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.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. 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!
Breaking News: £1000 married tax allowance
Comments
-
Council tax is a tax, not a charge. It's a tax related to the value of your property and has nothing whatsoever to do with the amount of council services you consume.abankerbutnotafatcat wrote: »Council charge pays for services that a single person will have less ability to use by virtue of only being one person than a household with more people.
Just like road tax is a tax related to the CO2 emissions of your car, not how much you use the roads. People who share a car don't pay more road tax, because it's not based on the number of users.0 -
I doubt it, there'll probably be some sort of taper. And if not, just contribute £100 to a pension, or gift aid it to a charity!Kennyboy66 wrote: »Only 15% of families with children will get any benefit from this.
Only 28% of people either married or in civil partnership will benefit.
A married person (with a non earning partner) will be better off earning £42400, than earning £42500.
It is at the moment, but once established it could be extended - perhaps until the whole allowance is transferrable.The maximum gain is £4 per week.
Does this really count as "thinking outside the box" or a "simplified approach".
It looks to me like it could have been devised by Gordon Brown as a "sweetie giveaway" of which he was so fond.0 -
Yes. But they do now, so there's no net cross-subsidy in taxation. Your scheme seems to expect parents to pay for all their children's childhood costs without any sort of payback. This would mean those who don't have children would get a free ride - they get their childhood paid for by someone else, and never have to pay it back.Loughton_Monkey wrote: »Yes, I revert to that language now and again. But you didn't pick up that these kids would not be paying the pensions of their parents. That was the point.
That's partially true now - as most people don't pay their parents back for all the direct costs of their childhood, but at least now they pay the taxpayer back for the cost of their education etc (effectively - by paying for the next generation's education).
Yes it's a Ponzi scheme, but why would it fail? When people stop having kids? When do you think that'll happen? And if it does, it'll be a disaster anyway regardless of how much people have saved/been taxed for their retirement. What are you going to spend your pension on if there's no working age adults to do any work? No shops, no transport, no food production...Once you adopt this commonly accepted position that today's children are tomorrow's 'chequebook' for the older generation, and they should therefore be encouraged by subsidies, you are, in effect, creating a great unsustainable 'Ponzi Scheme' which must, at some point fail disastrously.
Until you can teach babies to do a 9-5 job straight out of the womb and people are prepared to work till the day they die, there'll always be a need for cross generational subsidy and reliance.The current system of unfunded state pensions was ill founded, unsustainable, and is virtually impossible to 'correct' without another 60 years of 'transition'. We should make a start.0 -
What are you going to spend your pension on if there's no working age adults to do any work? No shops, no transport, no food production...
Or sort out personal needs, perish the thought, we need to go into care."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
Kennyboy66 wrote: »Only 15% of families with children will get any benefit from this.
Only. Then targeted correctly the most deserving. When I hear people say it's only a couple of hundred pounds. You realise that people have become detached as to well off they actually are. While there's , like in the USA, a growing underclass.
1 in 7 Americans now use foodbanks. A staggering statistic for one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.0 -
Isn't that a rather misleading statistic as in the US instead of paying certain benefits to people in cash they give them food stamps which are exchanged for food at food banks.0
-
Thrugelmir wrote: »
1 in 7 Americans now use foodbanks. A staggering statistic for one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.
Closer to 1 in 6.6?
The wealthiest or the most indebted?
A fine political and economic blueprint to be chasing."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
£3.50 a week will not be changing these married couples lives.Thrugelmir wrote: »Only. Then targeted correctly the most deserving. When I hear people say it's only a couple of hundred pounds. You realise that people have become detached as to well off they actually are. While there's , like in the USA, a growing underclass.
1 in 7 Americans now use foodbanks. A staggering statistic for one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.
Stop selling the Tory mantra and be realistic to what actually goes on instead of peddling this fiction straight from David Cameron's bedroom.0 -
£1000 is only the beginning, not the end. The plan is to increase it over time.0
-
£1000 is only the beginning, not the end. The plan is to increase it over time.
I doubt it will ever amount to much and will wither on the vine.
It is too little and will benefit only a limited amount of people, to make any meaningful difference"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards