Bozo wants to hike National Insurance to pay for social care

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

Not sure if this is the usual testing the water, but Bozo want to break the Tory tax pledge and hike National Insurance to pay for adult social care so pensioners don't have to sell their houses.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9953203/Boris-Johnson-break-manifesto-pledge-raise-National-Insurance-pay-old-age-support.html#article-9953203

How is a tax on young workers justified when many pensioners are sat on substantial housing assets?

[FANG]

Lets scrap HS2, the royal yacht and international aid first.

That's a saving of 200 billion right there. I would also increase the taxes on BTL landlords as well.  

Edited September 3, 2021 by FANG
?

[Si1]

1 hour ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

Not sure if this is the usual testing the water, but Bozo want to break the Tory tax pledge and hike National Insurance to pay for adult social care so pensioners don't have to sell their houses.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9953203/Boris-Johnson-break-manifesto-pledge-raise-National-Insurance-pay-old-age-support.html#article-9953203

How is a tax on young workers justified when many pensioners are sat on substantial housing assets?

It's a disproportionate tax on low to low middle incomes, and the purpose of Bojo's change is to enable rich kids to inherit more off their parents' estates from it.

It is so wrong it's untrue. The whole of the Labour party and many Tory MPs are rightly aghast at it.

Edited September 3, 2021 by Si1

[Clarky Cat]

Again, another policy to appeal to older Conservative voters. I really don't see the issue with using assets to fund care. You cant take the house with you when you die. 

Even just putting it on income tax is fairer.

[zugzwang]

Said it before a thousand times but it's always worth repeating.

Never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never ever vote Conservative.

[Debt Slaves]

2 minutes ago, Si1 said:

It's a disproportionate tax on low to low middle incomes, who's purpose is to enable rich kids to inherit more off their parents' estates

It is about as evil a tax as is possible

Tories, still looking after their own!  We're run by Tory boomers, with boomer self interests at heart.

I was watching GB News this morning, the rising house prices were mentioned.  The younger presenter seemed concerned, the boomer presenter had a beaming smile, saying it was good as she owned and said "you had to get in early".... my response, "congratulations for being 'born' in the right decade, you genius!"  I don't think GB News has a catchup as I think that was a good clip to illustrate how much most boomers don't care that younger generations have it much harder than they had it.

[IMHAL]

10 minutes ago, Clarky Cat said:

Again, another policy to appeal to older Conservative voters. I really don't see the issue with using assets to fund care. You cant take the house with you when you die. 

It is a tough issue because that older persons house is also an inheritance to the younger generation.

10 minutes ago, Clarky Cat said:

Even just putting it on income tax is fairer.

I agree, it should be openly, transparently and properly funded. Probably in a phased fashion, initially with a cap on assets used for SC which is tapered down over time and a phased tapering up of taxes to compensate. It will probably take 10-20 years to sort out.

[hurlerontheditch]

10 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Said it before a thousand times but it's always worth repeating.

Never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never ever vote Conservative.

is always the correct statement 

[Casual-observer]

17 minutes ago, Clarky Cat said:

Again, another policy to appeal to older Conservative voters. I really don't see the issue with using assets to fund care. You cant take the house with you when you die. 

Even just putting it on income tax is fairer.

I know of a fair few younger people who are simply banking on that inherited house largely because they gave up on the idea of buying. 

[Bruce Banner]

16 minutes ago, Clarky Cat said:

Again, another policy to appeal to older Conservative voters. I really don't see the issue with using assets to fund care. You cant take the house with you when you die. 

Even just putting it on income tax is fairer.

The whole care industry is a ripoff.

The NHS prolongs life for as long as possible, then the care industry makes money out of those who can no longer look after themselves. 

[spyguy]

3 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

The whole care industry is a ripoff.

The NHS prolongs life for as long as possible, then the care industry makes money out of those who can no longer look after themselves. 

The NHS *and* the care industry.

Id guess that 80%+ of my GP time is spend on the over 75s.

The local hospital is 50% OAP bed locking.

