Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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
insidenumber9 · 25/05/2024 01:30

Not sure what your post has to do with labour, it merely reflects how badly your life is going under the conservatives.

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 01:37

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 01:04

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

You mean when the national living wage rises, and ipso facto, so do their rates? Or do you mean rises along with inflation?

What about rewarding them with pay rises when they don't ask? They provide an extremely valuable service to you and should be rewarded for the hard work, no?

Out of interest, are you paying a salary, or by the hour? What benefits do they get? What is the actual rate you pay them?

No one, and I mean absolutely no one, is going to the effort of 'signing on' (and all that entails - you do actually have to do some work to receive benefit money you know - the government doesn't make it easy or low time expenditure) if they can't make a reasonable living without it. The benefits that people receive do not make it worthwhile to not work, or to risk benefit fraud (since that's what you're essentially accusing them of here, alongside tax evasion). Utilise some common sense here, please.

How many high income households do you think are evading tax? Or is it just the 'lowly' of society? Nah, higher income households just think they're more intelligent about it hiding it offshore. Of course, your wee cleaner isn't going to have the sort of money to be having accounts outside of the UK, are they?

Of course your cleaner does. They're absolutely raking it in via tax dodging.

Have you thought about the reasons they refused your increase of hours? Do you know the ins and outs of all their personal circumstances? Do you know whether they have caring responsibilities, kids with extra needs, ill health/disabilities, was the extra hours you were offering enough to offset what they'd receive in benefit? You probably wont know all of this, because most of us don't divulge our personal lives to our employers.

Unfortunately though, that means people will make assumptions. The less nice of us, come to the worst ones.

insidenumber9 · 25/05/2024 01:41

mrsdineen2 · 24/05/2024 08:03

Good morning brand new account, created upon the announcement of a general election to blame the incoming Labour government for current taxation applied to you by a 14 year tory government. I enjoyed reading your completely organic posts made at a time when UK professionals earning £100k plus are all generally online.

This!

whistleblower99 · 25/05/2024 05:34

The accusations of people being bots is tedious. Just because they have an opposing opinion. If you think someone is a bot - report it. If you think someone is posting in bad faith - report it. Troll hunting is against MN rules. It’s also a lazy argument for people who don’t understand the issues at hand.

Zonder · 25/05/2024 05:52

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 00:41

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

Oh the irony!

Polishedshoesalways · 25/05/2024 06:10

Well don’t worry op, you won’t be alone. Under the old Labour government in the 70s barely anyone worked as we only had 2-3 days of electricity and no bin collections. Industry could barely function. We needed a bail out from the IMF and Labour completely crashed the economy.

Not unlike the last time they were in government.

Some pp have short memories, and limited recall of history it seems on here.

Byronada · 25/05/2024 06:17

whistleblower99 · 25/05/2024 05:34

The accusations of people being bots is tedious. Just because they have an opposing opinion. If you think someone is a bot - report it. If you think someone is posting in bad faith - report it. Troll hunting is against MN rules. It’s also a lazy argument for people who don’t understand the issues at hand.

Edited

I completely agree. I thought the OP made a valid point for debate but the nastiness on here is shocking. Why can't people debate without resorting to mud slinging?

Charlie2121 · 25/05/2024 06:20

While the discussion has gone a little shouty and repetitive the fundamental point the OP makes is correct.

You can argue all you like about wage gaps and what is and isn’t desirable however the fact remains that a pretty small number of people fund everyone else. The top 1% of workers pay over a third of all income tax between them.

While they should of course pay more tax than lower earners you still have to make it worthwhile for them to maximise their efforts. The correct system with huge cliff edges doesn’t do that.

it can never be good for society when any worker decides to work less and pay less tax because the system encourages them to do so. That needs to be fixed at all levels.

I once received a £20k bonus and was actually worse off than had I not received it due to tax and childcare rules. That sort of scenario should never be possible.

Polishedshoesalways · 25/05/2024 06:29

Byronada · 25/05/2024 06:17

I completely agree. I thought the OP made a valid point for debate but the nastiness on here is shocking. Why can't people debate without resorting to mud slinging?

There is a lot at stake. Many simply do not want people to be reminded of labours track record. They would rather scream bot or Nigel than engage with the facts.

