerity to have lived past 60? Cunts, we are, thieving cunts -

They all say they’ve worked all of their lives & paid in. But they weren’t expected to live that long, & have therefore took a lot more out than they ever paid in.

It's a rigged market though, not pure capitalism. Bankers are only paid so much because they run the system that way. Same with CEOs - they love to talk up a load of shit about how demanding the job is etc but 90% of people could and would do it and probably at least as well, they just didn't go to the right schools and oxbridge so they won't get a chance.

No.

https://ash.org.uk/media-centre/news/press-releases/new-figures-show-smoking-costs-billions-more-than-tobacco-taxes-as-consultation-on-creating-a-smokefree-generation-closes#:~:text=Chief%20Executive%20of%20ASH%20Deborah%20Arnott%20said%3A&text=The%20cost%20of%20smoking%20to,and%20create%20a%20healthier%20workforce.

You keep banging the same old drum but you are not listening and not addressing the points being made. If you want to bring people round to your way of thinking you are going to have to respond to what they are saying.

So Hayley’s decision is immoral - when should the state pay for her to breed? Why should other people pay higher taxes and have less OF THEIR OWN money to spend as they see fit so she gets supported? But because we chose not to penalise the children, Hayley gets a subsidised life.

What would you propose? Less food for children of sluts?

Surely fiscal drag will sort a lot of this out eventually? By the government reducing NI and keeping the tax rate boundaries the same, the government appears to have done something fairly clever (for once).

Those of working age, in employment, pay a bit less in NI, but with each pay rise, over time, and en masse, means that overall the country should receive more in income tax.

Keep this up for say, five years, and I'd expect the numbers to start looking a bit more healthy on the balance sheet as people fall into the higher rate tax bracket.

Or is this an oversimplified view?

"Tax" isn't just income tax, is it?

No but with NI it's by far the biggest chunk

Far too simplified. People don’t pay more tax because they can afford to with fiscal drag. Lower earners will be pushed into poverty quickly and the tide of poverty will rise with every passing year. If more of a fixed pot goes to government, the economy will contract with govt losing out on VAT and other duties at the same time as unemployment will rise, pushing up the demand for public services.

My thoughts are that we need to get more people paying tax and at a decent level. NMW needs to rise annually - I often think it could do with a triple lock. The problem is not higher earners vs lower earners, we need to stop using benefits to subsidise businesses who pay low wages.

Nobody in work should need benefits. In work benefits are not a benefit to the individual, they are benefits to the employer whose profits are being propped up by state handouts.

@Whostoleallthemorals

Family behaving like family eh? Dealing with mentally ill and vulnerable people falls somewhat outside of that when there is a risk of violence both ways because "capacity" and also you're not a psychiatrist or a social worker.

You want to pick a fight about this? Crack on. Caring is not just making tea and mopping dribble and no matter how much you love a person specialist intervention is desperately needed to safeguard all concerned.

I'm dealing with the elderly care system at the moment and I'm a whisker away from going postal.

If you want to offer yourself up as a target and question "mirals", I'm spoiling for a fight.

I’m disabled and if eventually my condition gets so bad that DP ends up my carer, I wouldn’t see it as him saving the state thousands of pounds. In the same way I’m not saving the state thousands by raising my children and not putting them into care. I realise that sounds bad but I don’t think this type of fantasy economics helps.

It’s not fantasy economics. If family members won’t or can’t care the State has a legal duty to provide care which costs a significant amount of money. I’m an adoptive parent, over the course of my DCs childhood the local authority will save hundreds of thousands of pounds in care fees for them (£6k per month per child as a conservative estimate - many child placements cost considerably more). Just in care fees, not including the cost of the many professionals involved in keeping a child in care, multi agency meetings, the cost of children’s hearings and reviews.

These are actual costs incurred when family members aren’t able to care for their children, disabled adult relatives and older people who need care. It’s incredibly short sighted to not recognise the financial cost of state involvement in care.

Oh the irony!

If you want to offer yourself up as a target and question "mirals", I'm spoiling for a fight.

Well, you're just a peach, aren't you?

For the gif I mean which doesn't show in the quote.

I wonder which playbook of Tory responses you're flicking through there? I'd hazard a guess but I'd get deleted.

I can't engage with utter nonsense. We have tried. Repeatedly.

As a rape and dv victim myself how fucking dare you.
I refuse to engage with someone like you further.

You should be thoroughly ashamed. Disgusting