TAX ON FULL STATE PENSION APRIL 2027

ClashCityRocker1

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

ewaste said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think the SP will have to be taken away as it is unsustainable.

Take too much tax from high earners and they change their behaviour. They migrate to other more welcoming countries, or they cut back on hours so they aren’t in a tax crunching zone like the £100k trap.

If we want growth we need to encourage the most productive to want to work hard. Make sure they are rewarded. That’s the top 10% of income earners. The big economic hitters. The ones who contribute 60.3% of all the income tax paid in the UK. The 10% who alone, contribute 16.2% of the entire tax receipts received by HMG. £184.525bn / £1,132bn)

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8513/

..........Yes a small minority contribute a majority of tax receipts yet wealth and income inequality is plainly visible in society and continuing to worsen......

The last ONS Wealth and Assets survey estimated that of the total wealth in the UK, around half is held by the top 10%.......the top 50% hold 94%, while the bottom half hold just 6%.........the bottom 10% hold practically zero.....

Quite right too. Why should the bottom half hold any wealth when they are a net economic drain.

Have you ever thought that they might be a "net economic drain" precisely because they have no wealth? 

They are a net economic drain because they take more than they give.

53.3% of all UK households.

A snapshot in time. Retired or sick people might not be paying tax now, but they might have done, and they might again. They might be contributing in non-cash terms, volunteering, caring, playing guitar in the park, who knows? We might need to balance the books, but not everything is about money. 

Also people need more at different stages of life - so when kids are young and they are not yet at peak earning fro example, or later in life when they get frail or ill

The other big drain on everybody is housing costs - not sure what can be done easily to balance that except build a lot of houses/flats.

If somebody is a multi-site landlord and coining it in they might well be paying more tax than they receive but they might well also be squirrelling away wealth and not doing anything useful except putting rent up every 12 months.

OldScientist

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

ewaste said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think the SP will have to be taken away as it is unsustainable.

Take too much tax from high earners and they change their behaviour. They migrate to other more welcoming countries, or they cut back on hours so they aren’t in a tax crunching zone like the £100k trap.

If we want growth we need to encourage the most productive to want to work hard. Make sure they are rewarded. That’s the top 10% of income earners. The big economic hitters. The ones who contribute 60.3% of all the income tax paid in the UK. The 10% who alone, contribute 16.2% of the entire tax receipts received by HMG. £184.525bn / £1,132bn)

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8513/

..........Yes a small minority contribute a majority of tax receipts yet wealth and income inequality is plainly visible in society and continuing to worsen......

The last ONS Wealth and Assets survey estimated that of the total wealth in the UK, around half is held by the top 10%.......the top 50% hold 94%, while the bottom half hold just 6%.........the bottom 10% hold practically zero.....

Quite right too. Why should the bottom half hold any wealth when they are a net economic drain.

Have you ever thought that they might be a "net economic drain" precisely because they have no wealth? 

They are a net economic drain because they take more than they give.

53.3% of all UK households.

Let's say, following Douglas Adams , a solution to this problem is to place the 53% on a spaceship and send them somewhere else leaving those contributing most here in the UK.

Those sent in the spacecraft: the majority of retail workers, care workers, factory workers, recently qualified nurses,  teachers, police, and armed forces, office workers, those on maternity or paternity leave, bin men, bus drivers, unemployed, long-term sick, disabled, and pensioners.

Those left on earth: footballers, politicians, bankers, journalists, middle and upper management, etc.

More seriously, many of those in the 53% facilitate others to making an economic contribution. An example might be an early career teacher who will educate children a portion of whom will then go on to make net positive contributions. The private in the army or police constable who help keep the country safe for the wealthy to accumulate wealth.

I also note that a portion of the long-term unemployed are carers who get little income, but ultimately save the state money (since the care would otherwise have to take place elsewhere).

BlackKnightMonty

BrilliantButScary said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

german_keeper said:

Up until now I have been really quite proud of what me and my wife have achieved on a relatively low income. She's just gone to bed but I will mention to her tomorrow that we are a net economic drain.  

You are not on your own. Remember 53.3% of all UK households stand with you as net economic drainers.

Well, I am just thinking, is it worth it to get myself banned or this thread closed? Tempting....

What about all the 'net economic drainers' that continued to go out to work during the Covid pandemic? Doing jobs that are 'beneath contempt' in some people's opinion on this thread. 

https://www.jrf.org.uk/work/economic-growth-and-poverty

Important jobs no doubt. This doesn’t absolve the fact they are “net economic drainers”. That’s just a statistical fact.

It would be helpful if HMRC issued a “taxes paid vs benefits and services received” statement to all households. I think there would be quite a few surprises.

BrilliantButScary

kinger101 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

german_keeper said:

Up until now I have been really quite proud of what me and my wife have achieved on a relatively low income. She's just gone to bed but I will mention to her tomorrow that we are a net economic drain.  

You are not on your own. Remember 53.3% of all UK households stand with you as net economic drainers.

I blame central heating.  Impossible for a child to find gainful employment as a chimney sweep these days.  

This reminds me of Charles Kingsley 'The Water-Babies'  and the character 'Mrsdoasyouwouldbedoneby', otherwise known as the Golden Rule.

