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.

I work in education in London & the impact on school rolls due to falling birth rates/families pushed out of London is significant.

I think removing state pensions from high tax payers risks exposing it for the Ponzi scheme it is. My NI contributions are paying current pensions not going into a pot for my future. It’s a social contract, the working generation fund the pensions of the generation before. Undermine that at your peril.

but isn’t the issue the fact that the ponzi triangle is turning upside down?

With the exception of child carers, those carers who say they are doing the government a favour by looking after family members are no different to dads who say they are doing their partner a favour by babysitting.

Not really, if you’re caring for a disabled or elderly relative you save the state a huge sum in not paying for care services. If those caring responsibilities mean you can’t work - because someone’s needs mean they aren’t safe being left alone - you’re saving the state a huge amount in residential care fees. You also completely compromise your ability to work and pay your own bills.

It’s fine to say family have the first duty to care, but you then need to consider the impact of the cost of that caring role on those who are caring. I had to work part time to care for my disabled children, luckily I had reached a point in my career where I could work flexibly and had a reasonable salary but my career stalled for 7 years, it’s only now moving forward again. Swap disabled child for disabled partner or adult child and the impact on my earning capacity would be the same - while saving thousands a week for the state to provide care.

Fundamentally wrong isn't it.

It's not comparable in the slightest.

Parents have a legal duty. Carers of adults don't. The state however does.

Adult carers are absolutely doing the government a favour and saving everyone many millions.

Disabled children become disabled adults.

You can’t compare our pension to other countries.

i think we should move to something like Sweden, where tax kicks in much lower, but fewer things are means tested.

👋

Why high earners do not longer bothered with the U.K.? Those handouts money got a come from somewhere. Now high earners are called parasites only in this country. Nothing surprises me anymore. I beg those calling for it are unemployable.

You cannot even begin to quantify someone's contribution to the economy, or society, based on their tax contribution. It's an ignorant and dangerous discussion to encourage and only fuels misguided anger and resentment. Invariably, it's lower-earning workers that provide the most vital services, and without them the high earners simply couldn't function. The single biggest societal issue, not just in the UK but globally, is the unfair distribution of wealth and GDP. the tax and benefits system, that too many of the better off like to whine about, does not go nearly far enough to give us a fair and equitable society.

Is that because all poor people are good and altruistic?

That's often not true and it doesn't change the legal position at all.

Yes, it's the whining from rich people that is so repellent.

@Neveralonewithaclone I understood what you were getting at.

But it does affect the carer's ability to earn more, as they will be working anyway.

Of course you did, they're just playing with semantics.

People (women) in the UK are already choosing to have fewer children than ever before- without immigration our population would start falling (not immediately due to extended lifespans) eventually. Without enough ‘new’ people being born what happens to society when an increasingly old and infirm population needs all the structures and services, who will provide all that? So to tax parents even more heavily when they are already at an economic disadvantage ( again primarily Females) would be disastrous!

@LiquoriceAllsort2 would it tho I think we are very average and care a lot as it has a massive potential to damage our kids future. I would say the average in this country should be two parents working 37 hours a week with 1 or 2 kids.

I would target welfare and replace it with mandatory work on things we don't want to fund at cost. E.g. our council doesn't litter pick or adopt the public open space of new builds so you want to claim UC but only working 16hours no problem if you do 21 hours of litter picking.

The average working person can avoid this by taking out income protection and critical illness cover. Our critical illness cover is enough to pay off the mortgage in reality it's enough to buy a couple of cheap properties to keep us as we are now using the rent as income. We would also get our pensions so could simply pay off the mortgage and live happily.

If we say want to raise C for schooling which involves adding Y to the tax bill of everyone vs paying 2k a year whilst DS is in school for 13 years I would rather pay the 26k now than say 50k over my lifetime in extra tax.

I think we are at crossed purposes maybe.

It absolutely affects the carer's ability to earn more. But they are saving the Government far more than they would be capable of earning in the first place in many cases. Not many (if any?) would earn in excess of what a residential placement costs.

Yes my household is a net contributor. Circa £300k income, no kids and both have health conditions we treat privately because the NHS can’t provide treatments or the waits are 1+ years. Private dentists.

We also have four cars between us so pay four lots of road tax. I think road tax should be on the driver not the car but that’s another story. It’s not like you use the roads more because you have more cars.

Literally the only benefit we get personally are the NHS prescription pre-payment certificates for £9.99 a month as we each have multiple prescriptions a month. However, we make a point of buying any additional pain meds etc ourselves rather than rinse the certificates for all they’re worth.

What a stupid comment. How old are you?

They could tug their forelocks as they pick litter too.

Why are you so rich? Are you neurosurgeons?

I don’t see how UBI could work, 37.5 million working age population. How much would the level of UBI be? I assume UBI isn’t given to children. What about people who require additional funds such as PIP’s? Would you scrap all benefits entitlements other than UBI? Because if it’s UBI plus xy and z the system would just end up being more expensive.

54 and still not a stupid comment, just because you don't agree!!