Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To reduce hours when labour win election

877 replies

Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 01:40

I fall into the “60%” tax bracket. With the upcoming elections and knowing the government always hammer the middle ground….woudlnt it make more sense for me to cut my hours for a more relaxed life, eligibility for childcare, reduced tax?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 23:36

Toenailz · 24/05/2024 21:52

So, you'll have to cope with the consequences of a government that doesn't work best for you, exactly as the working class have had to deal with for the past 14 years.

Difference is, for the past 14 years, the impact on some of the working class has been access to food, heating, housing. You know, the basics for your body to actually be alive. Not to mention the exponential increase of need and use of food banks. Yours will just be private education. Woe is me.

Woe is me? So I should pay 5x more than the average tax payer and not see any benefit?

OP posts:
UPALLNIGHTMNETTING · 24/05/2024 23:57

Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 23:36

Woe is me? So I should pay 5x more than the average tax payer and not see any benefit?

Exactly this, yes.

Without taxing the rich, how do you expect to start to close the gap between the rich and poor? Or are you saying you prefer the status quo where the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer? Or that specifically you deserve more because you're somehow smarter / more hard working / better than other people, so it's fair?

80smonster · 25/05/2024 00:01

80smonster · 24/05/2024 20:42

Is that you Bridget Phillipson?

The IFS estimate is incorrect. There will have been under-reporting in these numbers, since they fall on the Independent Schools Council Survey (circulated via private schools). Parents surveyed may have very likely not wanted to say they would be likely leave, or else decided not to contribute to the survey. This quote is taken from The Guardian, this week: ‘There are differing opinions as to how much the tax rise is likely to affect demand for private school places. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), which implausibly argues VAT receipts will remain unchanged as impacted families spend elsewhere, expects a 3-7% enrolment decline. I have heard that a leading industry consultant advises schools to budget for a near 25% decline by 2030. Notably, at a 25% decline, the net impact becomes negative as the cost of educating private school leavers in the state system would exceed all VAT gains.’
A 25% increase would be absolutely catastrophic for the already creaking state system, that’s before you address the competition that will ensue at grammar school level. The numbers that Labour has outlined look appealing to parents with kids in failing state schools. There is no research that underpins that this will improve social mobility, there is research that says it will disadvantage children who are from poorer socioeconomic backgrounds, whilst children from wealthier backgrounds are likely to be skimmed off for talented & gifted programmes, which will benefit the schools via the uptick in academic achievements. Anyways, Bridget, give this podcast a listen: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/podcasts/nice-white-parents-serial.html and best of luck with the election.

https://www.adamsmith.org/research/short-term-thinking-analysing-the-effect-of-applying-vat-to-school-fees

Short-Term Thinking: Analysing the Effect of Applying VAT to School Fees — Adam Smith Institute

This paper reviews the proposal to apply VAT of 20% to private school fees in order to raise significant revenue. We build on a paper from the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) which concludes that levying an effective 15% of VAT on school fees would...

https://www.adamsmith.org/research/short-term-thinking-analysing-the-effect-of-applying-vat-to-school-fees

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:02

UPALLNIGHTMNETTING · 24/05/2024 23:57

Exactly this, yes.

Without taxing the rich, how do you expect to start to close the gap between the rich and poor? Or are you saying you prefer the status quo where the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer? Or that specifically you deserve more because you're somehow smarter / more hard working / better than other people, so it's fair?

I don’t think surgeons and supermarket shelf stackers should get the same pay no

OP posts:
UPALLNIGHTMNETTING · 25/05/2024 00:14

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:02

I don’t think surgeons and supermarket shelf stackers should get the same pay no

But they won't be getting the same pay? The surgeon will still be getting loads more overall, just very slightly less than they were before. You can't have a society where the gap keeps getting bigger and bigger - surely you can see that? Even if it's irksome to your own personal finances, you get the principle?

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:18

UPALLNIGHTMNETTING · 25/05/2024 00:14

But they won't be getting the same pay? The surgeon will still be getting loads more overall, just very slightly less than they were before. You can't have a society where the gap keeps getting bigger and bigger - surely you can see that? Even if it's irksome to your own personal finances, you get the principle?