 

[IMHAL]

1 minute ago, Bruce Banner said:

The whole care industry is a ripoff.

The NHS prolongs life for as long as possible, then the care industry makes money out of those who can no longer look after themselves. 

There is  whole set of moralistic issues that are being shoved under the rug here because people want to live longer but don't want to pay for it. Sadly, none of these are being addressed because they are not what people want to hear = not popular with voters.

[skinnylattej]

20 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Said it before a thousand times but it's always worth repeating.

Never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never ever vote

Parliamentary democracy is an outdated C19 concept, and should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

The sole purpose of parliament is to provide socially degenerate and morally bankrupt individuals with a sinecure.

[Clarky Cat]

3 minutes ago, Casual-observer said:

I know of a fair few younger people who are simply banking on that inherited house largely because they gave up on the idea of buying. 

It's a sad situation. There's still going to be the issue that this is for council/state funded care and will be the minimum required to meet their assessed needs. Many older people may want to pay more to get, for example, longer visits or a nicer care home and you can see this leading to family conflicts as they are "spending the inheritance". 

[Bruce Banner]

3 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

There is  whole set of moralistic issues that are being shoved under the rug here because people want to live longer but don't want to pay for it. Sadly, none of these are being addressed because they are not what people want to hear = not popular with voters.

I absolutely do not want to live beyond the time that I can look after myself and have done, and will do, anything possible to make sure that does not happen.

[mattyboy1973]

9 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

The whole care industry is a ripoff.

The NHS prolongs life for as long as possible, then the care industry makes money out of those who can no longer look after themselves. 

I'm not convinced it's a ripoff, it's more that housing someone, feeding them and providing 24 hour care costs a lot of money. No doubt some care home owners/managers do OK, but most of the staff certainly don't - it's a fairly crappy job with incredibly low wages.

[mattyboy1973]

1 hour ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

Not sure if this is the usual testing the water, but Bozo want to break the Tory tax pledge and hike National Insurance to pay for adult social care so pensioners don't have to sell their houses.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9953203/Boris-Johnson-break-manifesto-pledge-raise-National-Insurance-pay-old-age-support.html#article-9953203

How is a tax on young workers justified when many pensioners are sat on substantial housing assets?

Yep. The most politically cowardly (they hope people won't notice the Employer NI increase, in particular), and the least fair solution possible. If taxes have to rise, and I can accept that, then up the higher rates and put a penny on the lower rate - at least this way the wealthier pensioners (and they are a very wealthy demographic) will make a contribution. The simple truth, which never seems to be stated, is that the current crop of pensioners didn't pay enough for their pensions and care during their working lives because no one expected them to live this long, or for medical care in final years to be so expensive. Confront that truth, and ask the wealthier for more along with everyone else.

[GregBowman]

39 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

It is a tough issue because that older persons house is also an inheritance to the younger generation.

I agree, it should be openly, transparently and properly funded. Probably in a phased fashion, initially with a cap on assets used for SC which is tapered down over time and a phased tapering up of taxes to compensate. It will probably take 10-20 years to sort out.

Very well put. I do think older people should cough up some of their HPI gains. The fairest way is a fixed fee one off insurance  which I would set around a sum not a percentage say £30-£50k. There will be quibbles but I think fair in the short term. Then phasing as you suggest 

[scottbeard]

1 hour ago, Si1 said:

It's a disproportionate tax on low to low middle incomes, and the purpose of Bojo's change is to enable rich kids to inherit more off their parents' estates from it.

It is so wrong it's untrue. The whole of the Labour party and many Tory MPs are rightly aghast at it.

The reason for that is the original idea is it's a contribution to a compulsory pensions and insurance scheme.

Rich people don't get more State pension or more unemployment benefit - so why should they pay a higher contribution to the scheme?

Rich people already pay proportionately more income tax overall. 

[Bruce Banner]

7 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

The reason for that is the original idea is it's a contribution to a compulsory pensions and insurance scheme.

Rich people don't get more State pension or more unemployment benefit - so why should they pay a higher contribution to the scheme?

Rich people already pay proportionately more income tax overall. 

