Tax over-40s for old age care, say MPs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Crazy that this is only being addressed now, this has been an issue for decades.
Why just the over 40's? Surely it should be based on income rather than age :confused:
If they do this then the money needs to be ring fenced (bet it won't) otherwise it will be swallowed up by other departments.

Seeing as benefits have been mentioned, the introduction of Universal Credit, has cost us £15 billion so far and is likely to eventually cost £30 billion 😱 far more than it is going to save. By all accounts it's a complete f##k up 😡
Apparently £10 billion of benefits go unclaimed.
There's £40 billion right there, you're welcome Theresa 😉
 
I heard this issue being debated on LBC this morning.... everything from scrap Trident to reduce the overseas aid budget.

I despair for young people trying to make a start in life with unaffordable housing, student loans to pay back, rising retirement ages and increasing taxes. Zero hours contracts and a culture of minimum wage are crippling our young people. An additional tax at 40 will just add to the burden, with no guarantee that it really will be sufficient or available to meet their care needs come the time.. I expected to retire at 60 and that goal post was changed.

Personally, would give universal income a go and scrap all benefits. We could save millions on the cost of administering these multi layered, bureaucratic systems.

https://www.basicincome.org.uk/reasons-support-basic-income

I have always had a problem with the concept of "each according to their needs." I am a dye in the wool socialist but I believe that people deserve to benefit from their own efforts and as a baby boomer, it certainly felt that if you made the effort you could succeed. Everything seems so stacked against young people. I really don't think an even heavier tax burden and a badly thought out plan is the answer.
 
Last edited:
Total cost of social care for the elderly is capped at £72000, so how will people pay over £100000? looks like dodgy reporting to me.
 
The Scottish government is trialling universal basic income, pitched at £150 a week in four council areas. Just to see what happens, essentially, but also to weigh up whether the cost is a saving on the complex shambles of universal credit. It’s almost bound to be a saving.
 
mikeyB said:
The Scottish government is trialling universal basic income, pitched at £150 a week in four council areas. Just to see what happens, essentially, but also to weigh up whether the cost is a saving on the complex shambles of universal credit. It’s almost bound to be a saving.
Click to expand...
It hasn't worked anywhere else it has been tried so why they think Scotland will be any different is beyond me.
 
That’s not actually the case in Finland. The limited scheme is coming to a natural planned end so that the government can study the effects before rolling it out nationwide if the conclusions are positive, though this has been described in the press as ‘Finland abandons universal basic income’. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are multiple experiments like this in Europe and Canada. Early days, yet.

Any attempt to dispose of the clumsy and expensive benefit scheme that the UK has contrived should be given a chance.
 
Lucy Honeychurch said:
Crazy that this is only being addressed now, this has been an issue for decades.
Why just the over 40's? Surely it should be based on income rather than age :confused:
If they do this then the money needs to be ring fenced (bet it won't) otherwise it will be swallowed up by other departments.

Seeing as benefits have been mentioned, the introduction of Universal Credit, has cost us £15 billion so far and is likely to eventually cost £30 billion 😱 far more than it is going to save. By all accounts it's a complete f##k up 😡
Apparently £10 billion of benefits go unclaimed.
There's £40 billion right there, you're welcome Theresa 😉
Click to expand...
Good points Lucy...and no one is ever accountable for the wasted expenditure & the trauma this causes to those 'damaged' by the process.
 
mikeyB said:
That’s not actually the case in Finland. The limited scheme is coming to a natural planned end so that the government can study the effects before rolling it out nationwide if the conclusions are positive, though this has been described in the press as ‘Finland abandons universal basic income’. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are multiple experiments like this in Europe and Canada. Early days, yet.

Any attempt to dispose of the clumsy and expensive benefit scheme that the UK has contrived should be given a chance.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure a very more expensive system will help
 
That is exactly why they are closely assessing the system in Finland. That kind of analysis of entire cost is how the Scottish government worked out that it was cheaper to give everyone free prescriptions, which on the face of it you would think it would cost more. It doesn’t.
 
There have been a few studies carried out on universal income, mainly based on the fact that over the next decade many lower paid manual jobs will disappear as technology advances. I think more work needs to be done on evaluating Finland's experience before dismissing it out of hand. The old systems of government are breaking down and changing demographics in population require innovative thinking and changes, not some back of a fag packet tax rise that will inevitably fail because it was never fit for purpose in the first place - in my opinion🙂
 
I think claiming benefits can change your mindset in a negative way. Some years ago my parents were encouraged by Age Concern to sign up for all sorts of benefits. I had just had my second child and money was tight. At the time I helped my parents with some cleaning, food shopping and meals. It was suggested that I could sign up for carers allowance (I think). Age Concern gave the form to my parents and I initially started to fill it in. I had just started doing a little bit of self employed work and was earning around £50 a week. The form stated that if I earnt more than £79 a week I would lose the benefit. A day or so later I was offered some work that would take me above the £79 - and I caught myself considering turning it down so that I would be eligible for carer's allowance. I didn't like this change as I've always been a hard worker. So I tore the form up and took on the extra work.
 
I wouldn’t disagree with that, though I think there is a difference in mindset between the means tested benefits and the disability benefits, which aren’t.
 
Carers allowance is a woeful £64.60 a week, hardly a King's ransom :confused:
 
There's one interesting way of approaching this I've heard of. It would involve a complete change of attitude and approach.
You'd completely forget the idea of means testing (and possibly individuals applying) for all benefits/aid. This would cut out a lot of administration and save money. Chaing the name (Citizens wage was suggested).
Then just pay one payment to everyone (instead of having lots of different schemes). Then count it for tax. Anyone who didn't need it would get taxed accordingly.
Done right, the needy would be better off as they wouldn't get hit by the tax. The really well off would pay the taxes to cover their payments. And the middling well off would pay accordingly.
Since the tax system already exists, and shouldn't need any changes to run this scheme, their wouldn't be more expenses involved.
 
That’s the idea of the Universal wage. It eliminates most of the staff are the DWP, which saves millions, if not billions. You would still need invalidity benefits as a residual rump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top