Yes, but tax the big corporations, not the people trying to aspire for a bit of a better life

OP posts:
Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:19

Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 23:36

Woe is me? So I should pay 5x more than the average tax payer and not see any benefit?

I find it absolutely telling that the only part of that post you picked up on and bothered responding to is the 'woe is me'.
No mention or acknowledgement of what the working class have had to deal with for the past 14 years under a government that better served middle earners than low earners.

Aye, it's your turn now. 👏

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:24

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:18

Yes, but tax the big corporations, not the people trying to aspire for a bit of a better life

Are you (just like the tories) so unbelievably out of touch that you think people actually achieving the lifestyle of being a middle earner, are the only ones striving to earn a better life?

I don't even need to ask. We all know the answer, already.

No one bedgrudges people who earn higher, in actual reality. What they do begrudge is a society where people can't feed their children, the elderly can't heat their homes, and people die under austerity whilst others worry about not being able to send little Billy to private school, blaming the poor (and the government most likely to assist the poor) for this.

I mean, fuck me, OP. Just go 'strive' harder then. Or is it not quite that easy after all🤔

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:24

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:19

I find it absolutely telling that the only part of that post you picked up on and bothered responding to is the 'woe is me'.
No mention or acknowledgement of what the working class have had to deal with for the past 14 years under a government that better served middle earners than low earners.

Aye, it's your turn now. 👏

Ok, well my experience with my cleaner and babysitter is that they only want cash in hand, don’t want to commit to a contract, need time off to attend job centre interviews and appear quite happy with their lot. So apologies, but I’m sure you’ll tell me how wrong I am

OP posts:
Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:26

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:24

Ok, well my experience with my cleaner and babysitter is that they only want cash in hand, don’t want to commit to a contract, need time off to attend job centre interviews and appear quite happy with their lot. So apologies, but I’m sure you’ll tell me how wrong I am

Aye, judge an entire 'class' by two workers.

I wonder how much you pay them, and what benefits you provide. Not enough to avoid the job centre then? Even with your salary?

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:35

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:26

Aye, judge an entire 'class' by two workers.

I wonder how much you pay them, and what benefits you provide. Not enough to avoid the job centre then? Even with your salary?

So you don’t begrudge my earnings, but until we lift the entire society out of poverty I should put everything back into the system for the greater good ?

OP posts:
Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:35

UPALLNIGHTMNETTING · 24/05/2024 23:57

Exactly this, yes.

Without taxing the rich, how do you expect to start to close the gap between the rich and poor? Or are you saying you prefer the status quo where the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer? Or that specifically you deserve more because you're somehow smarter / more hard working / better than other people, so it's fair?

The latter is exactly what the OP thinks. They've made it clear enough the disdain they have for the lower earns. Even ridiculing the home help they get.

Maybe if OP just cuts back a little bit on the non-necessities, such as the above, they'll just be able to afford life (read: private education for the little ones). Wasn't that what lower earners were advised? To simply budget and they'd manage?😂

In other news, I reckon the OP is a goady troll. No one can actually think like this.

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:37

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:35

So you don’t begrudge my earnings, but until we lift the entire society out of poverty I should put everything back into the system for the greater good ?

Why do you want a country where the divide is such that kids go to bed hungry? Are you honestly that disgusting?

None of us are that far away from being part of the poverty you complain about, draining your finances. Even you.

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:37

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:35

The latter is exactly what the OP thinks. They've made it clear enough the disdain they have for the lower earns. Even ridiculing the home help they get.

Maybe if OP just cuts back a little bit on the non-necessities, such as the above, they'll just be able to afford life (read: private education for the little ones). Wasn't that what lower earners were advised? To simply budget and they'd manage?😂

In other news, I reckon the OP is a goady troll. No one can actually think like this.

I don’t have disdain at all for lower earners. I’m just saying if there’s no benefits to aim to be a high earner than I might as well be a lower earner!

OP posts:
coupdetonnerre · 25/05/2024 00:38

Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 01:40

I fall into the “60%” tax bracket. With the upcoming elections and knowing the government always hammer the middle ground….woudlnt it make more sense for me to cut my hours for a more relaxed life, eligibility for childcare, reduced tax?