BlackKnightMonty

OldScientist said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

ewaste said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think the SP will have to be taken away as it is unsustainable.

Take too much tax from high earners and they change their behaviour. They migrate to other more welcoming countries, or they cut back on hours so they aren’t in a tax crunching zone like the £100k trap.

If we want growth we need to encourage the most productive to want to work hard. Make sure they are rewarded. That’s the top 10% of income earners. The big economic hitters. The ones who contribute 60.3% of all the income tax paid in the UK. The 10% who alone, contribute 16.2% of the entire tax receipts received by HMG. £184.525bn / £1,132bn)

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8513/

..........Yes a small minority contribute a majority of tax receipts yet wealth and income inequality is plainly visible in society and continuing to worsen......

The last ONS Wealth and Assets survey estimated that of the total wealth in the UK, around half is held by the top 10%.......the top 50% hold 94%, while the bottom half hold just 6%.........the bottom 10% hold practically zero.....

Quite right too. Why should the bottom half hold any wealth when they are a net economic drain.

Have you ever thought that they might be a "net economic drain" precisely because they have no wealth? 

They are a net economic drain because they take more than they give.

53.3% of all UK households.

Let's say, following Douglas Adams , a solution to this problem is to place the 53% on a spaceship and send them somewhere else leaving those contributing most here in the UK.

Those sent in the spacecraft: the majority of retail workers, care workers, factory workers, recently qualified nurses,  teachers, police, and armed forces, office workers, those on maternity or paternity leave, bin men, bus drivers, unemployed, long-term sick, disabled, and pensioners.

Those left on earth: footballers, politicians, bankers, journalists, middle and upper management, etc.

More seriously, many of those in the 53% facilitate others to making an economic contribution. An example might be an early career teacher who will educate children a portion of whom will then go on to make net positive contributions. The private in the army or police constable who help keep the country safe for the wealthy to accumulate wealth.

I also note that a portion of the long-term unemployed are carers who get little income, but ultimately save the state money (since the care would otherwise have to take place elsewhere).

By all means explore that thought experiment. All the while HMG are borrowing over £150bn a year, and paying £110bn a year in debt repayments.

ClashCityRocker1

BlackKnightMonty said:

OldScientist said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

ewaste said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I

...

 All the while HMG are borrowing over £150bn a year, and paying £110bn a year in debt repayments.

Yeah we owe money to bond holders most of whom are UK institutions (some is admittedly owed overseas, I don't know how much income UK institutions get from overseas Government debt repayment) - so a UK debt owed to a UK institution is also a UK Credit. Those debt repayments mostly remain in the UK - a lot of them go to pension funds - so we are getting those debt payments back, aren't we?

I think we pay more money in debt repayment to the Bank of England for their QE assets than we pay abroad. It really is a classic example of money (and debt) only existing if you believe in it!

I tend to agree that we don't want debt (even to ourselves) to grow exponentially as that belief in money and debt (the so called  Money Markets) will disappear and like in 2008 nobody will believe in anybody's ability to repay anything. But we could if we wanted create new long term bonds like we did after the war and the debt effectively vanishes. 

But we do need to work out how to live within our means which isn't easy with an aging population and global competition. I think we need to pay teachers, civil servants, nurses, care workers a lot more and pump a lot more into training them - they are Osborne's multipliers (health, education) - cutting their working conditions as well as all the other services and hygiene factors makes us poorly educated and unhealthy with no real economic plan and at the mercy of better educated healthier (and younger) workers elsewhere.

We can't compete without investing and much of that investment will have to come from the Government - taxation and borrowing mostly.

QrizB

BlackKnightMonty said:

Important jobs no doubt. This doesn’t absolve the fact they are net economic drainers. That’s just a statistical fact.

That 53.3% receive more from the State than they contribute is a fact.

Those 53.3% being "net economic drainers" isn't a fact, it's opinion - and a rather unpleasant one, in my opinion.

We have a redistributive system, intended to shift assets from the rich to the poor. Those 53.3% are a sign of the system working.

Now please can someone close this thread? I've reported it three or four times  already for being overly political and non-moneysaving ...

Moonwolf

ClashCityRocker1 said:k

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

ewaste said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think the SP will have to be taken away as it is unsustainable.

Take too much tax from high earners and they change their behaviour. They migrate to other more welcoming countries, or they cut back on hours so they aren’t in a tax crunching zone like the £100k trap.

If we want growth we need to encourage the most productive to want to work hard. Make sure they are rewarded. That’s the top 10% of income earners. The big economic hitters. The ones who contribute 60.3% of all the income tax paid in the UK. The 10% who alone, contribute 16.2% of the entire tax receipts received by HMG. £184.525bn / £1,132bn)

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8513/

..........Yes a small minority contribute a majority of tax receipts yet wealth and income inequality is plainly visible in society and continuing to worsen......

The last ONS Wealth and Assets survey estimated that of the total wealth in the UK, around half is held by the top 10%.......the top 50% hold 94%, while the bottom half hold just 6%.........the bottom 10% hold practically zero.....

