To think that there is no hope here?

[Taxed]

52.6% of UK individuals are reliant on the State (that is 35 million people). Only 47.4% are net contributors. How did we get here?

AIBU to think that the UK is now a declining economy that will never recover if this continues to be the case?

I am 49 and a high earner (just shy of the top 1%). My husband is also a high earner and we are thinking of leaving. We don't know where but we know we have to as the situation in the UK is getting worse not better. The only thing that is keeping us here is our son, who is still in secondary school. I am actively encouraging him to consider a future outside of the UK.

I genuinely feel that being ambitious and successful is not worth it in the UK. People hate you for it and want to see you penalised. They think that whatever you do to earn the money it must be easy and a breeze. That you are greedy and need to be made to pay for doing well. Just last week, I heard that the government might be thinking of implementing a charge, payable by high earners, to access the NHS. Everything is about taxing the already heavily taxed even more and few want to face up to the fact that this is unsustainable when you have most of your people relying on the State to live.

People complain about the immigrants but they make up a tiny proportion of 35 million.

I feel disliked for doing well and just can't see a future here and it is making me angry and sad. I believe in having a welfare state, in helping those who are in need but 52.6%? The country is on its knees when most of its people are in need. That is like a developing country not a developed and thriving economy.

Sorry for the long rant. I'm just tired, sad and have just about lost hope of enjoying life in the UK.

the figures are from the Office for National Statistics and separately the Adam Smith Institute.

Why don’t you break them down for us- this is your thread after all. I think to maintain any credibility you have to set out what your 52% includes. That’s what people are asking you to clarify (and saying do your own research isn’t an answer for people who might only have 2/3 minutes in their day to make a contribution to this thread).

Somehow I believe people do not read posts and simply react from an emotional place.

I said I believe in the welfare state 100%. What I do not believe is right and sustainable is 52% plus being net reliant on the State and expecting the roughly 47% to pay more and more in tax. That 47% is set to grow smaller and the 52% is set to get larger.

That is the point. It is unsustainable and expecting to penalise the net contributors further is not good. The posters on here are proving my point. A lot of bad feelings towards high earners and I belief that they do not deserve what they have and more should be taken from them. Totally neglecting the fact that we have reached an unsustainable point that is not good for ANYONE. Everyone is being made poorer and poorer. Even the pensioners will find there is nothing more for them.

Lol, having read some of your responses on this thread, I sense irony is lost on you.

@Taxed I think you're referring to these statistics, is that right?
https://www.adamsmith.org/state-reliance-index

Interesting that almost half of the 52% are those receiving state pension, which is double the number of those receiving universal credit/unemployed. It's not very clear what they mean by reliance, I need to have a further look into the study and methodology.

Pensioners and children, and then people earning under £60k.

Why? Do you think someone who is self-made will have had that come easy with no work?

Totally agree with you, OP. I applaud your hard work and striving for a comfortable life for you and your family. Labour are all about the politics of envy and jealousy and trying to make everybody the same. This country cannot go on the way it is - I particularly worry that some of the up and coming generation do not seem to have any kind of work ethic or commitment to work and their colleagues - just look at how often people on here are encouraged to take a sick day when there is nothing wrong with them!

No, I will not break them down for you. Go do your research. If that means I lose credibility, then so be it. It's incumbent upon all of us to know what is happening to our country.

The ONS is very accessible and the Adams Smith Institute is likewise very easy to find and their report has been out for ages.

Again, what is your solution? Kill off old people?

Changing demographics is a problem, but not an easy one to fix.

What on earth makes you think the OP is working hard?

You started it, you do the work.

@Taxed I am always amazed at these 'high earners' who seem to have the time and inclination to post so extensively on MN.

Ok I tried to research the source of this figure and found this:

”The Adam Smith Institute (ASI) found that 52.1 per cent of British adults are recipients of universal credit, a state pension, work in the public sector, are students or higher education staff.”

https://politicsuk.com/majority-of-brits-reliant-on-the-state-for-income/

Which paints a different picture.

