The Budget

Generali

kabayiri wrote: »

To be fair I think that was Blue22 was saying, just in a different form.

Must have misread. Glad we agree Blue22!

MumOf2

Blue22 wrote: »

Are their independent lives entirely financed by their 'hard work and graft' or have they each been receiving a state pension for almost 30 years? How often do they use our health service and bus passes? Who pays for their TV licence? Do they use any care services? Who educated their Children and Grandchildren? etc etc

I'm sure you will reply that they are very low users of all those things, as everyone does, but the average person in their 80s/90s will have taken out far more than they have put in. Surely to ask for a little back when they no longer need it isn't an unreasonable thing to do?

To answer your specific questions:
Their state pensions are paid back in tax as they receive too much in the way of other income to keep any of the state pension.


None of them has a bus pass or a senior railcard.


Healthcare is paid for themselves in the private sector.


They do receive their TV licences but this is predicted to change in the upcoming budget and they will gladly pay for their own.


No care services are used - they are independent with the support of the families who are only too glad to help them.


All children and grandchildren were educated in the private sector, thus not burdening the local sector with additional pupils. The only exception was one child in tertiary education who received a full scholarship in the 1970s - all the others have paid varying levels of fees for their University education.


So no, they paid their taxes and Council Tax and pay huge amounts into the local economy in the way of goods and services thus enabling more tax to be paid to the State (income and VAT), yet take very little out. They are net contributors. Any more questions?

kabayiri

Hmm, just linking things together ...

Harsher budget >> Greater pain on the masses >> increasing frustration amongst voters >> swing to anti-austerity parties >> return to spending money we do not have >> more hardship long term.

Perhaps we should erect a statue of George Osborne now saying "Inspiration of the Left!"

michaels

kabayiri wrote: »

Hmm, just linking things together ...

Harsher budget >> Greater pain on the masses >> increasing frustration amongst voters >> swing to anti-austerity parties >> return to spending money we do not have >> more hardship long term.

Perhaps we should erect a statue of George Osborne now saying "Inspiration of the Left!"

So can you see a Corbyn led traditional socialist Labour party winning power in 5 years? Personally I don't think it is impossible, the Scots voted 50% for those politics. The other Labour leadership candidates seem to all being sayign that most of what Red Ed said was too socialist so we shall see.

kabayiri

michaels wrote: »

So can you see a Corbyn led traditional socialist Labour party winning power in 5 years? Personally I don't think it is impossible, the Scots voted 50% for those politics. The other Labour leadership candidates seem to all being sayign that most of what Red Ed said was too socialist so we shall see.

Labour without a Scottish presence is too wounded IMO. That is not to say they couldn't create a centre-left coallition next time.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

So can you see a Corbyn led traditional socialist Labour party winning power in 5 years? Personally I don't think it is impossible, the Scots voted 50% for those politics. The other Labour leadership candidates seem to all being sayign that most of what Red Ed said was too socialist so we shall see.

Well apparently Some Bloke thinks Corbyn is in with a shout:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11720055/Jeremy-Corbyn-is-a-close-second-in-Labour-leadership-race.html

Labour could come close to electing Jeremy Corbyn as its next leader, with one key lobbyist predicting he will come a close second to the winning candidate.

Having said that, Betfair has Corbyn 4th at 9.8.

wotsthat

MumOf2 wrote: »

So no, they paid their taxes and Council Tax and pay huge amounts into the local economy in the way of goods and services thus enabling more tax to be paid to the State (income and VAT), yet take very little out. They are net contributors. Any more questions?

I think the issue is you're angry because you think they're paying more than their fair share already rather than the material difference between being taxed in life rather than death.

If there's no net difference in tax paid what does it matter? I know I'd rather have paid less tax bringing up my kids than saving it up to give them when they'll likely be pensioners.

westv

MumOf2 wrote: »

Healthcare is paid for themselves in the private sector.

Private healthcare in their 80s/90s? Are you a family of millionaires?!

MumOf2

wotsthat wrote: »

I think the issue is you're angry because you think they're paying more than their fair share already rather than the material difference between being taxed in life rather than death.

If there's no net difference in tax paid what does it matter? I know I'd rather have paid less tax bringing up my kids than saving it up to give them when they'll likely be pensioners.

Not angry at all, just fed up with the anti older people rhetoric that seems to be very fashionable. Let corpses be taxed to the hilt as they no longer need the money...

MumOf2

westv wrote: »

Private healthcare in their 80s/90s? Are you a family of millionaires?!

Not everyone's healthcare needs are great as they become older. Looking after yourself throughout your whole life and having a close family support network means that the costs associated with ageing don't automatically have to rule out private healthcare for those few ailments which do need professional input.