Actually, having paid in more, they get less due to means testing.

[Casual-observer]

For a thread filled with dissing Tory boomer voting pensioners on how they should have paid for more and all the other jazz, why doesn't this orthodoxy replicate onto the COVID thread? 

The covid thread is effectively an advert that's filled with folk justifying screwing over the young  who just had two years of economic hardship thrust on them by having large swathes of their own industries (retail, hospitality, tourism) utterly destroyed for lockdowns for a virus that was only predominantly hitting the very elderly. 

 

Edited September 3, 2021 by Casual-observer

[TheCountOfNowhere]

2 hours ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

Not sure if this is the usual testing the water, but Bozo want to break the Tory tax pledge and hike National Insurance to pay for adult social care so pensioners don't have to sell their houses.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9953203/Boris-Johnson-break-manifesto-pledge-raise-National-Insurance-pay-old-age-support.html#article-9953203

How is a tax on young workers justified when many pensioners are sat on substantial housing assets?

Wants to hike NI to pay for their scams 6 months after forcing contractors to pay NI

 

 

[Money Frugality]

2 hours ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

Not sure if this is the usual testing the water, but Bozo want to break the Tory tax pledge and hike National Insurance to pay for adult social care so pensioners don't have to sell their houses.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9953203/Boris-Johnson-break-manifesto-pledge-raise-National-Insurance-pay-old-age-support.html#article-9953203

How is a tax on young workers justified when many pensioners are sat on substantial housing assets?

Came here to find a post on this and you delivered.  

 

1 hour ago, IMHAL said:

It is a tough issue because that older persons house is also an inheritance to the younger generation.

So....?

 

37 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Rich people don't get more State pension or more unemployment benefit - so why should they pay a higher contribution to the scheme?

Rich people already pay proportionately more income tax overall. 

This ^ 

 

So the current working population are paying for this, what ever happened to "I've paid in all my life, I've paid my fair share...?"  The basis of this was social care caps and the NHS.. Typical emotional blackmail and people are accepting of this judging by telegraph comments.

 

Regardless of how you end up there if you cant pay 80k for healthcare post retirement. Where is the accountability for peoples choices.. *Note* I'm not including people with *extreme* circumstances which are few in comparison to the majority. 

Once again government interference at a time when inflation is set to bite as well.. 

 

Also this doesn't hit just lower incomes since sub 50k is still paid for at the banding rate, NI is progressive just like income tax no? After 50k you are still paying for everything below 50k.. Granted going from 50-100 its less of an effect but still less money at the end of it. 

Edited September 3, 2021 by Money Frugality

[Freki]

16 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

The reason for that is the original idea is it's a contribution to a compulsory pensions and insurance scheme.

Rich people don't get more State pension or more unemployment benefit - so why should they pay a higher contribution to the scheme?

Rich people already pay proportionately more income tax overall. 

Not the angle I would attack that. The issue is more that the tax is increased on earned income and not unearned income. Using the same old recipes that are shafting the same people, and shielding the recipients. "Solidarity"

[winkie]

We talk about luck, being fortunate to be born at a certain time, place and even born to the right parents.....Very many today spend a high percentage of their earnings on rent notably now more so younger people, so what is wrong with older people paying rent to live in a comfortable residential home using the assets accumulated over a lifetime, paying for quality care if their family is unable to help them. What is wrong with those that need care at home spending their own wealth if they have it to pay for daily care. (those that hold cash get no help from the state till cash almost gone, whereas those owning and living in a million pound house with little or no cash do get help). 

Not all people will require social care, they die before ever required.

If children think more of protecting an inheritance than wanting to do best for their parents in the winter of their lives that doesn't say a lot about them, not all children will be fortunate enough to get an inheritance, not all elderly people own homes or assets but they have worked, paid their taxes and rents throughout their lives, they just didn't get the opportunity to win on the massive HPI uplift, those that were fortunate to win on that lottery should use that gift to make themselves more comfortable if they need to..... luck of life.....no pockets in shrouds.

Edited September 3, 2021 by winkie