Why don't you take your skills elsewhere for less taxes, better quality of life, sunshine etc

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:39

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:37

Why do you want a country where the divide is such that kids go to bed hungry? Are you honestly that disgusting?

None of us are that far away from being part of the poverty you complain about, draining your finances. Even you.

Of course I don’t want kids going to bed hungry and absolutely support a more equal society. But I also don’t believe in socialism

OP posts:
Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:40

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:37

I don’t have disdain at all for lower earners. I’m just saying if there’s no benefits to aim to be a high earner than I might as well be a lower earner!

Cutting back on a few hours, on the tax bracket you're in, will not make you a 'lower earner'. Good grief 😂

& yes you do. Ridiculing your employees for having to sign on, and take on cash and hand, whilst being employed by you. That says far more, than you have.

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:41

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:40

Cutting back on a few hours, on the tax bracket you're in, will not make you a 'lower earner'. Good grief 😂

& yes you do. Ridiculing your employees for having to sign on, and take on cash and hand, whilst being employed by you. That says far more, than you have.

I’m not ridiculing that at all, but it’s tax evasion is it not?

OP posts:
Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:44

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:41

I’m not ridiculing that at all, but it’s tax evasion is it not?

It's far more likely simply that you're not paying them enough, nor offering enough hours, for them to survive without signing on in addition. The cross over is so small, that you'd not be having to offer them many more hours/pay to make it worth their while (and far less stress) to stop signing on.

The extra pittance they get is probably helping keep their own kids fed.

Educate yourself. And maybe give them a better salary that helps your workers trying to better their situation...

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:51

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:44

It's far more likely simply that you're not paying them enough, nor offering enough hours, for them to survive without signing on in addition. The cross over is so small, that you'd not be having to offer them many more hours/pay to make it worth their while (and far less stress) to stop signing on.

The extra pittance they get is probably helping keep their own kids fed.

Educate yourself. And maybe give them a better salary that helps your workers trying to better their situation...

I pay them what they asked for, I didn’t set the rate.

honestly, I’m not a vile person like you seem to think I am.

I do struggle to understand why you think it’s so awful of me to contribute a high rate of tax, not take anything from the state and not see any reward for the hours and responsibilities

OP posts:
Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:53

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:51

I pay them what they asked for, I didn’t set the rate.

honestly, I’m not a vile person like you seem to think I am.

I do struggle to understand why you think it’s so awful of me to contribute a high rate of tax, not take anything from the state and not see any reward for the hours and responsibilities

Because of your inability to understand that the need for people to feed themselves and their families, have heating in winter, access to hot water, and a roof over their heads, far outweighs you're need to earn £100,000 + a year.

Even one child going to bed hungry, is not worth you, or any one of us, having over 100 grand a year.

Reward? You've got plenty of reward for your job. Plenty of people work incredibly hard and cannot even properly feed themselves. Get a fucking grip of reality.

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:59

You pay them what they ask for. Which I'm guessing is around about the going rate for your area?

Why do you think they ask that, instead of more? Do you think it's because people won't pay them more, and offer more hours, despite being in a position to do so?

If they do a good job for you (which they obviously do, as you've kept them on), why don't you offer them a payrise? They should be rewarded for their hard work, hours and responsibilities.

Looking after, and being responsible for someone elses kids is about one of the biggest responsibilities you can get. Why does their wages not reflect this?

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 01:04

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:59

You pay them what they ask for. Which I'm guessing is around about the going rate for your area?

Why do you think they ask that, instead of more? Do you think it's because people won't pay them more, and offer more hours, despite being in a position to do so?

If they do a good job for you (which they obviously do, as you've kept them on), why don't you offer them a payrise? They should be rewarded for their hard work, hours and responsibilities.

Looking after, and being responsible for someone elses kids is about one of the biggest responsibilities you can get. Why does their wages not reflect this?

I’ve given them rises whenever they have requested them. I give them bonuses and gifts. I’ve offered one out spare room when she has having some issues. I’ve asked to increase hours and been told no. They do do a good job and well respected

OP posts:
pinkzebra02 · 25/05/2024 01:16

Knock yourself out hun, there'll be plenty of others to step right into your shoes given that high rate tax payers are not a thpecial as they think xx

insidenumber9 · 25/05/2024 01:26

Tory bots please go away