Good time for skill and nation building

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
16,867
Today had the misfortune of having to call 999 for an ambulance as the MIL was having episodes of dizziness. After the triage, they said they can’t get an ambulance as not enuf of them around and currently used in life threatening situation. They asked if we could get her A&E ourselves for the tests which is impossible given that she is bed ridden.

So 6 hrs later we are on a waiting list for ambulances. They can’t see another one coming free for another 5-6 hrs.

So when Boris came along today to announce the hikes, it brought a wry laugh from me.
I assume you used the 111 service. I would have thought a duty GP could have visited you. The ambulance service you have been offered is crazy, I needed to call an ambulance last week for a family member in London which arrived very quickly. 12 Hours for an Ambulance! I've never heard of anything like it.
 

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
16,867
They would become reliant on the short term solution.
UK firms love to cherry pick talent not develop it. They like to use experienced contractors to develop youngsters they have groomed from university. But the old contractors share little as it would devalue them … UK firms need a culture change. Pay the skilled guys the money, and they may share their knowledge.

What is interesting today is the people pushing back about the NI rate increase, it was coming with furlough costs. However it is not quite fair across the whole pay range and no one has actually addressed the real cost save and that is, not paying out for stuff.
We often hear the cry that other countries pay more tax than us but get better social services, untill they actually have to pay it that is.
 

BiMGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2020
Messages
1,983
Tax rises were always going to be needed. I've no issue paying more. But there are a lot of elderly people needing care who could pay for it with the gains made on property values.
 

ColchesterFC

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
5,401
Tax rises were always going to be needed. I've no issue paying more. But there are a lot of elderly people needing care who could pay for it with the gains made on property values.
That's fine but the current plan as it is doesn't mean that will happen. My dad and stepmum are relatively well off and have recently moved into a £300k bungalow with no mortgage. My dad has early dementia and at some point is likely to need some kind of social care. Under the current plan as long as either he or my stepmum remain living in the property it won't count towards his assets for the purposes of this calculation. So that'll be a 300k+ property that won't count towards his assets.
 

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
16,867
Tax rises were always going to be needed. I've no issue paying more. But there are a lot of elderly people needing care who could pay for it with the gains made on property values.
That's fine but they can't live in their properties and sell them. Also under the new rules they could still have to pay £86K each and the kids would lose their inheritance.
 

pauljames87

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Apr 1, 2016
Messages
11,148
Location
Havering
Tax rises were always going to be needed. I've no issue paying more. But there are a lot of elderly people needing care who could pay for it with the gains made on property values.
This is what's got me..it's a tax on the poorest in society where as retired people on large pensions won't pay a penny

Why not an increase in income tax? Then for big pensioners they would pay but the lower pensions not so much

Seems fairer to me
 

harpo_72

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
5,208
We often hear the cry that other countries pay more tax than us but get better social services, untill they actually have to pay it that is.
Yup that is the case in Sweden but as foreign contract I cannot access their social services so it’s purely a money collecting exercise
 

BiMGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2020
Messages
1,983
This is what's got me..it's a tax on the poorest in society where as retired people on large pensions won't pay a penny

Why not an increase in income tax? Then for big pensioners they would pay but the lower pensions not so much

Seems fairer to me
I'm sure the answer to that is overstepping the no politics rule.
But, your suggestion would mean tax rises for the current governments core group of voters.
 

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
16,867
This is what's got me..it's a tax on the poorest in society where as retired people on large pensions won't pay a penny

Why not an increase in income tax? Then for big pensioners they would pay but the lower pensions not so much

Seems fairer to me
Also many poor pensioners would pay more tax. Many pensioners would be paying basic rate tax on anything above their tax free allowances so those with quite low incomes would pay more tax, as would any low earner. I also notice any pensioner still working will also pay the new NI contribution where they currently pay no NI.

Not all pensioners are raking it in and in many cases are the bank of Mum&Dad.
 
Thread starter #170

Mudball

Assistant Pro
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
2,805
I assume you used the 111 service. I would have thought a duty GP could have visited you. The ambulance service you have been offered is crazy, I needed to call an ambulance last week for a family member in London which arrived very quickly. 12 Hours for an Ambulance! I've never heard of anything like it.
We finally had the parameds visit us at 8pm.. A lovely pair and were very apologetic. They said they are maxed out. Checked her over and spoke to Drs. She will stay at home + get tests done in the morning.
Speaking to one of them.. he says they are stretched. Also their ambulance broke down and so they were sitting by the road for a couple of hours. It is a tough one.

This is our first experience of what is a very prompt service.

We did not use 111 since it was an emergency in the morning and needed triaging. It did not go to a duty GP, since I got thru to her GP and he picked up the phone.

Some new lessons and learnings.
 
