National debt would soar if immigration reduced...

kabayiri

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

...

The £121 bn spent on healthcare is, I assume, reasonably weighted towards older and younger rather than 'middle age'. Roughly 20% of the population are of state pension age. Rather more than this (about 25%) are children or students.
...

The biggest cost push when it comes to old people and health care is technological progress driving increased expectations.

A mere 2 decades ago my parent would have died of Cancer not long after diagnosis. Today we spend circa £30K on chemo treatment aimed at improving quality of life over a relatively short time frame.

Similarly technological improvements can be seen dealing with eye problems; hip replacements; heart surgery; respiratory and digestive issues.

The obvious counter to my argument is that pro-active treatments allow independent living, reducing pressure on hospital beds.

cells

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

I remain far from convinced that 'old people' are as much a drain on public finances as people think.

Yes, in 2012, Old Age Pension cost £93.6 bn out of £694 bn total public expenditure. That's 13.4% Only a tinch above education at £86.9 bn at 12.4%.

The £121 bn spent on healthcare is, I assume, reasonably weighted towards older and younger rather than 'middle age'. Roughly 20% of the population are of state pension age. Rather more than this (about 25%) are children or students.

When you consider the 'welfare bill' of £113 bn, which must be spent primarily (but not exclusively) on the unemployed/lower paid, I suspect those individuals are costing much, much, more than an average pensioner for pension and healthcare combined.

Now look at pensioners as a group. On average, they receive a gross income of £23,192 [DWP 2010/11], of which £9,932 comes from the state. So every pensioner on average may be unproductive, but is pumping £13,260 of cash into the economy by way of tax, spending, or ultimately inheritance. A lot of working adults aren't doing that. And what is more, this excludes the wealth [such as house equity and savings] that also ultimately gets pumped 'for free' into the economy. The spending of savings is additional to the £23K, and all the house equity is extra as well.

So where is the "drain" on the economy? I have yet to see any rational statistics on what a pensioner "costs" to the taxpayer, set against what a pensioner gives back to the taxpayer. Compare this to the 'cost' of children - who put nothing back - until they start work. So I'd love to see an analysis that could accurately breakdown the burden of (say) 50 adults, who between them have to support 25 children, 5 benefit recipients, and 20 pensioners. The latter group would cost a fraction of either of the other two per person.

I know I am not typical, but when I get my state pension next year, it will pale into insignificance set against the tax I still pay, let alone quite a substantial wealth that is slowly finding it's way into the GDP of this nation [and France when it comes to wine, cigars and gin, but that's another matter].

So you are bunging me £8,500 a year [less tax] and statistically paying slightly more than average for my healthcare, but I hardly think it's a bad deal for Joe Taxpayer.

All accounting tricks

An old person doesn't cost anything becuase he is still a net tax payer via the tax on his passive income.....sure but lets imagine he dies that passive income doesn't vanish it is just transfered to his surviving family or whoever else. So it is the pensioner paying the tax it is the passive income paying the tax

Simply put. Add a million who don't work be it pensioners or the younger who have no job and you add circa £10B burden pa to the rest. The argument that they spend money into the economy is also false as that money would be spent by the workers if they didn't first have to hand it over to those who don't work.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

Hamish's absurd prediction.

My 'absurd prediction' or the OBR's 'absurd prediction'?

Generali

A spotters guide to the upcoming alien invasion (SFW):

https://scontent-a-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1549428_10153717090825473_1799286464_n.jpg

antrobus

[QUOTE=Loughton_Monkey;63866951....So_you_are_bunging_me_£8,500_a_year_[less_tax] and statistically paying slightly more than average for my healthcare, .....[/QUOTE]

"Slightly more than average"??? In "2007/08 the average value of NHS services for retired households was £5,200 compared with £2,800 for non-retired". Try 85% more. But then, as far as healthcare is concerned, it's not the retired that are necessarily the problem; it's all those 80 and 90 somethings that really stretch the budget.




http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/key-issues-for-the-new-parliament/value-for-money-in-public-services/the-ageing-population/