National insurance tax hike

Same_as_before said:
I repaid for both wars. It's working age people who do pay. As salaries increase so does the tax take.
Click to expand...

The wars were repaid through taxes, not NI. Pensioners are literally exempt from NI, so the increase will not affect them, even though they're gaining from it by getting to keep their assets.

Why should working age people pay more NI to keep you in your house when they can't get on the property ladder themselves?
 
There is zero difference between NIC and tax to the payee. I accept that NIC stops at 66 yo.

I think the second paragraph is in a language I don't understand.
 
Same_as_before said:
There is zero difference between NIC and tax to the payee. I accept that NIC stops at 66 yo.

I think the second paragraph is in a language I don't understand.
Click to expand...

It's in English, so perhaps.

This policy effectively stops retired people having to sell their houses to find their care. That's a noble cause, but not that noble when its paid for by people who are young and struggling to get on the housong ladder themselves.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
It's in English, so perhaps.

This policy effectively stops retired people having to sell their houses to find their care. That's a noble cause, but not that noble when its paid for by people who are young and struggling to get on the housong ladder themselves.
Click to expand...
Why do you need to buy a house? The rest of Europe manages without that need.
 
It's just hilarious that your mask slips so easily. This champion of the people of Berwick Hills on every Brexit thread until it comes to you getting what's coming to you.

Why is the funding not taken from taxes, especially as this is one pensioners are more likely to pay?

Why should young people on average and below average incomes lose disposable incomes to pay another subsidy for older middle classes?

You don't have an answer beyond 'I paid for a world war'. It's ridiculous and you're ridiculous.
 
It was always inevitable with all the issues we’ve got. Many of which are the result of cuts to services by this government. I’d accept a bigger increase if they also lifted the threshold to ensure the people who can least afford it aren’t affected.
 
Make tax start at £15000, then 20% for say £50,000, then 45% on everything above that, including profits on houses sold within say 5 years of purchase. Taper the house profit tax down to say 20% at 10 years and then leave it.

Penna is right use house values to pay for care down to say £50,000 the money only goes to wealthy people.
 
bear66 said:
That was the point Hunt was making today. NI penalises the young at no expense to the elderly who could afford it.
Click to expand...
Given that the young will have to work until they are 80, are unable to afford a roof over their head and also have their education to pay for I shouldn't imagine an extra 1 or 2 percent on national insurance will even be noticeable to them. Like getting a mosquito bite when your legs have been bitten off by a shark. Make it 3 percent I say.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
It's just hilarious that your mask slips so easily. This champion of the people of Berwick Hills on every Brexit thread until it comes to you getting what's coming to you.

Why is the funding not taken from taxes, especially as this is one pensioners are more likely to pay?

Why should young people on average and below average incomes lose disposable incomes to pay another subsidy for older middle classes?

You don't have an answer beyond 'I paid for a world war'. It's ridiculous and you're ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Not everyone older is middle class just the same as all younger earners are not on the bones of their ar#es.
 
When I first started paying tax and NI I think the rate was 30% tax and 9% NI before then I think tax was 33% or something around that and this was the basic rate.

However, care, home helps, prescriptions, university and many other things were free and public transport cheap.

Thatcher and the Tories wanted people to pay less tax, so income tax rates were cut and indirect tax like VAT significantly increased.

It was the start of the survival of the fittest, keep your own money, but buy your own services when needed, the socialist (not communist) of support, care and education from cradle to the grave was being dismantled, there was profit to be made from caring for others, public essentials and utilities. Public sector services were derided by the right wing press and Tories so they could get their hand on the assets and make money. People were seen as a commodity to be exploited by the greedy for profit rather than provide a service at cost base because of need.

Essential public services of health, care, education, transport, and utilities should be provided by the state at cost price and not left to free markets to profiteer, why can't good services be provided at a fair and decent price, covered by a decent and fair rate of tax, this way the majority benefit, rather then a select few to make a profit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top