Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Democrats look to be weathering the California Recall Election – politicalbetting.com

12467

Comments

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814
    edited September 2021

    tlg86 said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    That’s not the question. Elderly people get looked after whatever. The question is, should more be done to protect inheritances?

    The press are too dumb to spot it, but this doesn’t exactly fit with the government’s levelling up agenda.
    One of the issues with all this that doesn't seem to get highlighted is that most elderly people will not need huge social care bills at the end of their lives. Dilnott reckoned about 10% need the kinds of levels of provision for years that wrecks any chances of passing on the family home (e.g. dementia care for years with bills of £100K+).

    So, there's a lottery over the inheritance. A small % of the families who might have inherited property get hit and the others don't.*

    The lottery is even more iniquitous since some can prove their care needs fall under NHS duty of care and they are fully funded (at least for the care bit, not the B&B bit iirc). Dementia doesn't. But other illnesses do.


    * and obviously the only families where this is an issue are property owning middle classes with assets. Large numbers don't have this issue.
    What I was saying earlier - but muich better put. And with crucial detail.
  • IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    Your attitude to the young is just as unpleasant, I've never once heard you stand up for any of us.
    I have stood up for young people all my life not just by having three children but also four grandchildren

    I have been chairman of our PTA, chairman of the group scout council, founder and treasurer of the local community hall, fund raising chairman in charge of a major festival attracting over 20,000 people with all proceeds going to youth charities and last, but not least, organising visits to our town from deprived children who actually ran into the sea fully clothed never having seen or heard of it

    Maybe you need to be careful how you throw accusations around
    Producing children would appear to be unrelated to backing their social and political interests. As is a list of voluntary activities, however worthy
    To be fair to BigG he has called for the end of the triple lock consistently when it has been discussed this year.
  • MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    Your attitude to the young is just as unpleasant, I've never once heard you stand up for any of us.
    I have stood up for young people all my life not just by having three children but also four grandchildren

    I have been chairman of our PTA, chairman of the group scout council, founder and treasurer of the local community hall, fund raising chairman in charge of a major festival attracting over 20,000 people with all proceeds going to youth charities and last, but not least, organising visits to our town from deprived children who actually ran into the sea fully clothed never having seen or heard of it

    Maybe you need to be careful how you throw accusations around
    Every post you make shows entitled you are and your tone is constantly talking down to people that are younger than you.

    I don't give a toss what you have or haven't done quite frankly, your posts on here show you don't give a monkeys and I am tired of seeing it (albeit not just from you)
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Boris has made the right call, refusing another dementia tax like May which cost her a majority in 2017 as 45-65 year olds saw their inheritance vanish if their parents needed at home care and sticking to a small 1% rise in NI, seeing off Javid and Sunak too who wanted a bigger NI rise.

    Tories are always the party of preserving property wealth and estates first, if you want to switch taxes from income to wealth you are a Liberal if you want to tax both more a socialist.

    If it leads to MaxPB and go going to Davey's LDs fine, I am sure he will welcome their support and they are basically classical liberals not Tories anyway.

    Longer terms some system of voluntary private insurance secured on property for social care is the way

    If all these not-Tories vote for someone else, or don’t vote at all, then we end up with a Labour government.

    We all used to critisise the Corbyn fan club, for being way more interested in ideological purity, than the pragmatism required to actually wield power.
    We don't we end up with the LDs having the balance of power in a hung parliament, they will not vote Labour either, LDs as 2010 showed can go either way for the Tories or Labour.

    However I would rather lose on a Tory platform than win on a Liberal one
    Great to see you back.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,577
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    There was an interview at one of the F1 races back before covid, with a man and his wife who were following the whole season, attending every race in the Paddock Club hospitality. By the end of the season everyone in the paddock knew about them! Sounds like a nice idea for someone who has more money than they need in retirement, and a different pace of life to a round-the-world cruise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Boris has made the right call, refusing another dementia tax like May which cost her a majority in 2017 as 45-65 year olds saw their inheritance vanish if their parents needed at home care and sticking to a small 1% rise in NI, seeing off Javid and Sunak too who wanted a bigger NI rise.

    Tories are always the party of preserving property wealth and estates first, if you want to switch taxes from income to wealth you are a Liberal if you want to tax both more a socialist.

    If it leads to MaxPB and go going to Davey's LDs fine, I am sure he will welcome their support and they are basically classical liberals not Tories anyway.

    Longer terms some system of voluntary private insurance secured on property for social care is the way

    If all these not-Tories vote for someone else, or don’t vote at all, then we end up with a Labour government.

    We all used to critisise the Corbyn fan club, for being way more interested in ideological purity, than the pragmatism required to actually wield power.
    We don't we end up with the LDs having the balance of power in a hung parliament, they will not vote Labour either, LDs as 2010 showed can go either way for the Tories or Labour.

    However I would rather lose on a Tory platform than win on a Liberal one
    I would rather you lost, too.
    But a wholehearted welcome back, HYUFD.
  • On a lighter note, I don't think Rahul was out. I think the edge showed up on Snicko because his bat clipped the edge of his pad at exactly the same time as the ball was passing without touching the bat. Unlucky.
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    You have an arguable point but it needs to be made without unnecessary attacks on the elderly who by a considerable majority are not receiving substantial retirement income
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    I agree the wealthy and retired should be stumping up more in general, but I'm not sure how you get the £1000 a year for extra NI from? I would have thought it was more like £500 for someone on the £40-£50K mark. Or have i missed something?
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    There was an interview at one of the F1 races back before covid, with a man and his wife who were following the whole season, attending every race in the Paddock Club hospitality. By the end of the season everyone in the paddock knew about them! Sounds like a nice idea for someone who has more money than they need in retirement, and a different pace of life to a round-the-world cruise.
    I can’t understand what people get out of attending live f1 racing. Surely it’s a sport that only works on TV?
  • Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399
    edited September 2021
    The discussion seems to be missing the most cynical bit.
    This rise won't "solve social care". It won't even cover the backlog in the NHS.
    It is a tax rise to help fund ongoing spending. That is all.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited September 2021

    Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    I'm in the top 5% of all earners in the country and yet without inheritance I could not afford to buy a house, how exactly could I be working much harder?

    I've been working every day since I came out of uni, never collected benefits, never been unemployed, always paid into the system, your post is stupid
  • Carnyx said:

    tlg86 said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    That’s not the question. Elderly people get looked after whatever. The question is, should more be done to protect inheritances?

    The press are too dumb to spot it, but this doesn’t exactly fit with the government’s levelling up agenda.
    One of the issues with all this that doesn't seem to get highlighted is that most elderly people will not need huge social care bills at the end of their lives. Dilnott reckoned about 10% need the kinds of levels of provision for years that wrecks any chances of passing on the family home (e.g. dementia care for years with bills of £100K+).

    So, there's a lottery over the inheritance. A small % of the families who might have inherited property get hit and the others don't.*

    The lottery is even more iniquitous since some can prove their care needs fall under NHS duty of care and they are fully funded (at least for the care bit, not the B&B bit iirc). Dementia doesn't. But other illnesses do.


    * and obviously the only families where this is an issue are property owning middle classes with assets. Large numbers don't have this issue.
    What I was saying earlier - but muich better put. And with crucial detail.
    Thanks.
  • Going back a generation or so, my gran had what was probably an average retirement lifestyle at the time, and it was nothing like the average now, it would probably be equivalent to be the bottom 10-15% retirements today. There was nothing fancy to it, and it was significantly worse off than your average worker at the time.

    Now it is the reverse where the average retiree is better off than the average worker. A lot of the policies like double and then triple lock, free travel and different taxation rules on NI did make sense twenty/thirty years ago. They are simply both unfair and unnecessary today though.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    dixiedean said:

    The discussion seems to be missing the most cynical bit.
    This rise won't "solve social care". It won't even cover the backlog in the NHS.
    It is a tax rise to help fund ongoing spending. That is all.

    Yep. It’s depressing.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,577
    ping said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    There was an interview at one of the F1 races back before covid, with a man and his wife who were following the whole season, attending every race in the Paddock Club hospitality. By the end of the season everyone in the paddock knew about them! Sounds like a nice idea for someone who has more money than they need in retirement, and a different pace of life to a round-the-world cruise.
    I can’t understand what people get out of attending live f1 racing. Surely it’s a sport that only works on TV?
    Hell no, it’s great to watch in person, TV doesn’t come close to showing the speed of the cars, and more importantly how quickly they change speed and direction. The utterly visceral noise isn’t there any more, which used to be like an aural earthquake, but it’s very impressive to see the cars live. I’ve been to a quarter of the venues, am aiming to go to all of them at some point.
  • Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero
  • malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think the planned NI rise will cost those on £40k £300 a year, and those on £50k £500 a year more. It will hit more than 25 million workers. And it may also do this just as inflation bites, tax thresholds are frozen, and commuting costs start to kick back in again.

    We are facing a real-terms squeeze in incomes and the standard of living.

    It will not be popular, despite what polling may currently suggest, and so now's the time to lay Dishy Rishi.

    It's completely regressive, leaves older workers off scot free; hits strivers hard.
    And it won't actually solve anything.
    Every diversity post in the NHS needs scrapping 1st
    I'd have more respect for a party that taxed asset wealth, which is hideously undertaxed, rather than progressively squeezing the incomes of those in their 20s and 30s who are trying to get on.

    I mean, does the government realise that if you're a graduate in your 20s these days you effectively pay 41% tax (NI+IT+SL) *plus* at least 5% of your pension, and that this will last for virtually all of your working life? That house prices are high and that getting a deposit together is really hard work? That childcare costs are extortionate? That transport and energy costs keep inflating ahead of RPI each year too?

    No, because the oldies get all the baubles and are entirely shameless about it.

    Young people voted Conservative in 1979 because they thought it would help them get on. I see virtually no reason for them to vote Conservative today and, lo and behold, they don't.
    Was not long ago you were whining about not wanting to get into the dead zone and so wanted to stay on just over 100K a year, how greedy can you get whinging about a few hundred on NI.
    How greedy can you get whinging that you might have to pay for your own care when you have hundreds of thousands in wealth?

    So you want people with possibly no wealth, who have to pay rent and don't have their own home, to pay hundreds in extra tax each instead?
    If they have no wealth they will be getting their rent paid for them in most cases, and if they are paying rent then it means they have money. You are not really up on these matters are you , plenty of renters are far richer than someone who owns a house but is very very poor.
    If you actually think that everyone or even most people renting have their rents paid for them then you are completely out of touch!
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    I agree the wealthy and retired should be stumping up more in general, but I'm not sure how you get the £1000 a year for extra NI from? I would have thought it was more like £500 for someone on the £40-£50K mark. Or have i missed something?
    Two working people per family and the other 1% on employers NI will come out of pay budgets. I expect to be having this conversation on Monday because our pay reviews will commence in December.
  • Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174
    dixiedean said:

    The discussion seems to be missing the most cynical bit.
    This rise won't "solve social care". It won't even cover the backlog in the NHS.
    It is a tax rise to help fund ongoing spending. That is all.

    Yep. The big story will be the cap on how much you have to pay. The tax payer is very much on the line from then on so it’s another thing that government is committing funding.

    Of course, I’m not sure the government will benefit much from the cap as most people don’t know that old people pay for care homes if they have the money (house).

    I guess the government thinks it will benefit because they’ll be able to say that they’ve done something, and given the cries from Labour and the media, I can see their logic.
  • Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    Fuck unity.

    If that's his proposals I wish I'd never tipped him to be next PM. Lay Sunak.
  • Root is just absolutely the worst at using the review system.
  • Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
  • Taz said:



    You are just ridiculous and question my integrity

    I voted remain and am happy to accept the vote of the referendum

    I watched GB news for 48 hours and have not watched it since and could not care less about Andrew Neil

    Furthermore , my membership of the conservative party has now lapsed and I am a free political spirit

    Welcome out of the dark! :) Joking, but will be interesting to see where your thoughts take you. Could you imagine voting Labour again, and what would Starmer need to do/say to peersuade you?
    I voted for Blair twice but at present Starmer has simply had nothing to say and I have no idea what todays labour party stands for and I suspect that is a widely held view
    Agreed Starmer has no clear vision and there are significant doubts about the LAB 'team' as a whole. Sort the policies, clear out the rubbish and then LAB may be considered suitable for reasonable centre moderates like me! 👍
    Labour seems to have very little talent at the top table. People talk, rightly, about the calibre of the cabinet but labour, the government in waiting, has very little to offer too.

    If starmer stood down who would seriously do a better job or engage with the country ?

    Labour just seems to be a disparate group of single issue obsessives under one overarching umbrella. No cohesive vision.
    One of the many baneful legacies of Corbynism was the driving out (e.g. Luciana Berger - compounded by its anti-Semitic manner) and marginalisation (e.g. Stella Creasy) of the genuine talent they had. I voted Labour in every GE from 1983 to 2017. I find it increasingly likely that I will never vote Labour again. But that’s probably OK as far as Momentum goes, because they would regard me as the wrong kind of voter.
  • Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    You ironically just described how broken the current system is.

    The cap is now anywhere between 3.5 to 5x earnings and yet house prices have increased 100s of %.

    You know nothing and it shows.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789

    Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    So in your head people under 40 do what? Don't work hard? Get fucked.
  • s
    MaxPB said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    So in your head people under 40 do what? Don't work hard? Get fucked.
    What a prick that guy is
  • England are going to lose this test match.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    Fuck unity.

    If that's his proposals I wish I'd never tipped him to be next PM. Lay Sunak.
    My only surprise is that you, and others, are surprised.
    The government won on spending more money more responsibly than Corbyn. That was what was sold. It has to be paid for.
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    I agree the wealthy and retired should be stumping up more in general, but I'm not sure how you get the £1000 a year for extra NI from? I would have thought it was more like £500 for someone on the £40-£50K mark. Or have i missed something?
    Two working people per family and the other 1% on employers NI will come out of pay budgets. I expect to be having this conversation on Monday because our pay reviews will commence in December.
    Ah, thanks. Two working people per family. I had missed that.
  • Taz said:



    You are just ridiculous and question my integrity

    I voted remain and am happy to accept the vote of the referendum

    I watched GB news for 48 hours and have not watched it since and could not care less about Andrew Neil

    Furthermore , my membership of the conservative party has now lapsed and I am a free political spirit

    Welcome out of the dark! :) Joking, but will be interesting to see where your thoughts take you. Could you imagine voting Labour again, and what would Starmer need to do/say to peersuade you?
    I voted for Blair twice but at present Starmer has simply had nothing to say and I have no idea what todays labour party stands for and I suspect that is a widely held view
    Agreed Starmer has no clear vision and there are significant doubts about the LAB 'team' as a whole. Sort the policies, clear out the rubbish and then LAB may be considered suitable for reasonable centre moderates like me! 👍
    Labour seems to have very little talent at the top table. People talk, rightly, about the calibre of the cabinet but labour, the government in waiting, has very little to offer too.

    If starmer stood down who would seriously do a better job or engage with the country ?

    Labour just seems to be a disparate group of single issue obsessives under one overarching umbrella. No cohesive vision.
    One of the many baneful legacies of Corbynism was the driving out (e.g. Luciana Berger - compounded by its anti-Semitic manner) and marginalisation (e.g. Stella Creasy) of the genuine talent they had. I voted Labour in every GE from 1983 to 2017. I find it increasingly likely that I will never vote Labour again. But that’s probably OK as far as Momentum goes, because they would regard me as the wrong kind of voter.
    Actually I think between 1997 and now there wasn't a big attempt to get good, new MPs into the party to be honest. Corbynism just accelerated the decline.

    There are good MPs in there, Dan Jarvis, Ed M (rubbish leader but he's on the front bench IMHO), Rachel Reeves, Yvette Cooper. But I agree they are few and far between
  • Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    What makes you think your generation worked harder than all generations before and after? Special ones indeed!

    If they didn't then your assets are not just down to hard work, but also down to luck and govt policies.
  • Pulpstar said:

    I think the planned NI rise will cost those on £40k £300 a year, and those on £50k £500 a year more. It will hit more than 25 million workers. And it may also do this just as inflation bites, tax thresholds are frozen, and commuting costs start to kick back in again.

    We are facing a real-terms squeeze in incomes and the standard of living.

    It will not be popular, despite what polling may currently suggest, and so now's the time to lay Dishy Rishi.

    It's completely regressive, leaves older workers off scot free; hits strivers hard.
    And it won't actually solve anything.
    Every diversity post in the NHS needs scrapping 1st
    I'd have more respect for a party that taxed asset wealth, which is hideously undertaxed, rather than progressively squeezing the incomes of those in their 20s and 30s who are trying to get on.

    I mean, does the government realise that if you're a graduate in your 20s these days you effectively pay 41% tax (NI+IT+SL) *plus* at least 5% of your pension, and that this will last for virtually all of your working life? That house prices are high and that getting a deposit together is really hard work? That childcare costs are extortionate? That transport and energy costs keep inflating ahead of RPI each year too?

    No, because the oldies get all the baubles and are entirely shameless about it.

    Young people voted Conservative in 1979 because they thought it would help them get on. I see virtually no reason for them to vote Conservative today and, lo and behold, they don't.
    Agreed. A point that only really struck me after I passed 65 is that if you have a good workplace pension you can claim it and carry on working, and then you'll be better off than you've ever been. Not paying the same level of tax/NI as anyone else is an embarassing bonus.

    That said, for a few years I've been caught in the £100-125K trap with disappearing personal allowance (which creates a 60% tax band that goes away above £125K) which was absent-mindedly created by Gordon and I equally absent-mindedly voted for. (Karma, innit.) It would be sensible to create a 50% tax band from £100K instead of withdrawing the PA - there's no logical reason why the effective tax bounces in that particular bracket. But there's virtually nobody in that tax bracket who is really suffering so it never gets fixed.
    Glad you acknowledge that.

    That tax trap is exactly where I'm at.
  • dixiedean said:

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    Fuck unity.

    If that's his proposals I wish I'd never tipped him to be next PM. Lay Sunak.
    My only surprise is that you, and others, are surprised.
    The government won on spending more money more responsibly than Corbyn. That was what was sold. It has to be paid for.
    The Conservative Party died, this is the no ideology UKIP-lite party now. And that's why there policies are all over the shop.

    Can we just go back to social democracy please
  • Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    Final salary literally isn't your own efforts, it's the efforts of others. That's why it's so completely different to DC pensions.

    Whereas my generation lumbered with debt, paying the bills for your pensions that you didn't save for, and now expected to pay for your care you didn't save for, are having to actually base our own lives on our own efforts. Plus your lives on our efforts.

    If paying for your care is done by your own efforts, then why are we being taxed to provide it. Use what you saved up from your own efforts supposedly.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,027
    edited September 2021
    tlg86 said:

    dixiedean said:

    The discussion seems to be missing the most cynical bit.
    This rise won't "solve social care". It won't even cover the backlog in the NHS.
    It is a tax rise to help fund ongoing spending. That is all.