OP’s headline seems to suggest they are all benefit claimants but I cannot see how pensioners (who have contributed), higher education staff and students should be counted there.

If this is a joke it’s really not funny. And if it’s not then you need to seriously re think this plan .

Don't worry Reform will get in soon and move us back towards being a small state economy. That will get all the feckless off their arses and back into work. It's amazing how many people who couldn't possibly work will suddenly find themselves able to when it is that or starve.

OP has dodged the questions each time I have pointed this out. It’s too inconvenient to admit that old people and women not spending their lives having kids are the biggest factors contributing to what she has identified as the major problem facing the country.

It's only really the top 10% who put in more than they receive. The next 10% are about break-even, and the bottom 80% get more out. That's just the nature of how finances are spread in the UK right now.

But I hear lots of uninformed talk, often from well-informed people, that the government is about to means-test the state pension, or add further charges to the NHS. I see no evidence that either will happen any time soon.

I do agree that we are far too aggressive in taxing those with earnings above £100,000, and that is causing real harm to the economy and not just to higher earners (people doing things like cutting hours to avoid that place, or using other ways to cut taxable incomes). But who in politics wants to stand up and say they are helping those on six figure salaries? (even though it would likely help everyone, in time).

I also have always been a net contributor.

However, I see things very differently from you. Our current situation is a result of the quality of education state school students achieve, a knock on effect of the lack of money put into education. It is affected by big business being allowed to pay full-time employees a non-living wage. It was hugely damaged by the destruction of industry by Thatcher.

The people you're attacking @Taxed, are the victims of this system which tries to keep the poor, poor. If we want a high earning work-force they need to be better educated, apprenticeships need to return in force for non-academic individuals, wages need to be raised to a level where working full-time supports us.

By all means jump ship. Leave the poor to sink by hoarding what you have for you and yours. Just a continuation of the me-me-me of the Tories.

Yes, it is unusual that taxed has so much time to be on MN.

Women AND men not spending their lives having kids. Women don’t have children alone.

You are being unreasonable by posting this without checking the facts. The 52.1% of adults reliant on the state for their livelihood includes people who work in the public sector! They are reliant in the state because the state is their employer! It also includes Higher Education students and people employed by a Higher Education institution.

No I know, but the ONS uses live births per woman to calculate the birth rate because it’s easier and more reliable than counting men’s children.

Yes this "stat" includes ALL public sector workers including teachers, doctors, infrastructure staff, as well as the entirety of the higher education sector which is pretty much all privatised. It's absolute nonsense.

I think you are focusing on the wrong thing here, OP. The real stat to focus on is the proportion of GDP spent on social security. Interestingly, many European countries with a higher standing of living than us - eg the Nordic countries - spend more of their GDP on social security than we do. They are prepared to pay more in tax to have better public services available to all.

There are comparatively few people in any country who are 'net contributors' as you put it, and the chances are that those who are net contributors are benefitting from low paid workers or other types of exploitation somewhere along the line. If you work for a multinational or derive your income/wealth from the stock market, property, financial services, manufacturing etc, it won't take long to find the exploitation you are benefitting from, even if you consider that your work is 'clean'. Likewise, if you are lucky enough to enjoy inherited wealth/property, how exactly was that acquired?

Yes, there are undoubtedly some people in the UK who are exploiting the system but the fact is that humans live in societies and that works through pooling resources, which is modern terms means having a social security system.

UK benefits are actually quite low in the grand scheme of things.

The real issue is how we raise tax, in my opinion. Taxing earned income places and undue burden on salaried people. We should be looking at taxes on wealth and property, including some sort of land value tax which could have a transformative effect on our urban and rural areas.

I vote that you ABU

I agree that we have too many people relying on the state, but I also think that discrepancy between the highest and the lowest earners is obscene. Of course people should be rewarded for doing well, but not to that degree. Their high wages often come at the expense of exploiting lower paid workers, many of whom work very hard for low wages. Worlds tiniest violin for the 1%.