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?

Top of Band 6 is over 45k but for the first 5 years, its 38k to 40k.

So a highly trained individual, with a great deal of responsibility, gets the national; average wage?

No wonder the NHS is struggling.

Fwiw my DD is B6, her level of stress is way above anything i got in the telecoms industry and i earnt a lot more and got a very nice car too.

The world is fucked up.

I don't know anyone that is on over £45k. Maybe as a household with combined wages, but no individuals. And these are people in important jobs like nursing.
Over 45k, or under. Both would be ordinary working people.

A teacher at the top of the main pay scale would be on just over £45k. A Band 7 nurse could be as well. So could an experienced electrician or plumber. They’re pretty normal jobs; not anything you’d specifically think of as high-paying careers (although all important jobs, of course).

I am not very well off at all. I grew up in severe poverty and worked my way up to six digits, working 60 hours weeks, before I retired precisely because of current government taxation.

Read about Norway - they tax WAY much more at a lower and middle level than we do. I'm all up for it. And their welfare is strictly time limited, there is no concept of lifetime on benefits. They pay people more, again all up for it, but their access to state services is for everyone, not like childcare funding here.

And I don't begrudge others to have a better quality of life if they earn it (unless severe professionally diagnosed health issues).

In USSR all investments were state run. We know the story.

No they don't get benefits and the single person council discount is only 25% off. Single people are usually adversely affected by tax policy tbh.

It sounds like you think it wouldn't be fair for your household earning 48k to be taxed more as two x24k isnt loads, but it is fair for a single household earning 45k to be taxed more as that's above the average income, even taking into account the fact that a dual income household gets two tax free allowances.

My point isn't really that you should be taxed more or that I should be taxed less, I'm not a single household anyway, it's just that 45k isn't a huge amount of household income and it's almost certainly not enough to have so much spare cash at the end of the month that a tax rise wouldn't make a difference.

No, his claims were fact checked and deemed false. He kept repeating them regardless. That’s what we were talking about.

Well yes, but not everyone in nursing wants to climb up the ranks. I know an A&E nurse who is very happy as a Band 5 and has been for years. Some people want to nurse patients, and not manage people.

But then, what does 'ordinary' even mean anyway? A job is a job.

I think people wouldn’t mind so much if the government had made a decent attempt at cutting back welfare spending. However, given that Labour backbenchers threw out most of the recent plans for welfare cuts, an income tax hike is going to go down like a bucket of cold sick.

capitalism and natural monopolies what could go wrong...

I agree, they are going to get the failure to curb welfare spending thrown in their faces time and time again.

I earn around £50k. Sometimes just shy depending on overtime and how many weekends I can be arsed to work.

I'm very much 'a working person' IMO. I worked six days last week and over 60 hours, which was only legal because I can log my waiting time onsite as a break if I'm away from the equipment/not sitting in a truck - so I don't hit the hard limit of what is classed as '60 hours working time'.

I'm always doing at least 50ish hours and I'm out there at 6am in the rain, snow, or scorching heat, doing a job that's always in the 'top few most dangerous'.

Honestly, Labour can get fucked. I could easily take cash in hand for a lot of my side work. Give the customer a small discount for paying cash. I don't do it out of principle but that won't be the case for long!

You name it, Labour will tax it.

They weren't deemed false, his claim was for households. Many of Labour's counterclaims to his 2K figure have turned out to be false too. That was before Chagos etc too.
How are your energy bills by the way?

Various things happened, a lot of people earn similar you just haven't met them. We aren't graduates for a start.

Well done for being honest, theres not a lot of honesty and fairness about anymore. Loads of people cheat the system, LOADS and honest hard workers have to fund that also! Such a corrupt system.

People have been complaining for years about cuts in benefits, the government don't want to cut them any more; many people depend on them in order to just live and eat. There was an uproar last year because pensioners with over a certain amount of income were not going to get the winter fuel allowance. I don't believe the government has ever been forgiven for that yet those pensioners survived, were none the worse for not getting £300. A lot of pensioners are well off and don't need it.

I'm a pensioner, not well off but I manage fine and am happy for a bit of my tax to go towards the welfare of others. I might need help myself one day, I hope not but nobody knows what is around the corner. More importantly I believe children need to be properly provided for and young families are often in need.

Labour did tax and borrowing hikes in the last budget and looks like they’ll need to again, that’s in direct opposition to their manifesto and GE pledges.

I mentioned graduates because that's the pay for someone starts their professional working career. So you didn't go to uni? Did you try and do anything to gain skills or experience?

They are going to need to tax and borrow more with every budget. It's a credit card junkie, out of control government until 2029.

My DP says,quite often, oh we needs to tax the wealthy more. Well he did until I pointed out that (at the time) it was being trailed that Rachel Reeves was thinking that a salary over £50k was wealthy. He's stopped now because, he earns over that. I genuinely think that often the broadest shoulders idea is interpreted as meaning the super wealthy. But it's not.

So what steps have you taken to address that? Also many wealthy people aren't graduates, especially trades people. They are often much wealthier than graduates anyway.

There's a huge "black" economy in countries like Spain due to high taxation. No wonder Starmer is desperate to bring in the digital IDs no bugger wants.

He was correct on what happened and the direction. He's obviously not a genie and can't predict exactly by how much. Sunak for whatever you say about him is honest and decent.

Which are 2 things you definitely can't say about Starmer

Depends what field the graduates are in. 24k isn't as uncommon a graduate wage as you think.

Initially at the start I thought "Starmer might disagree with Sunak on policies issues but he's a decent man who will do his best."

I was very naive wasn't I.