Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Well no. You make people pay tax to fund it in their own lifetimes - or at worst raise inheritance tax / adjust thresholds to claim it back at the end.

The myth you can have quality public services and a low tax economy is just that. Everyone is a capitalist until it comes to social care and they don’t want to pay.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Except that it isn’t, because the NI fund has never been ring fenced, nor has welfare spending ever been isolated from the Treasury’s general tax take. Moreover, no government has ever claimed that was the case. NI was introduced in order to create a sense of ownership and fairness. Everyone paid in, everyone could take out. It was important, especially in the early days, to ensure the programme succeeded.

All taxation in a modern welfare state is inherently redistributive. Wealthy corporations and individuals pay in more, poorer individuals and economically deprived regions receive more.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

You won’t find me complaining about taxation to fund quality public services. However I don’t see why the generation that lowered taxes to their lowest ever levels while enjoying the one off windfall of privatisation is exempt from putting their own hands in their own pockets along with the younger generations who will be lucky to see any pension at all at this rate.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Ah, boomers …

With the necessary caveat that blaming boomers is a sweeping generalisation because they didn’t all get rich buying shares in BT, British Gas and their local electricity board, this is one of those rare, epoch-defining points on which I suspect we are in broad agreement.

However, the fact that boomers understand you influence governments by actually voting in elections rather than posting hashtags on the internet means that governments tend to be more responsive to their priorities.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Why should people pay that extra whatever for people who effectively have a few £100,000 in the bank? Nobody is begrudging providing for those who don't have a large stash "in the bank".
Perhaps if the question was asked of people as to whether they were prepared to pay for people who had £100,000+ in cash in the bank, the answer might be different.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I know it isn’t that’s my point. While the system moves money around at the margins it fundamentally redistributes debt downwards to younger generations to cover the fact the generations who preceded them had no interests in funding public expenditure adequately.

---------- Post added at 12:13 ---------- Previous post was at 11:31 ----------

It’s a sweeping generalisation to claim they all got rich because I didn’t claim that at all.

You can personally remain poor while still benefiting from a low tax economy, and get handouts that you made negligible contribution towards.

Yes, the voting system means it’s far more likely successive generations will kick the can down the road that seek to resolve the issue and make the tough choices on taxation required. Which is the crux of this thread - making it exclusively a working age tax.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I reach pension age 66 next june [should be getting pension now but gov moved the goal posts] any hoo all i can say to the younger generations is get yer hand in your pockets and quit moaning, we've all had to pay so suck it up.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Can't be bothered with quotes, but to answer a few points.

Local councils (ours anyway) sold off most of it's care homes . . well when I say sold off, they stated they were old and 'in need of extensive maintenance & refurbishment' or that they'd 'discovered dangerous materials' in the building. They were then demolished and the land sold for housing . . well, rabbit hutch housing anyway. This obviously led to a rise in demand for private care homes, and the costs inherent with that.

People with 'a few £100,000 in the bank' will have to pay towards any care they receive, but they're still entitled to their state pension.

If we make all people needing care sell their homes - the ones they've worked hard for and maintained themselves - won't this drive people back into the rental sector? Maybe the Govt should purchase all privately owned houses, and let tax payers pay when they need new central heating boilers, double glazing, wiring, structural repairs, fencing etc . . the sort of stuff a house owner has to pay for (no grants here, move along folks).

NHS . . . stop funding (or partially funding) people who want a sex change, or nose job, boob enhancements etc, it's probably quicker to get a facelift than a hip replacement nowadays .

enough mild ranting, I'm off back gaming :p:

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Upskilling lorry drivers.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

migrants.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

So a 1.25% rise that will hurt those near the breadline with least assets most whilst the wealthy/wealthier or those with significant assets are able to absorb the increase with ease.

Hardly levelling up and i say this as a highest rate tax payer & who has to pay both NI & Employers NI (on stock sales)

---------- Post added at 12:59 ---------- Previous post was at 12:59 ----------

Paying all the 4* hotels ?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It’s happening then. 1.25% on NI from next April.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-58473078

Apparently from 2023 it will be separated out on payslips as a ‘Heath and social care levy’. Though further to my earlier post I think it’s vastly unlikely the money will be legally ring-fenced as that would be quite complex to achieve.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I think we just witnessed bojo losing the next election.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care