Protecting my house

wannabe_a_saver

lookstraightahead said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Salemicus said:

No political party will meet the cost of care. Some might force the taxpayer to meet that cost.

Well that's how a fair society works, we each contribute so that everybody can benefit. 

Its how we can get cancer or have babies or have a house fire without facing enormous individual bills for dealing with it.  

House fire? How do you mean? Don't you take out insurance for that?

Yeah but the insurance company aren't generally keen to come round and put out the fires.

wannabe_a_saver

lookstraightahead said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Billy_B_North said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Salemicus said:

No political party will meet the cost of care. Some might force the taxpayer to meet that cost.

Well that's how a fair society works, we each contribute so that everybody can benefit. 

Its how we can get cancer or have babies or have a house fire without facing enormous individual bills for dealing with it.  

But we don’t all contribute. Over half of all households are net recipients even when looked at only in cash terms. More are when things like healthcare costs are included.

It’s only about 40% of households that are net contributors, and only about 20% who pay in a significant amount.
There’d be far more money to fund care if we didn’t have such a high threshold for income tax and such a low starting rate.

We all contribute what we can, or at least that's the idea. 

A hike in inheritance tax would be a good start. 

That's just picking and choosing.

i think luxury goods tax should be increased - beer, fags, clothes, holidays, cars etc 

Yeah I'd be ok with that, although of course those are already quite heavily taxed I believe. 

Inheritance is unearned income and a huge driver of inequality. 

Nebulous2

GaleSF63 said:

Nebulous2 said:

GaleSF63 said:

davidmcn said:

coffeehound said:

While certain regions of Britain benefit from free care in old age while others don't, it seems unfair to berate the OP for wanting the same.  Welcome to the UK, folks.

In Scotland it's only the personal care element which is free - accommodation etc is still means-tested as elsewhere, which in practice I think is the major cost anyway.

And it's not easy to get. 

I think you've misunderstood - everyone gets it. That includes care at home visits for people in their own homes. 

If the local authority who pay it assesses someone as eligible. 

If the local authority assesses someone as needing personal care, then they are eligible.

I don't think I've ever known someone not get it. Some local authorities tried to ration it at one point, but they were told they couldn't. 

lookstraightahead

easterbunni said:

lookstraightahead said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Salemicus said:

No political party will meet the cost of care. Some might force the taxpayer to meet that cost.

Well that's how a fair society works, we each contribute so that everybody can benefit. 

Its how we can get cancer or have babies or have a house fire without facing enormous individual bills for dealing with it.  

House fire? How do you mean? Don't you take out insurance for that?

I think they mean the potential bill for the big red lorry and several highly trained persons who put their lives at risk fighting said house fire.

Ah sorry. I thought I was being ripped off 😂

Billy_B_North

wannabe_a_saver said:

Billy_B_North said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Salemicus said:

No political party will meet the cost of care. Some might force the taxpayer to meet that cost.

Well that's how a fair society works, we each contribute so that everybody can benefit. 

Its how we can get cancer or have babies or have a house fire without facing enormous individual bills for dealing with it.  

But we don’t all contribute. Over half of all households are net recipients even when looked at only in cash terms. More are when things like healthcare costs are included.

It’s only about 40% of households that are net contributors, and only about 20% who pay in a significant amount.
There’d be far more money to fund care if we didn’t have such a high threshold for income tax and such a low starting rate.

We all contribute what we can, or at least that's the idea. 

That’s a very different claim, but again, no. 60% of households are net recipients, so contribute nothing.

Many of those could contribute something.

AdrianC

wannabe_a_saver said:

lookstraightahead said:
i think luxury goods tax should be increased - beer, fags, clothes, holidays, cars etc 

Yeah I'd be ok with that, although of course those are already quite heavily taxed I believe.  

Not really.