AllPrincessAnneshorses · 25/05/2024 06:53

Breathtaking selfishness. No such thing as society, eh?

SweetFemaleAttitude · 25/05/2024 07:15

also at 35k you are entitled to child benefit, tax free child care etc etc

You're telling me you're jealous of people on £35k, whilst earning triple that amount and crying over paying higher taxes.

Cry me a fucking river.

Yes. Reduce your hours. Get tax free child care and child benefit. Live the life of fucking Riley you imagine people on £35k do.

You ain't the 'squeezed middle'

Parttimeplay · 25/05/2024 07:17

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 01:37

You mean when the national living wage rises, and ipso facto, so do their rates? Or do you mean rises along with inflation?

What about rewarding them with pay rises when they don't ask? They provide an extremely valuable service to you and should be rewarded for the hard work, no?

Out of interest, are you paying a salary, or by the hour? What benefits do they get? What is the actual rate you pay them?

No one, and I mean absolutely no one, is going to the effort of 'signing on' (and all that entails - you do actually have to do some work to receive benefit money you know - the government doesn't make it easy or low time expenditure) if they can't make a reasonable living without it. The benefits that people receive do not make it worthwhile to not work, or to risk benefit fraud (since that's what you're essentially accusing them of here, alongside tax evasion). Utilise some common sense here, please.

How many high income households do you think are evading tax? Or is it just the 'lowly' of society? Nah, higher income households just think they're more intelligent about it hiding it offshore. Of course, your wee cleaner isn't going to have the sort of money to be having accounts outside of the UK, are they?

Of course your cleaner does. They're absolutely raking it in via tax dodging.

Have you thought about the reasons they refused your increase of hours? Do you know the ins and outs of all their personal circumstances? Do you know whether they have caring responsibilities, kids with extra needs, ill health/disabilities, was the extra hours you were offering enough to offset what they'd receive in benefit? You probably wont know all of this, because most of us don't divulge our personal lives to our employers.

Unfortunately though, that means people will make assumptions. The less nice of us, come to the worst ones.

Yes, nice to see you recognise you are making a lot of negative assumptions

OP posts:
ThisOldThang · 25/05/2024 07:19

Toenailz · 25/05/2024 00:24

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🤔

Given the unbelievable generosity of benefits in the UK, just how much more money do you want to take from people like the OP?

To reduce hours when labour win election
Polishedshoesalways · 25/05/2024 07:31

ThisOldThang · 25/05/2024 07:19

Given the unbelievable generosity of benefits in the UK, just how much more money do you want to take from people like the OP?

Some would have us on 90% tax - and still expect those people to want to remain in the U.K.!

WithACatLikeTread · 25/05/2024 07:33

ThisOldThang · 25/05/2024 07:19

Given the unbelievable generosity of benefits in the UK, just how much more money do you want to take from people like the OP?

Here we go again.

Polishedshoesalways · 25/05/2024 07:38

WithACatLikeTread · 25/05/2024 07:33

Here we go again.

Well it’s a good point.

Whatafustercluck · 25/05/2024 07:42

Polishedshoesalways · 25/05/2024 06:29

There is a lot at stake. Many simply do not want people to be reminded of labours track record. They would rather scream bot or Nigel than engage with the facts.

Edited

Proper statistical analysis here. https://theconversation.com/labour-are-much-better-at-running-the-economy-than-voters-think-new-research-162368

But in summary:

... the economy grows at a very similar pace under Labour and the Conservatives, but Labour governments seem to do better at tackling recessions and achieve a more consistent performance. And if we discount the global financial crisis of 2007-09, Labour’s (slight) superiority becomes more pronounced.

All this "the Tories are better at managing the economy" is utter bollocks.

Labour are much better at running the economy than voters think – new research

We looked at 100 years of Tory and Labour governments to see who was better at producing GDP.

https://theconversation.com/labour-are-much-better-at-running-the-economy-than-voters-think-new-research-162368

insidenumber9 · 25/05/2024 07:50

Polishedshoesalways · 25/05/2024 07:31

Some would have us on 90% tax - and still expect those people to want to remain in the U.K.!

Edited

Seeing as the “trickle down” effect has been completely disproven, I couldn’t care less if you leave the UK. Goodbye.

