To want a budget which puts young people and families first

[HFJ]

In advance of an upcoming budget that will likely hammer working people (again, despite the rhetoric), I’m consoling myself by imagining my own budget. You’ll notice a theme. This is because I believe young people and families are the future, deserve to have hope, aspirations and goals. Please feel free to contribute.

1. The first 5 years of young people’s full time earnings to be tax and NI free. This would enable all to save for a house deposit, rather than only the few who inherit. Imagine the incentive to work hard!
2. No increases to any tax that primarily affects working age people, including fuel tax (because working people need fuel to go to work)
3. No stamp duty for young people and those with children under 18. This enables them a fairer chance of buying property rather than have to compete unfairly with cash buyers
4. Complete removal of the pension tax free cash allowance. This is because 100s of 1000s are poised to take their 25% lump sum and plough this into the property market (tbf I think the gov has got wind of this, hence the landlord tax changes)
5. instead of massive increases to NHS budget (which does not really benefit the young or families), a £10 charge to see the doctor, so people start to take ownership for their health
6. Removal of the free prescription for over 60s. Instead, use this money to bring back the school nurse and perhaps even school dentist visits

Any other ideas?

You cannot equalise the haves and have nots because individuals make their choices and live very differently . Some people save , some people spend it would never work .

Also, do we really believe that current and previous governments haven’t intentionally structured our society this way?

They didn’t just sleep walk into this. It wasn’t just suddenly realised ‘oh housing, is so expensive now, how did we get here?’ This has been created, it’s one of our main economies in the uk. The amount of wealth it’s creates, is pretty staggering. Why else would it be sooo expensive? Because people need houses. This was started back in the 80s with good old thatcher selling off stock and not replacing it. And sorry the answer is not to build more houses, we have enough housing, where do you currently live exactly? It’s just you have no control over how long you can stay there or how affordable it is. And guess what, why would the government change this, they make sooo much money themselves from this? They won’t because it will affect investments. The very thing, funding pensions. The changes to no fault eviction was almost pointless. The landlord can still boot you out when they want to sell. I’ve privately rented 6 houses, 4 of those I had to move because they wanted to sell, the other two, I moved on from one and currently living in one of them. It’s madness, but it isn’t going to change.

it won’t ever be affordable unless you have inherited wealth, we need to get over this let’s buy a house dream. It just ain’t gonna happen, unless you have inherited the wealth, which there is a lot more of now thanks to the boomers, once they die off and that won’t be long. They’ll be coming for that and more. Which is where I see this government raising their money from. No one else has any real money left.

Are you saying that the 'have nots', many single mothers, people with disabilities, people from deprived backgrounds for example, are responsible for not having much?

Complete removal of the pension tax free cash allowance. This is because 100s of 1000s are poised to take their 25% lump sum and plough this into the property market (tbf I think the gov has got wind of this, hence the landlord tax changes)

This is completely unfair as people have paid into their pensions on the basis of 25% tax free lump sum.

Genuinely wondering why it's a bad thing for people to plough their 25% into the property market? It would certainly help the housing crisis we're currently facing in the UK.

I think the one thing the government could do to improve the lives and future of a great many citizens would be a massive council house building programme.
Really good quality, spacious homes with affordable rent. And I would put key workers, including higher income ones, at the top of the list, first to be housed, but ultimately there should be enough for everyone who needs/wants one. It would also be an income generating asset for councils.

No not at all , I’m all for a fair benefit system and have a disabled adult child but it has to be fair for everyone not just the disadvantaged otherwise what would be the point of anybody working and trying to better themselves .

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/e8315-budget-2025/#supports-for-families-and-children

here’s the latest Irish budget…just in case anyone wants to use these ideas 😂

Why are young people and families more important than any other part of society OP?

This.

So nobody over a certain age (ie, older than you and your offspring) is to be permitted to have 'hope, aspirations and goals'?

Have you ever heard the phrase 'It's not all about you, you know'?

Inheritance to be taxed at 99%….after all its unearned income.

This is actually a very sensible idea. Much better than anything OP suggested. It might encourage people into vital - but not highly paid - jobs e.g. care workers, TAs and HCAs.

My family will be affected by this. I am a single parent and I earn a pound or so a month over the threshold for my DD to get a subsidised bus pass, so it will cost me an extra £40 a month to get her to college after the rise is implemented. We won’t starve but that’s our annual holiday budget gone.

What a load of rubbish.

Let me think. How can I put this?
FUCK YOU Op. I have worked and paid my contributions for 50 years including when my children were little why should I have to still be struggling? When life really should be a little bit easier now.

No. Because one group doesn't deserve more than another. A working uterus doesn't somehow make you better and more deserving, and neither does being young. Saying you have more value in youth or motherhood is quite frankly insulting.

£10 charge to see a Doctor… I’m pregnant and have had to see at least one Doctor/HCP most weeks, so that’d be around £400 - £500. No amount of ‘taking responsibility’ for my own health would have prevented my pregnancy related illnesses, nor would it help my young family with maternity leave pending!

Exactly, the work-shy have no income to tax, they're just happy to take.

As ridiculous as I think the OP is, pitting age groups against each other.
It's also an arithmetic fact that a critical mass of working population is needed to sustain those above them.
When one pays 'taxes all their life' they are paying for those above them, not themselves.
It is expected that the next generation of working people (so, the kids) pay for their parents.
It's not a bank account where you pay for 'yourself'.

Not only are people living longer (and so costing more), but the working age population is shrinking in relative proportion to the non-working that need support.

Now obviously there's been mismanagement erc but this isn't just a problem in the UK. It's a trend seen across most of the developed world. Even the Nordic utopias that MN loves.

What's the solution then?

Everyone can get as angry as they like but it's not going to change these facts. Unless the entire financial system undergoes a major reset.

BTW I don't have DC so not part of the 'smug parents' camp.

I hope when you are over 60 the younger workers paying tax are just as pleasant as you.

Slow handclap OP.

Why is it always someone pitching young against old, or some culture war type rubbish?

Most people’s reality is not this thankfully. We have parents, uncles, aunties, who we care about, or we are grandparents who love and want the best for our kids and grand kids. Or maybe we just care about other people outside of our own bubble.

Sorry I think the idea about giving benefit money to children instead of the parents is a terrible idea.
While it's terrible that there are some parents out there spending that money on drugs instead of their kids. Thankfully most parents are good and abusers are the minority. Your idea would lead to loads of children wasting the family money on expensive shoes and games consoles. Worst case scenario the kids would spend it on drugs. In fact seeing as kids have poorer impulse control then adults there would probably be way more kids spending the family money on drugs (if your idea was implemented )then there currently is parents spending the family money on drugs.

Your idea about making shelters for runaway teens that are being abused was a good idea though imo