We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Universal Credits - Self Employed
Comments
-
Have been paying taxes and NI since 1988 - what I mean is there won't BE a state pension by the time I retire at 67, it won't existLove many, trust few, learn to paddle your own canoe.
“Don’t have children if you can’t afford them” is the “Let them eat cake” of the 21st century. It doesn’t matter how children got here, they need and deserve to be fed.0 -
Once you are earning enough to pay income tax, isn't anything you get for your children a tax rebate? It only becomes a benefit, as in something paid to you by other taxpayers, if your income tax is insufficient to cover the amount of rebate you get.
You really don't think you are taking benefits if you take less money back than you paid in taxes??? If we all took back the taxes we paid as a "tax rebate", then where would the govenment get this lost revenue from that is needed to fund public services i.e. schools, NHS, roads, the welfare bill?
If someone ask for benefits and then thinks they have just got a "tax rebate", then should those people then pay for their childrens education, or their own and their childrens medical care etc, out of that "tax rebate" that they took back?
Benefits are not tax rebates, they are welfare payments that people apply for. If you don't apply for benefits, then you aren't just given them. If you don't meet the criteria to get benefits i.e.low income, then you don't get given this help from the welfare state.
The welfare bill is now so big, that in the last few years, for the first time ever, the amount of money the government collects from income tax, doesnt even cover the UKs massive welfare bill! Scary stuff.RENTING? Have you checked to see that your landlord has permission from their mortgage lender to rent the property? If not, you could be thrown out with very little notice.
Read the sticky on the House Buying, Renting & Selling board.0 -
Have been paying taxes and NI since 1988 - what I mean is there won't BE a state pension by the time I retire at 67, it won't exist
I think they will just keep raising the pension age so they pay less out and some will die before they get to that pension age, as the welfare bill is massive.
I believe the 3 biggest welfare bills are state pensions, housing benefits and tax credits. So they raise the pension age and cut housing and tax credits payments. The NHS is a massive burden to the taxpayers too.RENTING? Have you checked to see that your landlord has permission from their mortgage lender to rent the property? If not, you could be thrown out with very little notice.
Read the sticky on the House Buying, Renting & Selling board.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »Not that old chestnut about needing to pay for all those children whose parents can't be bothered to go without for them, because we need children from those families to pay for our pensions. Where do you think all the next lot of muggers, burglars and long term welfare claimants are going to come from? The next generation of parents who also want someone else to pay x for their children, so they don't have to go without something themselves?
State pensions are from age 68 now; up from 60 for women. Expect that age to go higher. You should be saving for your own pension and private healthcare in old age; but that doesn't mean that you should be saving for that by getting others to provide for free things for the children you chose to have.
I have a pension, I also have 2 businesses, and a house here plus 2 overseas, but as with the childcare, I'm not talking about me, I've provided for myself and my family without recourse to the public purse. I do believe that if the government really wants everyone to work then they need to make that possible, and not by throwing cash at people and making it possible for people to work as little as possible and still have a decent quality of life! Childcare provision for working parents rather than benefits and tax credits. And the fact is there will not be a state pension for my generation due to overspending and not enough children being born who would ultimately be paying taxes and providing for the pension deficit.Love many, trust few, learn to paddle your own canoe.
“Don’t have children if you can’t afford them” is the “Let them eat cake” of the 21st century. It doesn’t matter how children got here, they need and deserve to be fed.0 -
I actually agree with you, BUT, I do think that if a good work ethic is installed in the next generation - ie they see their parents working to afford a decent life, then they will work - after all we need them to in order to pay for our pensions

They way the pension age keeps going up, pretty soon there will not be anyone left to pay a pension to!!!!0 -
POPPYOSCAR wrote: »They way the pension age keeps going up, pretty soon there will not be anyone left to pay a pension to!!!!
Which pretty much brings us full circle - years ago people didn't live much past retirement, now we all live longer there are more people claiming state pension for longer.Love many, trust few, learn to paddle your own canoe.
“Don’t have children if you can’t afford them” is the “Let them eat cake” of the 21st century. It doesn’t matter how children got here, they need and deserve to be fed.0 -
lol ...all i can say is there are not many going bankrupt. farmers always plead poverty
Do you live in a parallel world?!
Finished livestock prices are down 30-40% in the last decade but every single cost is up. How much have energy prices increased in the last ten years? Doubled? Trebled, even. Our livestock herds are down 20% in the same period. The value of agriculture to GDP is down by 60% since the 90s. The average age of a farmer is 59, evidencing that their children no longer think it a worthwhile career and are bluggering off to do something else.
Anecdotally speaking, the majority of farmers' children at my local schools qualify for free school meals. And we know how difficult they are to get for those whose parents are in work.
This is bad for many reasons, not just for the effects on farmers and their families. Already, most finished food products in the supermarkets contain meat from sweatshop/battery farms in Asia. In the same way UK manufacturing jobs have been lost to sweatshop workers in Asia, the food we eat is heading to be produced in the same way (and often already is). More jobs gone forever and less control over the quality of the food we eat. As an island nation with a dense population, food security is already an issue - and always has been. Do we want to be as food-insecure as we are currently energy-insecure? With all the implications for national security that brings?
Farmers in the UK are simply not enjoying lavish lifestyles on the back of the CAP and the rest of us. Around here, farmers make more money from renting a field for scrambling or quad racing than they do from producing beef, milk, or lamb.0 -
Do you live in a parallel world?!
Nope, i do take into consideration there are hardly any going bankrupt and most importantly many are paper rich and have a very large amount of assets.
Profit margins are getting squeezed for everyone farmers, retailers etc
Think you will find farming is one of the industries that is least effected by bankruptcy. That tells you something. And many that are bankrupt are leashold/rented.
anyway going of topic.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »I think they will just keep raising the pension age so they pay less out and some will die before they get to that pension age, as the welfare bill is massive.
I believe the 3 biggest welfare bills are state pensions, housing benefits and tax credits. So they raise the pension age and cut housing and tax credits payments. The NHS is a massive burden to the taxpayers too.
What I don't like about the housing benefit - and the NHS come to that - is that there is no co-payment. Housing benefits should be restricted to the lower of the LHA or, say, 80% of the actual rent. What incentive is there for people to move to areas they can afford and rent within their means, or accept social housing, if the housing benefit is enough to fully fund a three bedroom house in one of the nicest parts of town?
NHS is different to benefits because everyone could potentially have to use it. So it makes sense to spend on it and make sure it is fit for purpose. Sadly, some hospital trusts don't fulfil their function in this regard, and some doctors and nurses are so rude and/or incompetent, it's a wonder they keep their jobs. Maybe the government is afraid, if we actually had to make a co-payment when we used the NHS, that we might expect better quality service and complain long and loudly when we don't get it?
But at the same time, the government encourages misuse of the NHS. If you had co-payments, even if it was only, say, £3 when you went to the doctor, people wouldn't be going to the doctor for a prescription for paracetemol - which is what they do here in Scotland - when it only costs 36p a packet at Asda.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards