Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New ComRes poll for the Daily Mirror shows 82% of voters, acro
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New ComRes poll for the Daily Mirror shows 82% of voters, across all the main parties, would support a 1p rise in National Insurance contributions to fund NHS
New @ComRes poll for the @DailyMirror on the NHS is very interesting. 81% of Conservative voters and 86% of Labour voters in support a 1% increase in National Insurance contributions to fund the NHS. pic.twitter.com/Zr2wIabzjL
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The answer to your question is Yes.
Other people paying is popular. Oneself paying, not so much.
This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.
Wouldn’t a 1% rise in NI raise about £5bn ?
Less than a fifth of what the ‘long term settlement’ requires.
Why not 1% on dividend incomes too !
EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/700494/SS18_Direct_effects_of_illustrative_tax_changes_bulletinFinal.pdf
A 1% rise in employees main rate of NIC would raise £4bn. To get to £11bn you need to raise all rates including the employers rate, thus increasing the effective tax and NIC rate of employment by around 2%.
+1 for that
A mixture of nationalisation and concession is the future of the railways.
Franchising has failed. Bin it.
Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.
to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.
Would you vote for a party that says "2p extra on tax to fund the armed forces to keep Putin at bay" ?
Lacking a big majority, I should think other solutions, short term probably, will always be more popular.
To no one but Casino, it seems.
What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?
Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?
Or I guess that is what I thought. I suppose it may not exactly be clear cut, you could possibly sell many of those conservatives in favour on the idea of increasing NHS spending by freeing up money from other things instead, I could be wrong on that as well though...
Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
Spending will always look more attractive than saving and we've been conditioned to believe happiness comes with the latest gadget, the most faraway place visited, the latest "thing". The notion all that is subsidiary to nursing care in your 80s and 90s isn't one that's going to be easy to embed.
Anyway, from that spreadsheet - adding 1p (1%) to everyone would raise about £10.3bn from c31m taxpayers.
It needs to rise because we are getting older (and therefore sicker) and because we’ve invented new and expensive ways of treating people.
The only question is how to pay for it.
The “one penny on NI” is a bit of a fraud because it sounds like very little, and there is a suggestion it solves the problem.
We need much more than that.
I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
I don't see why those who work should have to pay even more, compared to someone on an identical income, particularly to support a service used mainly by those not in work.
We should look at merging Income tax, NI and any other sorts of personal taxes on unearned income and say that everyone whose earnings are in the same band should pay the same amount of overall tax whether they are employed, self employed or retired. To end the horrible idea of double taxation in inheritance, we should stop taxing the estate and tax the recipient on the same basis as any other income. So if your estate is left to one person they might end up paying quite a large amount of tax but if you have 5 kids and the estate is split amongst them then tax paid is based on their individual circumstances.
As I say personally I would like to see such a system tied to a much smaller state but that is immaterial in this particular argument. What we really need at the moment is transparency and a much simplified tax system.
Tax credit is related to how many children you have not what job you do. Why should employers either ask how many children you have or pay you differently based upon your chosen number of children?
Either way, it won't happen because politicians like getting votes.
This tax should either be applied to income tax or be funded by putting NI back onto retired people's income.
They should have an exit strategy (high speed powerboat racing is a good one, or a heavy morphine habit) but they don't need to think about that until much later.
Tobacco already pays more than its fair share.
Junk food needs taxing heavily.
Booze should be taxed more (and I say this as a beer, wine, whisky and cocktail enthusiast)
Legalise cannabis and tax the shit out of it.
Heavy car taxes for short journeys - particularly where children are being ferried when they could walk. Congestion charges around schools.
The tax threshold is much higher for income taxes meaning many eg part time workers may be caught by NI but not Income Tax. Secondly "a penny in National Insurance" really means 2% of tax (1% for Employees and 1% for Employers" whereas income tax is simply income tax.
I'd have thought the fact NI was a 2% rise not a 1% rise would more than make up for the exemptions that NI has. Which is why Gordon Brown was so keen on it.
Am planning next year's Valentine's Day weekend break.
(Thanks also to everyone that replied)
This also shows how much could be raised if NI was applied equally to self-employed, investment and retirement income. Someone with better maths than me might like to have a stab at the figure.
Or the fact that an employee will only work 16 hours so they can maximise their benefits?
Tax credits are maximised by people who have lots of children and refuse to work more than 16 hours - how does the employer benefit from that?