    Yep. The big story will be the cap on how much you have to pay. The tax payer is very much on the line from then on so it’s another thing that government is committing funding.

    Of course, I’m not sure the government will benefit much from the cap as most people don’t know that old people pay for care homes if they have the money (house).

    I guess the government thinks it will benefit because they’ll be able to say that they’ve done something, and given the cries from Labour and the media, I can see their logic.
    It will be interesting to hear the detail especially whether retired people in work will now be subject to NI and just how much the pension increase will be in April 22

    The poll yesteday did indicate a NI rise was popular across all age groups and BBC's report yesterday from the public indicated general approval

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1433730987981221899?s=19



  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,128
    edited September 2021

    Taz said:

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think the planned NI rise will cost those on £40k £300 a year, and those on £50k £500 a year more. It will hit more than 25 million workers. And it may also do this just as inflation bites, tax thresholds are frozen, and commuting costs start to kick back in again.

    We are facing a real-terms squeeze in incomes and the standard of living.

    It will not be popular, despite what polling may currently suggest, and so now's the time to lay Dishy Rishi.

    It's completely regressive, leaves older workers off scot free; hits strivers hard.
    And it won't actually solve anything.
    Every diversity post in the NHS needs scrapping 1st
    I'd have more respect for a party that taxed asset wealth, which is hideously undertaxed, rather than progressively squeezing the incomes of those in their 20s and 30s who are trying to get on.

    I mean, does the government realise that if you're a graduate in your 20s these days you effectively pay 41% tax (NI+IT+SL) *plus* at least 5% of your pension, and that this will last for virtually all of your working life? That house prices are high and that getting a deposit together is really hard work? That childcare costs are extortionate? That transport and energy costs keep inflating ahead of RPI each year too?

    No, because the oldies get all the baubles and are entirely shameless about it.

    Young people voted Conservative in 1979 because they thought it would help them get on. I see virtually no reason for them to vote Conservative today and, lo and behold, they don't.
    Those young people that voted Conservative in 1979 did do well. They are the retired of today, and still voting Conservative.

    The population pyramid of the UK is such that the projected growth in the population is entirely of the elderly over the next 15 years. The working age population is stable, though projections were based on pre Brexit levels of immigration, so may actually be declining. That is the reality that politicians have to grapple with. Work longer, pay more, get less is the future for the current workers.

    Similarly we are in a phase of economic development based on a service economy where productivity increases are minimal. Those workers cannot simultaneously be working in social care, picking vegetables, driving lorries and serving in hospitality. Sure, some will get pay rises, but some industries will just become uncompetitive and disappear. Demographics are going to be one of the big challenges for all advanced economies, but also for middle income countries like China and Brazil etc.
    Perhaps our restaurants will become like the Swiss ones berated earlier, extortionately overpriced and decidedly average due to high labour costs. A shame as they have massively improved over recent decades.
    I think it was Jay Rayner in the Observer who was recently bemoaning the practice of some restaurants to absurdly mark up the price of wine.
    Puddings now seem to be priced at 8 to 9 quid where we go. About 25% higher than previously.
    Going out shortly to lunch at what is claimed to be the best local restaurant. Not too long re-opened.
    Must admit we don't often go for the pudding; starter and main more to our taste.
    Get yourself to Sola Soho.

    Fixed Price: £89 .
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,354
    Pujara playing some uncharacteristically aggressive shots here.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited September 2021
    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Because it's where all the jobs are.

    Software Engineering is by far and away really only good in London, as an example.

    Long term absolutely, we need to get people living elsewhere. But the Tory strategy is level down London, not level up the country
  • Talking of housing madness...

    This Town Was Paradise, Then Everyone Started Working From Home
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhElNHGN9KY
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,577

    England are going to lose this test match.

    Yep, India have managed to slow the game right down, and holding onto their wickets is going to push the match long with England batting on the fifth day pitch.

    Some good news for @MaxPB today anyway, he’s got tickets for tomorrow!
  • Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    What's tough about furlough ending ?
  • Furlough ending will lead to increased unemployment, no?
  • dixiedean said:

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    Fuck unity.

    If that's his proposals I wish I'd never tipped him to be next PM. Lay Sunak.
    My only surprise is that you, and others, are surprised.
    The government won on spending more money more responsibly than Corbyn. That was what was sold. It has to be paid for.
    I don't remember all this extra expenditure being in the manifesto.

    I do remember no new taxes being in the manifesto.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789

    Furlough ending will lead to increased unemployment, no?

    Unlikely, the market is very hot.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399

    tlg86 said:

    dixiedean said:

    The discussion seems to be missing the most cynical bit.
    This rise won't "solve social care". It won't even cover the backlog in the NHS.
    It is a tax rise to help fund ongoing spending. That is all.

    Yep. The big story will be the cap on how much you have to pay. The tax payer is very much on the line from then on so it’s another thing that government is committing funding.

    Of course, I’m not sure the government will benefit much from the cap as most people don’t know that old people pay for care homes if they have the money (house).

    I guess the government thinks it will benefit because they’ll be able to say that they’ve done something, and given the cries from Labour and the media, I can see their logic.
    It will be interesting to hear the detail especially whether retired people in work will now be subject to NI and just how much the pension increase will be in April 22

    The poll yesteday did indicate a NI rise was popular across all age groups and BBC's report yesterday from the public indicated general approval

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1433730987981221899?s=19



    That's because folk have been told it will "solve social care". Folk think OK. That's reasonably cheap.
    Except it won't. Not even close.
  • ping said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    There was an interview at one of the F1 races back before covid, with a man and his wife who were following the whole season, attending every race in the Paddock Club hospitality. By the end of the season everyone in the paddock knew about them! Sounds like a nice idea for someone who has more money than they need in retirement, and a different pace of life to a round-the-world cruise.
    I can’t understand what people get out of attending live f1 racing. Surely it’s a sport that only works on TV?
    Sound, smell I imagine, though I've never attended (or wanted to) an F1 event. Very much not my cup of tea.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,978
    edited September 2021

    Furlough ending will lead to increased unemployment, no?

    No, it should have actually ended earlier, as there have been huge demand for workers, not just the stories for drivers, but with all reopening of hospitality and stay-cationing, there hasn't been enough people in the market to fill all the vacancies.

    Instead we have been paying people whose current job doesn't actually exist anymore to sit flipping NFTs for the past 3 months.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Because it's where all the jobs are.

    Software Engineering is by far and away really only good in London, as an example.

    Long term absolutely, we need to get people living elsewhere. But the Tory strategy is level down London, not level up the country
    BiB - that’s obviously not true.
  • tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Because it's where all the jobs are.

    Software Engineering is by far and away really only good in London, as an example.

    Long term absolutely, we need to get people living elsewhere. But the Tory strategy is level down London, not level up the country
    BiB - that’s obviously not true.
    That's where a lot of the jobs are, then.

    I had a look as I was changing jobs just recently and the offerings outside of London are just horrendous compared to what you get here.

    And all my friends are here, I'm drawn in - so I guess I do agree with your general point but I think people should be able to live wherever they want to be honest
  • If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    But don't you support FoM with the downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on housing costs it brings ?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,577

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    The first and the last are going to draw the ire of the 1922. They didn’t become Tory MPs to vote for tax rises and ‘green crap’.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814
    dixiedean said:

    tlg86 said:

    dixiedean said:

    The discussion seems to be missing the most cynical bit.
    This rise won't "solve social care". It won't even cover the backlog in the NHS.
    It is a tax rise to help fund ongoing spending. That is all.

    Yep. The big story will be the cap on how much you have to pay. The tax payer is very much on the line from then on so it’s another thing that government is committing funding.

    Of course, I’m not sure the government will benefit much from the cap as most people don’t know that old people pay for care homes if they have the money (house).

    I guess the government thinks it will benefit because they’ll be able to say that they’ve done something, and given the cries from Labour and the media, I can see their logic.
    It will be interesting to hear the detail especially whether retired people in work will now be subject to NI and just how much the pension increase will be in April 22

    The poll yesteday did indicate a NI rise was popular across all age groups and BBC's report yesterday from the public indicated general approval

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1433730987981221899?s=19



    That's because folk have been told it will "solve social care". Folk think OK. That's reasonably cheap.
    Except it won't. Not even close.
    Also the discussion today has made me realise quite a few people generally (I mean not on PB) didn't know that the old don't pay NI whether on their wages or income more generally. So polling is likely to reflect that.

    Though NI was originally and still is seen as a pension contribution and as any fule kno one stops paying pension contributions when the pension comes into payment. Which is probably a good reason for public incomprehension, I suppose.
  • Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    Not being able to borrow so much also meant that your hard work wasn't competing against someone else's profligacy. The housing market has not worked like that for about 20 years.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399
    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Well. 21% of graduate jobs are in London. Not everyone who ends up there wants to be there.
    Maybe we should address the lack of high paying jobs, and, crucially, career progression outside the Capital?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,798

    Furlough ending will lead to increased unemployment, no?

    Quite hard to say. It may be that there are some businesses who have just be deferring the redundancy payments by using furlough but there will also be quite a lot of businesses who have not bothered replacing staff that have left and will now need to hire again once they are up and running. Certainly in Edinburgh I have seen some businesses that have folded but a lot of others urgently seeking staff. The net effect is quite hard to predict.
  • MaxPB said:

    Furlough ending will lead to increased unemployment, no?

    Unlikely, the market is very hot.
    With massive tax rises it seems Sunak is determined to put a halt to that.

    Low taxes, economic growth and grow our way out of the mess is the solution. Not high taxes strangling growth and just shovelling more money so a few seventy year olds can enjoy inheritances when their ninety year old parents die.
  • If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    But don't you support FoM with the downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on housing costs it brings ?
    Not anymore, we've left the EU so we may as well have a controlled immigration system now, I've lost that argument
  • dixiedean said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Well. 21% of graduate jobs are in London. Not everyone who ends up there wants to be there.
    Maybe we should address the lack of high paying jobs, and, crucially, career progression outside the Capital?
    Free training for lorry drivers would be a start!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399

    dixiedean said:

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    Fuck unity.

    If that's his proposals I wish I'd never tipped him to be next PM. Lay Sunak.
    My only surprise is that you, and others, are surprised.
    The government won on spending more money more responsibly than Corbyn. That was what was sold. It has to be paid for.
    I don't remember all this extra expenditure being in the manifesto.

    I do remember no new taxes being in the manifesto.
    Did you listen to any of the PM's campaign? Did you read between the lines the implications of "levelling up"? An end to austerity?
    The voters did. They didn't read the manifesto.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814

    dixiedean said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Well. 21% of graduate jobs are in London. Not everyone who ends up there wants to be there.
    Maybe we should address the lack of high paying jobs, and, crucially, career progression outside the Capital?
    Free training for lorry drivers would be a start!
    And decent loos! Seriously, though, another face of the crisis in local gmt funding is the closure of many public conveniences. Not helped by covid, either. Not good for anyone.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,798

    Pleased to say I did get a new job BTW

    Congratulations.
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    Fuck unity.

    If that's his proposals I wish I'd never tipped him to be next PM. Lay Sunak.
    My only surprise is that you, and others, are surprised.
    The government won on spending more money more responsibly than Corbyn. That was what was sold. It has to be paid for.
    I don't remember all this extra expenditure being in the manifesto.

    I do remember no new taxes being in the manifesto.
    Did you listen to any of the PM's campaign? Did you read between the lines the implications of "levelling up"? An end to austerity?
    The voters did. They didn't read the manifesto.
    Levelling up and an end to austerity is affordable without tax rises.

    Since Browns structural deficit was gone, it's now possible to grow our way forwards and use the proceeds of growth to go towards that. No need for tax rises.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789

    Pleased to say I did get a new job BTW

    Congratulations! Being under 40 I assume you won't actually work hard though. I mean that's what under 40s do apparently.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,577

    dixiedean said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Well. 21% of graduate jobs are in London. Not everyone who ends up there wants to be there.
    Maybe we should address the lack of high paying jobs, and, crucially, career progression outside the Capital?
    Free training for lorry drivers would be a start!
    There’s already government-backed loans and tax breaks for training, the haulage firms should take maximum advantage.
    It’s possible to structure driver contracts to contain a ‘training bond’, committing the driver to work for a couple of years or pay back a pro-rata of the training costs - it’s routine in the airlines, where training a pilot for a new type of plane costs £25k, and for promotion to Captain another £50k or so.
  • MaxPB said:

    Furlough ending will lead to increased unemployment, no?

