National insurance tax hike

[weststandwally]

Where did I say that? What I'm advocating is not punishing the young and the poor for the sake of keeping the rich rich.

We have a housing crisis in this country and you pretending that unearned wealth is the equivalent of hard work is grotesque.

Buying a house and then seeing it quintuple on value is not am achievement.

Of course it is an achievement,most homeowners who bought their properties 30 to 40 years ago were paying really high interest rates and did without out luxuries that are taken for granted nowadays, you don't buy a house and just sit in it as it increases in value as it it generally needs maintaining and improving at considerable expense that is generally not factored in the value.

 

[LaPennaBianca]

Of course it is an achievement,most homeowners who bought their properties 30 to 40 years ago were paying really high interest rates and did without out luxuries that are taken for granted nowadays, you don't buy a house and just sit in it as it increases in value as it it generally needs maintaining and improving at considerable expense that is generally not factored in the value.

Absolutely none of that has anything to do with house prices increasing. Do you think house prices have quintupled in value and outstripped wages because people have got really good at maintaining them?

Truly history's vainest generation.

 

[Expat Smoggie]

We all knew taxes would be raised after the pandemic hit — and as per usual the people most hit will be the working class causing more poverty, homelessness and probably more social deprivation. The rich will just do as the normally do — push the exit door button.

 

[r00fie1]

 

[bear66]

Absolutely none of that has anything to do with house prices increasing. Do you think house prices have quintupled in value and outstripped wages because people have got really good at maintaining them?

Truly history's vainest generation.

I paid 26% interest rate on my first mortgage. Don't you think interest rates at 3% have some effect on house prices?

 

[Chris_Boro]

I paid 26% interest rate on my first mortgage. Don't you think interest rates at 3% have some effect on house prices?

How much was your first mortgage?

 

[bear66]

How much was your first mortgage?

£150/month. It fell to about £60/month over the next 10 years, which was better than any pay rise!

 

[Chris_Boro]

A raise in any tax can be argued to death on it's pros and cons, but that's not the main argument here for me.

It's where the money raised is going, nowhere does this bill show how it's going to bring in more doctors and nurses to help reduce waiting times, it has no target for waiting times and no contingency for further covid outbreaks effecting the above.

Similar for social care, no plan to provide care workers a decent wage, no plan on how to reduce the cost of being in a care home, no plan on helping those who care for relatives at home to keep doing so, no plan on the ridiculously unfair and low carers allowance pay. There's nothing in this bill that actually looks at the root cause of the problems that are faced.

No targets equals no accountability. They can't just offer everyone a course in social care and call them a care a worker. This money, that the care workers themselves will have to pay, will not reach them or provide better services, it will go to shareholders and executives. The Tories will just blame Covid.

 

[CheshireBoro]

I have been a senior manager in Social Care for around 15 years, and have been in the sector for almost 28 years now. I am relatively well qualifies to comment on this.

In the commitment, there is nothing about timelines of funds finding their way into Social Care - and the system has been in crisis for around 4 years. The last 12 months has seen it melt, especially in the inner city areas where Brexit has meant a huge reduction in the workforce. For example, we have an office in SE London that had a workforce that was 82% EU citizens. Most have stayed, some have left - but crucially, that source of staff has dried up totally.

The ONLY way to fix Social Care is for the vast majority of that cash to be passed on to Local Authorities - they commission most Social Care in this country for those who cannot afford to pay for it privately. The majority of LAs spend around 50% of their income on Social Care already. If that money doesnt find its' way to councils, with a commitment to pass it on to Providers, then nothing will change.

The alternative to that is to take away the remit of LAs to fund and sustain Social Care entirely. Make it part of the wider health provision that the NHS delivers - that will never happen.

1 final political point. Boris went into the last election with a commitment to not raise taxes and NI, and he also said he already had a costed plan to revamp Social Care. We now know that no such plan ever existed - he just lied about that, to keep the votes of the Elderly.

 

[Chris_Boro]

£150/month. It fell to about £60/month over the next 10 years, which was better than any pay rise!

On a mortgage so low, the high interest rate is somewhat negated. It's all relative to incomes too I suppose.

Think most would happily pay higher interest if it meant house prices were significantly lower.

 

[caravan club]

Surely the argument that the younger generation are paying taxes to fund the elderly has always been the case? Today’s Pensioners were yesterday’s younger generation once and they paid to fund the pensioners of their day. Not that all social care is solely for the Older generation, about a third of people in receipt of care are of working age.

 

[LaPennaBianca]

Surely the argument that the younger generation are paying taxes to fund the elderly has always been the case? Today’s Pensioners were yesterday’s younger generation once and they paid to fund the pensioners of their day. Not that all social care is solely for the Older generation, about a third of people in receipt of care are of working age.

But it's the fact that the policy is so elderly people can keep hold of their houses, houses that many young and poor people will never be able to afford. Also the tax is not on wealth but on NI, which disproportionately affects the young and the poor.

There are also significantly more pensioners these days and they are living longer.

Something needs to be done, but the approach adopted will only deepen generational inequality.

 

[bear66]

But it's the fact that the policy is so elderly people can keep hold of their houses, houses that many young and poor people will never be able to afford. Also the tax is not on wealth but on NI, which disproportionately affects the young and the poor.

There are also significantly more pensioners these days and they are living longer.

Something needs to be done, but the approach adopted will only deepen generational inequality.

There isn't anything in this policy to help pensioners keep their houses. The costs of care will still be substantially from the person needing care unless they have assets below or close to £23k, far less than the value of a house.

 

[LaPennaBianca]

There isn't anything in this policy to help pensioners keep their houses. The costs of care will still be substantially from the person needing care unless they have assets below or close to £23k, far less than the value of a house.

No. That is the current system. The new proposal sets a maximum of £86,000 of social care spending for someone's lifetime. Far less than the value of a house.

 

[bear66]

No. That is the current system. The new proposal sets a maximum of £86,000 of social care spending for someone's lifetime. Far less than the value of a house.

£86k times 2 for a couple and that's without the hotel costs which are at least as much again.

 

[LaPennaBianca]

£86k times 2 for a couple and that's without the hotel costs which are at least as much again.

So you're saying that your £23k claim was wrong?

 

[bear66]

So you're saying that your £23k claim was wrong?

I meant £20 k above which self funding starts. I thought it was £23k. An MP on R4 this morning said it was £23,500, which doesn't seem to be right.

The average cost of a house in the North East is £150k.

 

[LaPennaBianca]

I meant £20 k above which self funding starts. I thought it was £23k.

The average cost of a house in the North East is £150k.

And those people should be helped. But this is a blanket policy where people with houses bought for peanuts in the south east sell for millions now. As I said before in this thread, over a quarter of UK pensioners have assets worth over a million pounds. Take 86k x2 put of that and you're still looking at obscene amount of money.

 

[bear66]

And those people should be helped. But this is a blanket policy where people with houses bought for peanuts in the south east sell for millions. As I said before in this thread, over a quarter of UK pensioners have assets worth over a million pounds. Take 86k x2 put of that and you're still looking at obscene amount of money.

And it won't touch those people, which is why this is an obscene policy that hits most people in every region except London and the South East.

 

[Soutra]

And it won't touch those people, which is why this is an obscene policy that hits most people in every region except London and the South East.

Why? People in the SE are more likely to be very asset rich, because their homes are worth much more than someone in the NE for example. But that doesn't mean that they have more in liquid assets. Unless you preclude them from owning houses, then they'll be more vulnerable won't they? Even if they sell the £1 million house, the partner may have to spend £750K to find a smaller one.