Corbynomics: A Dystopia

posh*spice

mrginge wrote: »

Wow.
Age specific taxation. Sounds like a plan.

The Student loan system is just an age specific tax system - extra taxes to pay for "their" education.

So it's ok to tax younger people extra but not your generation?

My age specific plan would also be as easy to implement and as fair as the student loan system.

Of course you msy not want to pay extra tax - it's a choice - you may be happy with a trolley in a corridor? But at least you can continue having your holidays, free bus pass, winter fuel allowances, and a house full of chinese crap.

mrginge

posh*spice wrote: »

The Student loan system is just an age specific tax system - extra taxes to pay for their education.

So it's ok to tax younger people extra but not your generation?

The student loan system is for students.
I wasn't aware that there was an age limit on becoming one but you live and learn.

My age specific plan would also be as easy to implement and as fair as the student loan system.

Yes, definitely as fair.
Because people make a personal choice to need health care just like they do to become a student.

Of course you msy not want to pay extra tax - it's a choice - you may be happy with a trolley in a corridor? But at least you can continue having your holidays, free bus pass, winter fuel allowances, and a house full of chinese crap.

I've got Bupa through work me old mate.
And I've paid off my student loan.
And I don't get a winter fuel allowance or free bus pass or Chinese crap.
Do go on holiday though. Sometimes twice a year.

Enterprise_1701C

posh*spice wrote: »

I've had a little think. If taxes have to be raised to increase NHS spending they should be levied on those aged 45 plus. They didn't pay for young peoples university expensives so the intergenerational contract is broken. Pay your own health care fees grandad.

So what do we gain from those going to university? In our day the minority went to university, it is only since labour decided to totally devalue the university education and make sure many more people went than actually deserve to go that this has been a problem. A degree is worth very little these days because there are so many pretend subjects you can get one in. The money has to come from somewhere.

Oh, and you forget one thing. About two thirds of students will never repay the "loan", mainly because there is so many "graduates" around it takes a lot more than that fact to actually get a decent job these days.

mrginge

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

So what do we gain from those going to university? In our day the minority went to university, it is only since labour decided to totally devalue the university education and make sure many more people went than actually deserve to go that this has been a problem. A degree is worth very little these days because there are so many pretend subjects you can get one in. The money has to come from somewhere.

Oh, and you forget one thing. About two thirds of students will never repay the "loan", mainly because there is so many "graduates" around it takes a lot more than that fact to actually get a decent job these days.

Depressingly true.

setmefree2

The simple fact is that young workers won't be able to shoulder boomers health care costs even if they wanted to. The levels of tax they face are eye watering. I have had this argument many times in the past with Martin Lewis (re student loans.)

Student loans were introduced in 1998 - 19 years ago. These students are now are at least 37. They face really high marginal tax rates

For income levels of between £17k (pre 2012) and £21k (post 2012) and above this is the marginal tax rates that young workers face.

At basic rate tax levels (From £17k To £43K)

NI = 12% Income tax 20% St Loans = 9%

Marginal tax rate = 41%

At higher rate tax level( From £43k to £150k) the marginal rate becomes
NI = 0% Income Tax 40% St Loans = 9%

Marginal Tax rate = 49%

Over £150k the marginal tax rate = 54%

So young people face marginal tax rates of 41% plus from income levels of £17k to £21k. This is clearly unacceptable.

Anybody who things the under 40s can be taxed more are nuts - frankly.

So, yes boomers are either going to have to fund their own health care through the tax system, get private health insurance or suffer the consequences imho.

setmefree2

Moby wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/14/ukip-leader-admits-claim-that-he-lost-close-friends-at-hillsborough-was-false

Such a nice chap to have as your MP!:eek:

Something we agree on.

mrginge

setmefree2 wrote: »

The simple fact is that young workers won't be able to shoulder boomers health care costs even if they wanted to. The levels of tax they face are eye watering. I have had this argument many times in the past with Martin Lewis (re student loans.)

Student loans were introduced in 1998 - 19 years ago. These students are now are at least 37. They face really high marginal tax rates

For income levels of between £17k (pre 2012) and £21k (post 2012) and above this is the marginal tax rates that young workers face.

At basic rate tax levels (From £17k To £43K)

NI = 12% Income tax 20% St Loans = 9%

Marginal tax rate = 41%

At higher rate tax level( From £43k to £150k) the marginal rate becomes
NI = 0% Income Tax 40% St Loans = 9%

Marginal Tax rate = 49%

Over £150k the marginal tax rate = 54%

So young people face marginal tax rates of 41% plus from income levels of £17k to £21k. This is clearly unacceptable.

Anybody who things the under 40s can be taxed more are nuts frankly.

Nobody is forced to become a student though. The lie that it's the only way to get on in life is unraveling.

And don't forget that the boomers with all their wealth will be passing that down the generations so these youngsters have nothing to complain about.
Well that's what our old friend cells told us anyway. :rotfl:

We've tried taxing the crumblies by making them pay for care costs, and then the youngsters moan about having their inheritances stolen.

I don't know what the long term solution is to this mess, other than we *all* end up paying more.

setmefree2

mrginge wrote: »

I don't know what the long term solution is to this mess, other than we *all* end up paying more.

Seriously you will not be able to tax people under 40 more. Too high rates of tax on young workers will damage the economy and effect growth rates. I would argue that they are already massively too high. I think its nuts that young people who graduated after 2012 face marginal tax rates of 41% on an income of just £21k. In fact, I think it's criminal!

Add to that stupidly high house prices and rents......

Finding ways to tax the well off boomers is the only way forward "if" you want more money put into the NHS. If boomers don't want to pay increased tax rates then that is their choice.

mrginge

setmefree2 wrote: »

Seriously you will not be able to tax people under 40 more. Too high rates of tax on young workers will damage the economy and effect growth rates.

Finding ways to tax the well off boomers is the only way forward "if" you want more money put into the NHS.

How do you just tax well-off boomers?

You can tax the well-off, but the well off over X age?

You can of course take their underlying wealth off them, as we do to some extent now.
And which lots of people complain about.

Now I have no issue with it personally and would agree with your comment. But the young are going to have to accept that it's their inheritances that are going to disappear.

setmefree2

mrginge wrote: »

How do you just tax well-off boomers?

Just add a couple of percent to income tax for people of a certain age, get rid of the triple lock, free bus passes, winter fuel allowance - whatever. If that's what you guys want. You can't squeeze any more out of the young I'm afraid. Nobody is going to vote for that.

Young people don't earn as much as previous generations. A fact.

What they do earn is taxed to the hilt. A Fact.

They face really high house prices or rent. A Fact.

So how do you think they are going to pay for Boomers health costs?