The autumn budget should cut benefits before increasing tax

[Leett]

There is talk of Labour breaking their election pledge and increasing income tax by 2p. I doubt they'd do that because voters will revolt. However they need to do something with the state pension due to increase by 4.7% next year.
I really hope they cut benefits / pensions before the deciding to increase taxes.

Basically anyone who agrees to save money and wants to stop any kind of 'benefit' money on this thread gets knocked down.

Why should the taxpayer fund thousands of people daily on paracetamol when they're so cheap in the shops.

Why should working people who get paid nothing except their daily wages have to pay for everything.

Why do people in this country want things for free, when they are cheap are chips on this shop.

Someone has to pay for it. The people who go to work daily, and many of them get NOTHING back in benefits and just get their daily wages.

Getting ready to be shot down, but this country is mess.

Which is not the same thing as requiring wider family to contribute financially.

Christ, the privilege. You do understand that not everyone has family either able or willing to help or, even, family full stop? Some people really do live life in a cosseted bubble.....

Then you will no doubt be pleased to learn that you can pay extra tax.

You just tick a box and you can contribute to your heart's desire.

Because £10 to you is ‘probably’ pocket change , but could be the difference of eating that day for others.

Erm, because you can only downsize if someone will buy your property?

The other issue with downsizing is that there really aren’t a lot of suitable properties for people to downsize to (at least this is true in the areas I’m familiar with, may be different in different parts of the country)

But what is the FATHER'S contribution?

According to this thread, there are tonnes of people that would prefer to pay more tax than cut benefits. If they all did what suggested and volunteered to pay more tax than we could potentially make a huge dent in the deficit and reduce the need for cuts.

Well, it kind of is
Support comes in many guises but financially is one of them
My children don’t pay rent to anybody because they’re able to stay at home. They have a secure Roof over their heads. Nobody is ever gonna throw them out with two months notice.
They will never not be able to afford utilities or food
And that’s a very privileged position that allows them to take risks in their career, And enjoy their lives freely without undue financial pressure

Erm, because you can only downsize if someone will buy your property?

@LegoPicnic erm, a property at the right price will always sell

You can't get a bus pass in my area until you are 66.

If there are no buyers how do you sell?

It’s also one of the stupidest things you can do with your most valuable asset.

@Rosscameasdoody

Things have changed, you should read up on it.

@Padthaispecial priced correctly everything sells

When have we ever had a time when there were zero buyers for housing?

I don't pay for my daughters prescription for her allergy. No way should it be cut!!

No it doesn't! People choose to have children - people who are already born get older and become pensioners - they don't choose to get older!

Why not? If my granddaughter had a terminal illness and my daughter was struggling I’d have them move in with me. Yes my daughter might lament the loss of her independence but why should the tax sayer pick up the bill for her living independently when she has other resources she can count on? It makes no sense.

They tried but the back benchers revolted. So Labour will never be able do anything which upsets them....

But you can go to another place to buy more paracetamols. Do a round of the shops. They're less than 50p in most shops.

People who need so much paracetamol it's prescribed may very well not be fit to "do a round of the shops" on a regular basis. By the time FIL was on a high dose a day he couldn't collect one prescription alone, let alone to a shop trail (and not everyone has family who can trail the shops every few days either).

What there should be is more protection for pharmacists so that if a Dr says "this person needs 8 paracetamol a day" the pharmacist can sell them high quantities without fear of getting in trouble if that person misuses it.

Perhaps on the first prescription issued the Dr could say "for at least 3/6/12 months" and that allows the pharmacist to sell the paracetamol to them, thus saving the NHS, but also protecting the pharmacist from any comeback (as they can sell higher amounts but are obvious very reluctant as the fallback lands on them), plus ensuring regular review.

If they do that and discover they can now no longer afford the bungalow, then what.

In my experience, what people mean by this is that downsizing wont pay for a spacious bungalow with profit left over.
(cross posted with the above. Lol)

And the question I actually asked as opposed to your soapbox rant?

@Digdongdoo or chunky inheritance for their dc

@Padthaispecial find another property?