Not an ordinary working person if you earn over 45k

[TesChique]

Disincentivising anyone to strive to earn over 45k a year is a bizarre strategy for growth i feel

Aibu?

Why would they now need a definition if not related to Labour promises anyway

Your obviously not unfortunate enough to work in the public sector then. 15 years qualified and classed as senior in my role just over the 45k thereshold the vast majority of public sector workers are under it. Other than my manager the remainder of my team
are under it (47 staff).

I no longer live in the UK so might have an outdated view, but in what world is £30k considered a “good salary” for a professional career? Isn’t it below the entry level salary for most professions? Junior doctors, trainee accountants, newly qualified teachers, trainee solicitors etc. all earn more than £30k pa. It’s barely above the threshold for paying back the student debt these careers require you to rack up.

Perhaps the electorate in the UK just has ridiculously low expectations which is why the Gvmt will get away with raising taxes.

It’s not far off. You’re only just shy of 40k now 4 years in. 43k ist at 5. A teacher, only in the profession for 6 years is over 45k. So relatively new teachers or those who are capped due to school budgets are no longer workers.

In London, teachers are no longer workers after Y3.

Trying to tax their way out of it is not the answer. Normal, working 'higher earners' are not hoarding wealth. Most of their salaries are being spent and taxed and cycled through the system, being taxed multiple times.

Hoarded wealth and inefficient government spending are the problems. They could literally have every penny from us and the country would still be a mess

How can people get so worked up over made up stuff?

The OP is wilfully misleading and has either deliberately misinterpreted the Sky report or just doesn’t understand it.

It’s fucking tiresome.

The actual take-away from the piece is they want to protect the lower 2/3 of earners so NI and Income Tax are unlikely to see increases. The reporter HIMSELF says that the top thirds starts VERY ROUGHLY at £45k as it depends on age and other things.

I’m so sick of the hyperbole and utter bollocks people spout sometimes.

It is finally hitting some people how dangerous this government really is.

Yep. I earn about 42g but thats because i only work 4 out of 5 days. I will be staying at 4 days only now so theiving reeves cant get the better of me!

You’ve also got to look at income after benefits, not just how much someone earns. Someone may only earn £30k but actually have more income than someone earning £45k.

But the government never seems to take that into account.

So we now consider teachers, nurses, paramedics and social workers as ‘the rich’ now! It’s not a race to the bottom! Just because my leg hasn’t been sawn off like my friend does not mean the nasty gash on my thigh isn’t agony! And it’s perfectly reasonable to acknowledge that neither is an ideal state to be in.

And adverts here for a newly qualified solicitor at £28k ( south east)

So it does start at 45 then? Not made up! 👏

Well you knew she was coming for you after she put VAT on private schools.

Where has all that money gone?

Have state schools got extra physics teachers to teach the separate sciences again (which they should have been doing anyway)?

I digress, but the point is what on earth are they wasting our massive taxes on?!

Why is it misleading to say that the top third of earners (£45k ish plus) won't be protected from tax rises?

It didn't seem like it at the time. But I did get in there before things completely sky rocketed. 2 bedroom semi in the worst part of town for £110k thanks to a £10k down payment from my parents, a bonus from work at the right time so I could buy furniture and then paid the mortgage out of my (at the time) £20k salary. I did assume when younger that with 3 uni degrees I might have ended up earning more.

Granted the housing prices around here are ridiculous now. A one bedroom bungalow across the road was sold for £360k a couple of years back - as in a house with a bedroom, a bathroom and another room that is the kitchen, dining and lounge and with nothing else outside but a drive.

It went to housing. Starmer tweeted it 🤣
State schools are making cuts and redundancies. It's almost like they lied about the true purpose of the policy 🤔

I do wish governments would come to understand that they exist to protect and promote the interests of all the people of this country, not just the ones that fit nicely into their latest rhetoric.
When I was a single young woman, there was much talk about looking after “hard working families”. So not me then.
Now I have a family and am married to a man who earns (just) over £45k and it seems that I’m not part of “hard working people” now either.
Not that the bit in the middle when we were in fact part of “hard working families/people” was any great shakes, but it was nice to feel included for a change.
Sigh.

As someone just in that bracket good- I can afford it more than others who earn less than me. Yes richer people should get taxed more but our public services are on their knees and yes I can afford to pay an extra 1p income tax rate

So are you doing it now through the voluntary tax scheme? Or are you just virtue signalling?

Totally. I could just about rationalise the VAT imposition if it was going to be used to substantially improve the state school system - but it’s not (more ‘affordable housing’ BS).

Funny, I didn't hear any caveats applied to 'working people' in the election campaign. Apparently it can mean anything Labour want it to mean.

Protecting the bottom two thirds is not at all different from saying that the top third will not be protected. It is you who is being a 'twit'.

How rude.

I trust you have seen the other posts with a link.

If not, feel free to move on.

Benefit claimants. That’s their only target audience.

It’s not - the OP made the post about one not being considered a normal working person if you earned over that threshold.

The piece didn’t say ‘we are taxing people earning over £45k because they are not ordinary working people’ which is the implication of the post.

The aim is to protect the lowest earners and therefore NI and PAYE increases won’t do this.

An ordinary worker earning over £45k is likely only paying PAYE and NI therefore they will not be taxed more.

The whole piece is about how NI and PAYE aren’t going up. If you earn £80k and have simple tax arrangements then you won’t see an increase either.

If you earn £35k but have significant other wealth or assets then you may not be protected.

That is why it’s misleading.