Clothes - just VAT, but kids clothes and some accessories are zero rated.
Holidays - just VAT, unless Air Passenger Duty is involved... but fuel for flights is zero VAT.
Cars - just VAT on purchase, maintenance, etc. Fuel is taxed... but electricity is lower-rate taxed (or free if you have PV). VED is far lower now than it was for most of the time the car has been in existence, albeit not quite as low (for new cars) as a few years ago - the average new car in 2016 was £30/year, a price last seen in the early 70s. It's back up to 1990s prices now...

Then there's all the luxury goods like consumer electronics etc, again just VAT.

As Oliver Wendell Holmes said... Taxes are the price we pay for a civilised society.

MaryNB

lookstraightahead said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Salemicus said:

No political party will meet the cost of care. Some might force the taxpayer to meet that cost.

Well that's how a fair society works, we each contribute so that everybody can benefit. 

Its how we can get cancer or have babies or have a house fire without facing enormous individual bills for dealing with it.  

House fire? How do you mean? Don't you take out insurance for that?

In Ireland the fire brigade isn't free in most areas. My uncle's neighbours fell out because one caused a fire along the party wall but said the neightbour who called emergency services should pay the call out fee.

It can be quite expensive - in Dublin it's €610 for the first hour and €485 per vehicle per hour after that. It's covered under house insurance. 

After I called emergency services due to a smell of burning from the flat above me in a previous home in England I was very relieved to find out it was covered under council tax. 

wannabe_a_saver

Billy_B_North said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Billy_B_North said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Salemicus said:

No political party will meet the cost of care. Some might force the taxpayer to meet that cost.

Well that's how a fair society works, we each contribute so that everybody can benefit. 

Its how we can get cancer or have babies or have a house fire without facing enormous individual bills for dealing with it.  

But we don’t all contribute. Over half of all households are net recipients even when looked at only in cash terms. More are when things like healthcare costs are included.

It’s only about 40% of households that are net contributors, and only about 20% who pay in a significant amount.
There’d be far more money to fund care if we didn’t have such a high threshold for income tax and such a low starting rate.

We all contribute what we can, or at least that's the idea. 

That’s a very different claim, but again, no. 60% of households are net recipients, so contribute nothing.

Many of those could contribute something.

Many of them do. 

Being a net recipient doesn't mean you don't contribute. 

Where does the 60% figure come from out of interest?  I expect its not far off when you consider education, health, council services etc. but I'd like to see the source still please. 

wannabe_a_saver

AdrianC said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

lookstraightahead said:
i think luxury goods tax should be increased - beer, fags, clothes, holidays, cars etc 

Yeah I'd be ok with that, although of course those are already quite heavily taxed I believe.  

Not really.

Clothes - just VAT, but kids clothes and some accessories are zero rated.
Holidays - just VAT, unless Air Passenger Duty is involved... but fuel for flights is zero VAT.
Cars - just VAT on purchase, maintenance, etc. Fuel is taxed... but electricity is lower-rate taxed (or free if you have PV). VED is far lower now than it was for most of the time the car has been in existence, albeit not quite as low (for new cars) as a few years ago - the average new car in 2016 was £30/year, a price last seen in the early 70s. It's back up to 1990s prices now...

Then there's all the luxury goods like consumer electronics etc, again just VAT.

As Oliver Wendell Holmes said... Taxes are the price we pay for a civilised society.

Cigarettes and alcohol were mentioned but you haven't commented on those. 

What's vat these days? 20%?  That's fairly high its just that we're used to it and don't tend to really think about it. 

AdrianC

wannabe_a_saver said:
Where does the 60% figure come from out of interest?  I expect its not far off when you consider education, health, council services etc. but I'd like to see the source still please. 

Figure 2.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2018

Not quite as simple as "40%" - because the result is simply in quintile bands.
The top two are net contributors, the lower three are net beneficiaries.
Lowest quintile is +£11,400/year - average household income £7,900
Second quintile is +£9,700
Third quintile is +£2,300
Fourth quintile is -£5,400
Fifth quintile is -£22,700 - average household income £88,200
Overall average is +£1,000 - average household income c£38k

Negative means net contributor, positive net beneficiary. The actual position is going to vary widely based on household make-up, of course.