Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Quicken

Members
  • Posts

    1,897
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Quicken

  1. 10 hours ago, Riedquat said:

    Online is it now? So now having a smartphone is now necessary?

    Sad world where people find the idea of having a passport for doing ordinary things within your country perfectly acceptable, no problem with it at all. Even if you balance the factors up and decide it's OK it should only be with extreme reluctance and distaste.

    And in any case with the vaccination levels the UK's got there's bugger all practical argument for one anyway.

    Driving Licence

  2. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jul/19/ministers-mull-national-insurance-rise-to-fund-social-care

    So NI or income tax seem to be the preferred options for round one. Breaking the manifesto pledge either way. Escalation will get easier from there.

    Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: “Tax rises will be needed to deliver decent social care, but a national insurance rise is a terrible way to raise the funds required. It’s a tax disproportionately loaded on to younger and lower-paid workers, compared to a fairer rise in income tax.

    “Why we would target a tax rise on the groups who have been hardest hit by the economic impact of this pandemic, while exempting older and wealthy individuals, is completely beyond me.”

  3. To be clear, on average Gen X are not as hard done by as younger generations. Some were able to ride on the coat tails of the boomers. I feel sorry for younger generations. They will suffer for the pensions greed of the older generations. As a cohort, the Boomers never paid enough for the generous pensions they will receive. Later generations are being called upon to pay the bill.

  4. 8 hours ago, kzb said:

    Generation X benefitted from most of this, with the additional benefits of much higher starting salaries and reducing unemployment.

    The drawbridge was pulled up sometime after Gen X.  Blame them.

    I see - divide and conquer, just blame gen X eh?

    Gen X haven't retired yet, and they're set to retire much later than their parents (with similar life expectancy). That drawbridge is being pulled up and not by Gen X.

    I am late Gen X, but stayed at University for a long time getting a masters and PhD. So I started work in 2007, by which time house prices were batsh*t crazy out of reach (as we all know here). And they have remained that way ever since. Hence there is a whole cohort of gen rent (it doesn't exactly map to date of birth cohorts) heading towards retirement without a hope of owning. That is the big generational divide.

    Disposable income is only one half of the game (and your graph above did not define what constitutes disposable - before or after housing costs?). Wealth is more important than income. e.g. https://www.ft.com/content/c69b49de-1368-11e9-a581-4ff78404524e

    Quote

    In 2006, those aged over 65 owned 28 per cent of the UK’s household wealth, a figure which had increased to 36 per cent 10 years later. The analysis also found that one in five (20 per cent) of over-65s in the UK to be a millionaire, compared with 7 per cent in 2006.

    What about the wealth of other generations? Younger households have seen their proportion of the UK’s household wealth fall over the same period. Generation X, defined as those aged between 35 and 44, suffered a 5 percentage point fall, while millennials, defined as those aged 25 to 34, experienced a 2 percentage point fall.

     

  5. 2 hours ago, kzb said:

    You do realise this is after housing cost ?

    Also did you see this plot in the report.  It took me a while to realise what I was seeing but the boomers were actually poorer than either Gen X or Millennials.  The crossover occurs between Gen X and Millennials, not, as universally believed, between Boomers and Gen X.

    image.png.57fd96dcc280429aeb623a801b382a94.png

     

    I do, yes. I think the split actually occurs within the 'Gen X' as defined there. Early gen x were actually still part of the uk second baby boom that ended early 70s. 

    Anyway, that has little to do with the ludicrous triple lock rules.

  6. 6 hours ago, scottbeard said:

    Probably true - but remember that not everyone who declines a vaccine is an "anti vaxxer" who believes that vaccines don't work and/or are detrimental.

    Some people just don't want it.

    Well that's fine, but those people need to have the integrity to admit that we would not be coming out of lockdown restrictions without the vaccination programme massively lowering the hospital and death burden per infection. Indeed, we'd be heading right back into hard lockdown in this wave without the effects of the vaccine. That is called free-riding.

  7. On 04/07/2021 at 10:24, scottbeard said:

    I’d be OK with CGT being the same as income tax ONLY if it was gains in excess of inflation that’s taxed.

    Otherwise you’re just being taxed on inflation and not true gains which I think is unfair.

    I buy a painting for £10,000 and sell it for £1 million then sure CGT is fair on your profit.  But if you sell it for £30,000 just because of inflation then it’s not fair as in real terms you haven’t gained. 

    It's a fair point. The flat tax at 25% with no indexation and no allowance is a compromise, but indexation at marginal income tax rate (also with no allowance beyond the existing personal allowance on income tax) would be a reasonable alternative.

  8. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57734805

    Quote

    The OBR is the government's official, but independent, forecaster. Late last year, and early this year, it predicted wages would rise by 4.6%.

    Now, it is expecting the increase to be higher. The Bank of England has suggested it could be an 8% rise.

    "If earnings growth… were 8%, that would add around £3bn a year to spending [on the state pension] relative to our forecast," the OBR said in its Fiscal Risks Report.

    So the cost to the taxpayer would be £3bn more than what was already predicted to be a significant rise. The effect continues into subsequent years.

    Easy money

  9. In response to the OP, my current medium term plan is to stay in Scotland which can take a bit of warming and has good fresh water resources. Of course, it is possible that the North Atlantic circulation shuts down and we actually get significant cooling in Scotland as a result of global warming. That will involve adapting the plan.

  10. 1 hour ago, jiltedjen said:

    Unsustainable 2000-2007 style boom. blow off top end of this decade. pensions not keeping up with inflation. Central bank interest rates deliberately well below real inflation, deliberate under-reporting of inflation.

    fairly large % wage rises but slower than inflation, but HPI causing huge building boom via home improvements with incredible equity release deals tempting people. 

    governments not building, only building will be flats, to the new ‘size standards’ tiny crammed boxes. 

    governments realising that the boomers suddenly moving on mass from big spenders to drooling old age just wanting a chair and not actually spending much, just sat on stacks of equity will mean a huge crash, so they will do the extend and pretend economy, propping up bubbles, throwing everything behind growth, relaxing regulations, I mean by 2027 it will of been 20 years since the crash, times will of ‘moved on’

    Interest rates haven't yet 'moved on' from the post 2007 crash. Nor have QE programs. I'm not so sure things will have 'moved on' by 2027 in those respects. I see the point you're making about the arguments that will be made for relaxing regulations though, and I shudder at the thought. Nice light touch regulations -> Financial crisis, cladding scandal, etc.

  11. 2 hours ago, spyguy said:

    Your thinking is oldl school, not reflecting the change to the UK that have occurred over the last 20 years.

    Remove all access to benefits and free public services from non nationals.

    All non nationals to pay for public services up front - NHS, cost of schooling. UK should look to turn a profit of ~2k per each non national a year.

     

     

     

    I can't see them going down that sort of discriminatory route personally, and nor should they for various reasons including international treaties, tit-for-tat and basic decency.

    I'd rather they revoked non dom status of course, but pigs might fly.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.