Quite right too. Why should the bottom half hold any wealth when they are a net economic drain.

Have you ever thought that they might be a "net economic drain" precisely because they have no wealth? 

They are a net economic drain because they take more than they give.

53.3% of all UK households.

A snapshot in time. Retired or sick people might not be paying tax now, but they might have done, and they might again. They might be contributing in non-cash terms, volunteering, caring, playing guitar in the park, who knows? We might need to balance the books, but not everything is about money. 

Also people need more at different stages of life - so when kids are young and they are not yet at peak earning fro example, or later in life when they get frail or ill

The other big drain on everybody is housing costs - not sure what can be done easily to balance that except build a lot of houses/flats.

If somebody is a multi-site landlord and coining it in they might well be paying more tax than they receive but they might well also be squirrelling away wealth and not doing anything useful except putting rent up every 12 months.

I think the 53% figure includes education and health costs as well pensions. While the tax take includes VAT but doesn’t include corporate taxes.

This means that to a certain extent there will be tendency for the figures to suggest that quite a lot of households would generally receive more than they pay out anyway.

Education is probably a public good and overall should help productivity as is a functioning health service.

In addition, I’ve seen a lot of chat recently about how much of the tax burden the top 1% are taking on, without a discussion about the change in pay ratios over the last 50 years or so, or for that matter the big increase in inequality in the 70s and early 80s that hasn’t been corrected. https://www.tomforth.co.uk/incomeandinequality/

Of course the two biggest issues in this country are the lack of willingness to build houses and the lack of investment in the regions. Landlord issues are a symptom of lack of housing rather than the real cause of housing problems (although bringing back MIRAS might rebalance things a bit).

BlackKnightMonty

Moonwolf said:

ClashCityRocker1 said:k

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

MK62 said:

ewaste said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

I think the SP will have to be taken away as it is unsustainable.

Take too much tax from high earners and they change their behaviour. They migrate to other more welcoming countries, or they cut back on hours so they aren’t in a tax crunching zone like the £100k trap.

If we want growth we need to encourage the most productive to want to work hard. Make sure they are rewarded. That’s the top 10% of income earners. The big economic hitters. The ones who contribute 60.3% of all the income tax paid in the UK. The 10% who alone, contribute 16.2% of the entire tax receipts received by HMG. £184.525bn / £1,132bn)

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8513/

..........Yes a small minority contribute a majority of tax receipts yet wealth and income inequality is plainly visible in society and continuing to worsen......

The last ONS Wealth and Assets survey estimated that of the total wealth in the UK, around half is held by the top 10%.......the top 50% hold 94%, while the bottom half hold just 6%.........the bottom 10% hold practically zero.....

Quite right too. Why should the bottom half hold any wealth when they are a net economic drain.

Have you ever thought that they might be a "net economic drain" precisely because they have no wealth? 

They are a net economic drain because they take more than they give.

53.3% of all UK households.

A snapshot in time. Retired or sick people might not be paying tax now, but they might have done, and they might again. They might be contributing in non-cash terms, volunteering, caring, playing guitar in the park, who knows? We might need to balance the books, but not everything is about money. 

Also people need more at different stages of life - so when kids are young and they are not yet at peak earning fro example, or later in life when they get frail or ill

The other big drain on everybody is housing costs - not sure what can be done easily to balance that except build a lot of houses/flats.

If somebody is a multi-site landlord and coining it in they might well be paying more tax than they receive but they might well also be squirrelling away wealth and not doing anything useful except putting rent up every 12 months.

I think the 53% figure includes education and health costs as well pensions. While the tax take includes VAT but doesn’t include corporate taxes.

This means that to a certain extent there will be tendency for the figures to suggest that quite a lot of households would generally receive more than they pay out anyway.

Education is probably a public good and overall should help productivity as is a functioning health service.

In addition, I’ve seen a lot of chat recently about how much of the tax burden the top 1% are taking on, without a discussion about the change in pay ratios over the last 50 years or so, or for that matter the big increase in inequality in the 70s and early 80s that hasn’t been corrected. https://www.tomforth.co.uk/incomeandinequality/

Of course the two biggest issues in this country are the lack of willingness to build houses and the lack of investment in the regions. Landlord issues are a symptom of lack of housing rather than the real cause of housing problems (although bringing back MIRAS might rebalance things a bit).

Government spending per person is around £13k per annum.

Once you factor in children, those unable to work, and the retired; that £13k figure is a lot to be raised through taxation.

This is why the 53.3% figure comes about.

But back in 1977 it was only 37%. Why the change? An ageing population combined with a more generous welfare system.

ClashCityRocker1

QrizB said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Important jobs no doubt. This doesn’t absolve the fact they are net economic drainers. That’s just a statistical fact.

That 53.3% receive more from the State than they contribute is a fact.

Those 53.3% being "net economic drainers" isn't a fact, it's opinion - and a rather unpleasant one, in my opinion.

We have a redistributive system, intended to shift assets from the rich to the poor. Those 53.3% are a sign of the system working.

Now please can someone close this thread? I've reported it three or four times  already for being overly political and non-moneysaving ...

But Rachel Reeves might be needing our help!