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?

People over 60 get free prescriptions.
Most people don't retire till they are over 65?
If people are on lots of medication they can by a prepayment certificate for £114.00 which lasts a year.

Quite. I was supposed to have a phone appointment last week that I'd waited four weeks for - the call never happened. Rang the next day, they apologised and re-booked it for six weeks' time. I did protest but as it was classed as non-urgent, they couldn't do anything.

Not one of the ‘special ones’ thinking you can produce children you can’t afford and have the state pay.

less people do that now hence the fall in birth rates

Do people who are resentful of the state paying for things disagree with council housing and pension credit?

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

So people who would have liked to have children but couldn’t, or who are struggling to have them, get hammered with higher housing costs as well?

One thing I wish the government would do would be to do something radical about absent fathers who don't pay child support.

I’ll tell you what’s wrong with every one of your ideas.

1. Some graduate training schemes in law & finance are paying salaries over £50k. Should they not pay tax & NI? NI is a contribution to your future pension, of course you should pay it when you start work.
2. Climate change. We need to stop subsidising carbon intensive lifestyle choices. Fund better public transport & cycling & walking routes instead.
3. Stamp duty should be limited by value of property not age of the buyers. If you ban it will just encourage more house price inflation which will make it even harder to get on the property ladder.
4. so you want to go back to the days when people were forced to buy an annuity? no idea where this idea that rich pensioners are all investing in property comes from. DH is using his lump sum to finally pay off the remainder of our mortgage.
5. Don’t kids get sick quite often? We will all benefit from an increase in NHS budget. Have you tried getting a GP appointment recently. 90 year old father with severe back pain was given one in 3 weeks time. I couldn’t get one at all & have been paying privately for physio. Lucky I can afford it.
6. Older people tend to need more medicines yet have lower incomes if they are retired. DH is on statins & blood pressure meds. Keeping him well & saving NHS money in the long run. If there was proper investment in the NHS there would be no need for school nurses.

Well said, @NetZeroZealot !!!!

And how will you feel when you reach 60s 😂

I'll tell you what @HFJ you can have your ageist and lacking-in-insight to life cycles budget, but only if:

• any woman who wants to have a child passes an IQ test and is deemed at least 10 points above the median
• any woman wanting State support of any sort for her conception, pregnancy, birth, and child's support and schooling, can show she's been a nett contributor to taxation income for at least 5 years before becoming pregnant ie she has a decent job
• all men have vasectomies and store their sperm at the age of 15, so that there can be no "accidental" pregnancies

I am sick of my taxes and really long hours & hard work over the last 40 years going to feckless men and women who think that reproducing is some sort of prize that I should e grateful for.

Unreasonable ? Yes of course. But your requirements are even more so.

Just wait until you're 67.

Over 60 here😬. Thanks. Scrap heap here I come, despite having worked and contributed all my adult life. I think it's a very bad idea to prioritise one group of people against another. I could say what I really think of your ideas but probably better that I don't.

Of course it's a bad idea to prioritise one group but that's exactly what the Tories have done the whole time they've been in power. Pensioners have been protected the last 14 years or so. It's time to redress the balance at least a bit.

The state deciding if you can have children? I think your idea is a lot worse than OP's.

So your theme seems to be, make life more expensive for those who have paid into the system all their lives, whilst rewarding those who haven’t contributed anything with perks previous generations never had, and now have to finance?! Yeah, that sounds fair…🙄

Well said, @YellowAsteroid

Clearly you didn’t properly comprehend my post. You fail the IQ test.

*To me putting young people first isn’t around tax incentives to get on the housing ladder and is more fundamental:

• education properly funded
• children’s centres, social services, EdPsychs etc. all properly funded
• College and uni lecturers properly funded so students have in-person, quality higher education
• Proper apprenticeship schemes offering a range of career options
• etc.

People may never be homeowners for a variety of reasons and that is not a benchmark of ‘having achieved’. We can give them the best start at least.*

All of this, and then I'd add in proper mental health care through funding for CAMHS, easy access to neurodiversity assessments and actual support following diagnosis. I'd massively diversify the offer for children with additional support needs into adulthood. I'd also improve supports for care experienced children and young people through to early adulthood.

They are protected because any functional state wants workers to be able to fund their own retirement instead of needing to rely on benefits / handouts.

And present fathers who don’t pay.child support. There are plenty of those. Don’t forget them!

That's patently not true though. Triple lock, free prescriptions, bus passes, WFA - none of these are about people being able to "fund their own retirement" they're literally benefits!
They were protected because they vote Tory. That's all.

95% of prescriptions are dispensed free of charge. If charging for appointments followed this model, only 5% of appointments would be paid for.

They were protected because they vote Tory. That's all.

The size of them too

That stamp duty idea is ridiculous. What percentage of buyers have kids under 18? I think that will create a huge hole.
I'd reform inheritance tax.
Not clear about your reasoning on the pension thing - I doubt there will be a rush to buy as that would already be happening as it exists.
How are all these to be paid for by the way? £10 charge to see GP is the only thing you added in the plus column (unclear about pension), but you've taken billions out.

Will probably cost more to administrate the whole thing

They manage it in other countries