    Unlikely, the market is very hot.
    With massive tax rises it seems Sunak is determined to put a halt to that.

    Low taxes, economic growth and grow our way out of the mess is the solution. Not high taxes strangling growth and just shovelling more money so a few seventy year olds can enjoy inheritances when their ninety year old parents die.
    60 people a year inheriting £20bn between them is what is forecast for the next decade. That is about what we spend on social care. We need a wealth tax, but electorally it should be ultra elite, i.e. £20m+ rather than on normal rich people.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    ping said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Can somebody explain to me why young people should pay for the care of the elderly, can somebody explain that coherently

    They can't mate, all they have is resorting to calling young people greedy or unpleasant for asking the old to pay their own way. The level of entitlement the generation above have is ridiculous.

    They bought all the property, pulled up the ladder, leeched off young people for rent and now are leeching off us again to pay for their care.

    Not a single person who supports this NI rise has been able to answer why a retired person with £80k in gross income will get £60.5k net (and receive ~£9k in benefits) while a working person on the same gross income will get £55k net and no benefits.

    The whole system is stacked against us and I do fear that this will become the start of a brain drain from the UK as people decide they've had enough of being milked by the old who neglected to save for their old age.
    I really do think you are way out by suggesting a retired person receives an £80k gross income nett £60.5, as these are figures I just cannot accept as anything other than for an exceptional few, and the vast majority of pensioners will struggle to see £20k pa, even much less

    I would also take to task your attitude to the elderly many of whom suffer health issues consistent with ageing as quite unpleasant and to be honest rather surprising
    My dad is literally in that position having reached the age of retirement last November. He laid out to me and my sister his plan to spend as much money as possible before he dies rather than accumulate it and then the both of us having to deal with IHT. Fair enough, neither of us need the inheritance, but when we went through the numbers it was quite ridiculous. He will get net income of over £60k per year from his various pensions, equity investments and state pension. It's literally more than he can spend in retirement, he's got no mortgage, no dependent kids, my mum works for a school and will get a pretty fat local government defined benefit pension when she retires early next year.

    In what world does it make sense that he pays less tax than a 40 year old on the same salary as his gross income?

    16% of retired people are higher rate tax payers, 3% are additional rate tax payers. These are people who not only have significant wealth, they also have significant income and little to no outgoings given they are retired.

    All I'm asking for is, before working age people are hit for yet another tax, the wealthy of your own generation are asked to stump up first. We could easily raise £20bn per year from that cohort with state pension withdrawal higher income tax rates on pensions and "unearned income" and merging NI with income tax. Instead working families are being hit for £1000 per year at a time when finances are already stretched and inflation is shooting up.
    There was an interview at one of the F1 races back before covid, with a man and his wife who were following the whole season, attending every race in the Paddock Club hospitality. By the end of the season everyone in the paddock knew about them! Sounds like a nice idea for someone who has more money than they need in retirement, and a different pace of life to a round-the-world cruise.
    I can’t understand what people get out of attending live f1 racing. Surely it’s a sport that only works on TV?
    Very few motorsports work better in real life than on TV. I can't really judge F1 because I can't stand it and wouldn't watch it on Ceefax.

    Some MotoGP venues (Losail, Assen) are better in person and some aren't (Donington or anywhere in Spain or Italy).

    The VQdM, Bol d'Or or a NASCAR night race (Chicagoland Speedway gets the least redneck crowd) are all great live experiences but you wouldn't want to go more than once.
  • Sandpit said:

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    The first and the last are going to draw the ire of the 1922. They didn’t become Tory MPs to vote for tax rises and ‘green crap’.
    There's a shit sandwich, and then there's that - it's like one of those triple nightmares that Tesco sell.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399
    Sandpit said:

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    The first and the last are going to draw the ire of the 1922. They didn’t become Tory MPs to vote for tax rises and ‘green crap’.
    Herein lies the problem. The vast majority of Tory MP's didn't become Tory MP's to...well, implement the kinds of policies the 2019 election was won on.
  • dixiedean said:

    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    1h
    Sunak guest of honour at 1922 reception on Monday - he will tell them tough times are ahead and appeal for unity:

    * NI rise to fund health/ social care

    * Triple lock suspended

    * £20 a week UC uplift ends

    * Furlough ends

    * Spending review & mini Budget

    * COP26/ net zero

    Fuck unity.

    If that's his proposals I wish I'd never tipped him to be next PM. Lay Sunak.
    My only surprise is that you, and others, are surprised.
    The government won on spending more money more responsibly than Corbyn. That was what was sold. It has to be paid for.
    The Conservative Party died, this is the no ideology UKIP-lite party now. And that's why there policies are all over the shop.

    Can we just go back to social democracy please
    Thats what the Conservative Party is now delivering, plus Brexit and a bit of anti-Wokeness.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,507

    If you're elderly and have owned a house a long time you can just sit around and wait, it's legitimately pathetic that you can accuse young people of feeling entitled.

    I'm only in the position to buy because I happened to very fortunately inherit money from a relative (as did my brother). If we were not in that position we wouldn't be able to buy a house despite our combined salaries being well over £100K a year, now you tell me if that is right

    So if that inheritance had been eaten up by social care costs you would have barely inherited anything?
  • MaxPB said:

    Pleased to say I did get a new job BTW

    Congratulations! Being under 40 I assume you won't actually work hard though. I mean that's what under 40s do apparently.
    Something else worth mentioning, is that jobs for life don't really exist anymore. I worked with a few older folks who had been in the same job 20+ years, good pay rises, great pension etc. I've moved jobs three times and I'm not very old.

    Now of course that comes with its own benefits, much bigger pay rises etc but it's a lot more stressful and difficult than it was even a few years ago. And this so I can afford to do things most people who are older could do quite easily.

    And I am told I don't work hard, I am proud of what I do.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399

    dixiedean said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Well. 21% of graduate jobs are in London. Not everyone who ends up there wants to be there.
    Maybe we should address the lack of high paying jobs, and, crucially, career progression outside the Capital?
    Free training for lorry drivers would be a start!
    Free. Or heavily subsidised training for a range of skills indeed. The butchering of the FE sector was one of the coalition's biggest errors.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174
    dixiedean said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Well. 21% of graduate jobs are in London. Not everyone who ends up there wants to be there.
    Maybe we should address the lack of high paying jobs, and, crucially, career progression outside the Capital?
    Alternatively, don’t encourage so many kids to go to university.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited September 2021
    Based on the level of anger on this site from working age Tory voters, if Boris and Sunak proceed with this insanity then a Labour poll lead should be absolutely nailed on soon.