WithACatLikeTread · 25/05/2024 08:00

Polishedshoesalways · 25/05/2024 07:38

Well it’s a good point.

It is actually inaccurate. UC for the majority is less than generous.

Byronada · 25/05/2024 08:08

Given the unbelievable generosity of benefits in the UK, just how much more money do you want to take from people like the OP?

I don't grudge a penny in benefits to those who need them. But I was really shocked by a post on Mumsnet recently where the OP was receiving a huge amount of money, more than many people's take home pay, and refused to disclose how much child maintenance she got claiming it wasn't relevant. It was the first time I realised that CM isn't taken into account for Universal Credit.

I'll be honest and say that it's one of the factors that's prompted me to consider taking my pension early and get out of the workforce. I may work part time but I want to keep more of my money after 42 years of tax and NI and not a penny in benefits (which I'm grateful I haven't needed)

I hope the new government has the courage to radically overhaul the benefits system. Those who genuinely cannot work such as the disabled need more. However the taxpayer should not be compensating for absent parents and should definitely not be paying where the parent may be paying as well. Madness.

WithACatLikeTread · 25/05/2024 08:12

Byronada · 25/05/2024 08:08

Given the unbelievable generosity of benefits in the UK, just how much more money do you want to take from people like the OP?

I don't grudge a penny in benefits to those who need them. But I was really shocked by a post on Mumsnet recently where the OP was receiving a huge amount of money, more than many people's take home pay, and refused to disclose how much child maintenance she got claiming it wasn't relevant. It was the first time I realised that CM isn't taken into account for Universal Credit.

I'll be honest and say that it's one of the factors that's prompted me to consider taking my pension early and get out of the workforce. I may work part time but I want to keep more of my money after 42 years of tax and NI and not a penny in benefits (which I'm grateful I haven't needed)

I hope the new government has the courage to radically overhaul the benefits system. Those who genuinely cannot work such as the disabled need more. However the taxpayer should not be compensating for absent parents and should definitely not be paying where the parent may be paying as well. Madness.

She had two disabled children and London rent. Not sure I would be envious of that?

ThisOldThang · 25/05/2024 08:22

It's not a case of being envious.

The example calculation I've posted is based upon a family of four in private rented accommodation with one parent working 40 hours for minimum wage and one parent not working.

The 'take home pay' is higher than a senior teacher at the top of the pay scale and in receipt of the London Allowance.

What incentive is there to go to university with the associated costs and then enter a high stress profession, such as teaching, if you're better off working in a coffee shop and recieving benefits?

The benefits brigade always start shouting that people should quit their jobs if they think benefits are so great.

What do you think is going to happen (has already happened) to the government finances when people start making those rational decisions and stop striving and start taking?

BIossomtoes · 25/05/2024 08:29

The example calculation I've posted is based upon a family of four in private rented accommodation with one parent working 40 hours for minimum wage and one parent not working.

And the bulk of the money is rent. That’s taxpayers’ money going straight into the bank account of a landlord. The answer isn’t cutting benefits, it’s high time we had rent controls.

WithACatLikeTread · 25/05/2024 08:29

ThisOldThang · 25/05/2024 08:22

It's not a case of being envious.

The example calculation I've posted is based upon a family of four in private rented accommodation with one parent working 40 hours for minimum wage and one parent not working.

The 'take home pay' is higher than a senior teacher at the top of the pay scale and in receipt of the London Allowance.

What incentive is there to go to university with the associated costs and then enter a high stress profession, such as teaching, if you're better off working in a coffee shop and recieving benefits?

The benefits brigade always start shouting that people should quit their jobs if they think benefits are so great.

What do you think is going to happen (has already happened) to the government finances when people start making those rational decisions and stop striving and start taking?

Edited

You think teachers are worse off than those on benefits? 🙄

Byronada · 25/05/2024 08:31

She had two disabled children and London rent. Not sure I would be envious of that?

I'm not envious at all. I'm ok with my lot. But I would like to see a benefits overhaul. I want companies to be forced to pay decent wages so that the taxpayer isn't topping them up. I want to see absent parents forced to step up and pay for their children. On Mumsnet the answer often seems to be 'benefits'