    We're ahead of the curve and understand that only certain people are screwed by NI which others don't necessarily realise.

    Once this is actually announced expect all hell to be brought down upon it. Like the dementia tax.

    Lay the Tories. They're determined to lose my vote and the vote of anyone else who works for a living.
  • Based on the level of anger on this site from working age Tory voters, if Boris and Sunak proceed with this insanity then a Labour poll lead should be absolutely nailed on soon.

    We're ahead of the curve and understand that only certain people are screwed by NI which others don't necessarily realise.

    Once this is actually announced expect all hell to be brought down upon it. Like the dementia tax.

    Lay the Tories. They're determined to lose my vote and the vote of anyone else who works for a living.

    Thanks Philip, I will increase my Labour poll lead by end of 2021 bet on this - IMHO - good point.
  • If you're elderly and have owned a house a long time you can just sit around and wait, it's legitimately pathetic that you can accuse young people of feeling entitled.

    I'm only in the position to buy because I happened to very fortunately inherit money from a relative (as did my brother). If we were not in that position we wouldn't be able to buy a house despite our combined salaries being well over £100K a year, now you tell me if that is right

    So if that inheritance had been eaten up by social care costs you would have barely inherited anything?
    Absolutely - and how does that make any difference? It just confirms the system is broken.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Because it's where all the jobs are.

    Software Engineering is by far and away really only good in London, as an example.

    Long term absolutely, we need to get people living elsewhere. But the Tory strategy is level down London, not level up the country
    BiB - that’s obviously not true.
    That's where a lot of the jobs are, then.

    I had a look as I was changing jobs just recently and the offerings outside of London are just horrendous compared to what you get here.

    And all my friends are here, I'm drawn in - so I guess I do agree with your general point but I think people should be able to live wherever they want to be honest
    I’d like to have lived in N5 so that I could walk to the Arsenal. Just because I’d like to have done that ten years ago doesn’t give me the right to be able to do so.
  • Incidentally, just to add to ongoing discussions around SPOTY, the big sporting event this evening will be Emma Raducanu’s match in the US Open - and if she progresses much further I could see her picking up the SPOTY prize, though I think winning an actual slam will have to wait for the years to come, if at all.

    In short, she may have great potential as a tennis player, but in terms of her PR operation she’s already arrived.
  • tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Because it's where all the jobs are.

    Software Engineering is by far and away really only good in London, as an example.

    Long term absolutely, we need to get people living elsewhere. But the Tory strategy is level down London, not level up the country
    BiB - that’s obviously not true.
    That's where a lot of the jobs are, then.

    I had a look as I was changing jobs just recently and the offerings outside of London are just horrendous compared to what you get here.

    And all my friends are here, I'm drawn in - so I guess I do agree with your general point but I think people should be able to live wherever they want to be honest
    I’d like to have lived in N5 so that I could walk to the Arsenal. Just because I’d like to have done that ten years ago doesn’t give me the right to be able to do so.
    There isn't much of London you could live in now without some form of inheritance for a deposit.

    Again I can see what you're saying but I stand by what I said, the system is broken
  • Be fascinating if this policy even goes ahead, why do I get the sense this is yet again Government by focus group
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814

    MaxPB said:

    Pleased to say I did get a new job BTW

    Congratulations! Being under 40 I assume you won't actually work hard though. I mean that's what under 40s do apparently.
    Something else worth mentioning, is that jobs for life don't really exist anymore. I worked with a few older folks who had been in the same job 20+ years, good pay rises, great pension etc. I've moved jobs three times and I'm not very old.

    Now of course that comes with its own benefits, much bigger pay rises etc but it's a lot more stressful and difficult than it was even a few years ago. And this so I can afford to do things most people who are older could do quite easily.

    And I am told I don't work hard, I am proud of what I do.
    A point of historical interest is that in trhe old days moving between pension schemes was really deleterious in the private sector (though one could move between public sector schemes, etc., fairly easily without detriment). Which discouraged moves of jobs. I don't think this was liberalised till, what, 1990-2000?
  • Furlough ending will lead to increased unemployment, no?

    No, it should have actually ended earlier, as there have been huge demand for workers, not just the stories for drivers, but with all reopening of hospitality and stay-cationing, there hasn't been enough people in the market to fill all the vacancies.

    Instead we have been paying people whose current job doesn't actually exist anymore to sit flipping NFTs for the past 3 months.
    I wonder how many of the people who have been paid to do nothing for 18 months have taken the opportunity to improve their skillset.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    On topic, thanks Pip and I think the odds are Newson will come through. However, not sure if you saw this:

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/31/democrats-latino-turnout-california-recall-508012

    There is a more general point here for Democrats, as seen in the likes of south Texas, as to a potential significant shift in the Hispanic vote.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,399

    Incidentally, just to add to ongoing discussions around SPOTY, the big sporting event this evening will be Emma Raducanu’s match in the US Open - and if she progresses much further I could see her picking up the SPOTY prize, though I think winning an actual slam will have to wait for the years to come, if at all.

    In short, she may have great potential as a tennis player, but in terms of her PR operation she’s already arrived.

    She'll win SPOTY on the basis of a couple of last 16's? In an Olympic year with a football team in a final? And Joe Root? And Lewis Hamilton?
    It'll be a travesty if she's on the shortlist. Winning the Junior prize maybe.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789

    MaxPB said:

    Pleased to say I did get a new job BTW

    Congratulations! Being under 40 I assume you won't actually work hard though. I mean that's what under 40s do apparently.
    Something else worth mentioning, is that jobs for life don't really exist anymore. I worked with a few older folks who had been in the same job 20+ years, good pay rises, great pension etc. I've moved jobs three times and I'm not very old.

    Now of course that comes with its own benefits, much bigger pay rises etc but it's a lot more stressful and difficult than it was even a few years ago. And this so I can afford to do things most people who are older could do quite easily.

    And I am told I don't work hard, I am proud of what I do.
    Yeah I completely agree, the last two times I've moved jobs both came with payrises that weren't available for people who stuck with the company. I can't imagine staying in a job for more than five years. Most of my friends would say more than three years.
  • MaxPB said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    So in your head people under 40 do what? Don't work hard? Get fucked.
    Thanks for your valuable and thoughtful contribution 👍
  • dixiedean said:

    Incidentally, just to add to ongoing discussions around SPOTY, the big sporting event this evening will be Emma Raducanu’s match in the US Open - and if she progresses much further I could see her picking up the SPOTY prize, though I think winning an actual slam will have to wait for the years to come, if at all.

    In short, she may have great potential as a tennis player, but in terms of her PR operation she’s already arrived.

    She'll win SPOTY on the basis of a couple of last 16's? In an Olympic year with a football team in a final? And Joe Root? And Lewis Hamilton?
    It'll be a travesty if she's on the shortlist. Winning the Junior prize maybe.
    See my point about her PR - it’s a truly awesome operation.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,577

    Incidentally, just to add to ongoing discussions around SPOTY, the big sporting event this evening will be Emma Raducanu’s match in the US Open - and if she progresses much further I could see her picking up the SPOTY prize, though I think winning an actual slam will have to wait for the years to come, if at all.

    In short, she may have great potential as a tennis player, but in terms of her PR operation she’s already arrived.

    She needs to have trophies, it’s not a rising star award.
  • MaxPB said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nah Max is right and this is exactly the point he was making. You make a point about this and you're immediately called unpleasant or rude.

    Yet I see comments about young people being lazy, sitting indoors all day playing PlayStation, not working during the pandemic and it just gets a pass.

    Bunch of hypocrites the lot

    There is, however, one way I do call [edit] some young lazy, irresponsibvle and feckless - and that is in not using their vote.
    A number of 'young' people on here whinging. They need to take responsibility, work a bit harder, try getting on in life and thus becoming more successful.

    Like wot us old people have done.
    How much in tuition fees did you pay when you went to uni? Or were you given a grant instead?

    What multiple of earnings were you expected to pay for housing?

    Did you have a purely contribution based pension scheme?

    I have no objections whatsoever to people getting on in life. But don't pull the ladder up after yourself at every turn!
    Lol Pal didn't go to university. In my time interest rates were so high I couldn't borrow more than 3.5 times earnings. I worked very hard for my lovely final salary pension. And I have a little DC one too.

    All worked hard for. What I have achieved has been built on my own efforts.
    So in your head people under 40 do what? Don't work hard? Get fucked.
    Thanks for your valuable and thoughtful contribution 👍
    I am convinced at this point you are just here to troll, nobody with a brain cell can think what you said
  • Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    Pleased to say I did get a new job BTW

    Congratulations! Being under 40 I assume you won't actually work hard though. I mean that's what under 40s do apparently.
    Something else worth mentioning, is that jobs for life don't really exist anymore. I worked with a few older folks who had been in the same job 20+ years, good pay rises, great pension etc. I've moved jobs three times and I'm not very old.

    Now of course that comes with its own benefits, much bigger pay rises etc but it's a lot more stressful and difficult than it was even a few years ago. And this so I can afford to do things most people who are older could do quite easily.

    And I am told I don't work hard, I am proud of what I do.
    A point of historical interest is that in trhe old days moving between pension schemes was really deleterious in the private sector (though one could move between public sector schemes, etc., fairly easily without detriment). Which discouraged moves of jobs. I don't think this was liberalised till, what, 1990-2000?
    I have to say, moving pensions does not seem to be as easy as it should be.

    I've had a bit of a nightmare trying to move my pension from Aviva
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Because it's where all the jobs are.

    Software Engineering is by far and away really only good in London, as an example.

    Long term absolutely, we need to get people living elsewhere. But the Tory strategy is level down London, not level up the country
    BiB - that’s obviously not true.
    That's where a lot of the jobs are, then.

    I had a look as I was changing jobs just recently and the offerings outside of London are just horrendous compared to what you get here.

    And all my friends are here, I'm drawn in - so I guess I do agree with your general point but I think people should be able to live wherever they want to be honest
    I’d like to have lived in N5 so that I could walk to the Arsenal. Just because I’d like to have done that ten years ago doesn’t give me the right to be able to do so.
    There isn't much of London you could live in now without some form of inheritance for a deposit.

    Again I can see what you're saying but I stand by what I said, the system is broken
    I’m generally in favour of tax second homes and BTLs, but London is ultimately very popular. Who has the right to live where they want? We can’t all live their, so how do you decide who is worthy of living in these places?

    I think this is generally a difference between the left and the right. The right tend to accept that there are trade-offs in life (perhaps too accepting sometimes), whilst the left believe in entitlement.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited September 2021
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    If you are earning £100K a year in London and struggling to buy a house - which you would be with house prices now - then the system is broken. I don't care how anti London you are.

    Thirty years ago you could have worked about 50% less hard and been able to afford a house in a few months, there is no way anyone sane can justify the system as it is

    This is where I have less sympathy with youngsters. Vote with your feet. I work in London (pre-COVID anyway), but only because I can live with my parents. Yet the capital seems to suck in youngsters from the rest of the country. Why? Because youngsters don’t tend to be all that rational. They want to have a fun and London is like a big playground.
    Because it's where all the jobs are.

    Software Engineering is by far and away really only good in London, as an example.

    Long term absolutely, we need to get people living elsewhere. But the Tory strategy is level down London, not level up the country
    BiB - that’s obviously not true.
    That's where a lot of the jobs are, then.

    I had a look as I was changing jobs just recently and the offerings outside of London are just horrendous compared to what you get here.

    And all my friends are here, I'm drawn in - so I guess I do agree with your general point but I think people should be able to live wherever they want to be honest
    I’d like to have lived in N5 so that I could walk to the Arsenal. Just because I’d like to have done that ten years ago doesn’t give me the right to be able to do so.
    There isn't much of London you could live in now without some form of inheritance for a deposit.

    Again I can see what you're saying but I stand by what I said, the system is broken
    I’m generally in favour of tax second homes and BTLs, but London is ultimately very popular. Who has the right to live where they want? We can’t all live their, so how do you decide who is worthy of living in these places?

    I think this is generally a difference between the left and the right. The right tend to accept that there are trade-offs in life (perhaps too accepting sometimes), whilst the left believe in entitlement.
    I don't think it's entitled to say that I should be able to live where people who were in a similar situation to me thirty years ago could. But I can't because house prices have increased hundreds of percent in that time.

    That is the same in a lot of places, London is just the worst
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    Interesting paper (for those interested) on ‘gain of function’ research risks and benefits, and what the term actually means.
    https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.15252/embr.202153739
This discussion has been closed.