Last edited:

ColchesterFC

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
5,401
Here's a radical idea, why not tax the very rich a bit more and make sure big companies also pay the proper amount of tax. Yes, the big companies create jobs and pay taxes but a lot of the time it's not what it could, or should, be due to moving profits around and other tax dodges. How about a temporary 60% tax rate on income over 150k and a 75% tax rate on income over £500k?
 

ColchesterFC

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
5,401
Current government will never do it as it will impact themselves, their cronies, their party's funders.
There are two main problems as I see it. The Tories won't tax the very rich as that's where most of their money come from. Labour like to raise corporation tax as they say it taxes the big companies more but ignore the fact it also affects one man band plumbers, electricians etc. I quite like the current corporation tax set up where bigger companies are taxed more than smaller companies. Lots of people also wanting tax on dividends to be the same as PAYE while ignoring the fact that those running their own business are also having to pay their own insurance, not getting paid holidays, not getting any medical cover etc. But I fear we are straying far across the line of political discussion and should probably move on.
 
Thread starter #173

Mudball

Assistant Pro
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
2,805
Here's a radical idea, why not tax the very rich a bit more and make sure big companies also pay the proper amount of tax. Yes, the big companies create jobs and pay taxes but a lot of the time it's not what it could, or should, be due to moving profits around and other tax dodges. How about a temporary 60% tax rate on income over 150k and a 75% tax rate on income over £500k?
Two things..
1) there is no such thing as a ‘temporary tax’. In most cases when w surcharge is added as a top up, it ends up being a permanent one. It may start as ‘Hurricane Katrina Relief cess’ but is replaced by ‘Hurricane Ida Relief cess’ because the idea is that people are now used to paying the additional charge

2) the high tax is self defeating. Personally if I have to pay the state more than half I earn, then I should be elsewhere or have a better accountant. A person earning 150/500 is not suddenly going to live with another big chunk taken. Paye will be most hit. Counties with high tax (eg nordics) provide a commensurate level of healthcare, education, housing etc. which is lacking at the moment
 

ColchesterFC

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
5,401
Two things..
1) there is no such thing as a ‘temporary tax’. In most cases when w surcharge is added as a top up, it ends up being a permanent one. It may start as ‘Hurricane Katrina Relief cess’ but is replaced by ‘Hurricane Ida Relief cess’ because the idea is that people are now used to paying the additional charge

2) the high tax is self defeating. Personally if I have to pay the state more than half I earn, then I should be elsewhere or have a better accountant. A person earning 150/500 is not suddenly going to live with another big chunk taken. Paye will be most hit. Counties with high tax (eg nordics) provide a commensurate level of healthcare, education, housing etc. which is lacking at the moment
But isn't that at least part of what we are looking to do by raising NI? We're looking to provide a better standard of healthcare - or at least we are if the money raised actually goes to the areas that it's being claimed it will go to. I just think it would be better to make the very well off pay for this change rather than making the poorer in society also pay for it.
 
Thread starter #175

Mudball

Assistant Pro
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
2,805
But isn't that at least part of what we are looking to do by raising NI? We're looking to provide a better standard of healthcare - or at least we are if the money raised actually goes to the areas that it's being claimed it will go to. I just think it would be better to make the very well off pay for this change rather than making the poorer in society also pay for it.
A lot of ‘well off’ are asset rich and cash poor too.. any changes to Inheritance tax?
 

ColchesterFC

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
5,401
A lot of ‘well off’ are asset rich and cash poor too.. any changes to Inheritance tax?
And a lot of well off will also be landlords renting out their multiple properties to those who will be paying this increased tax while they themselves won't be paying it.
 

BiMGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2020
Messages
1,983
But isn't that at least part of what we are looking to do by raising NI? We're looking to provide a better standard of healthcare - or at least we are if the money raised actually goes to the areas that it's being claimed it will go to. I just think it would be better to make the very well off pay for this change rather than making the poorer in society also pay for it.
I'm in no way part of the very well off. But, they already pay a significant portion of the tax bill. How much more do we think they will pay? Previous attempts to raise higher rate tax has resulted in a reduction in tax income.

There are multiple places to go for the extra cash.
People providing for their own care through capital gains.
Going after the black economy.
Efficiency savings in other departments.
Reform of the NHS.
Higher pay across the board.
Massive tax rises on crap food, tobacco and booze.
Very controversial but. Maybe stop intervening to keep people alive for the sake of keeping them alive. I wouldn't like to guess at what it cost to keep my grandma, and my wife's grandma alive for a few extra months when they were completely unaware of anything going on around them.

The burden of looking after society should fall on us all.

Maybe a flat rate of tax on everyone is the fair answer.
 

Bunkermagnet

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
5,737
Location
Kent
But isn't that at least part of what we are looking to do by raising NI? We're looking to provide a better standard of healthcare - or at least we are if the money raised actually goes to the areas that it's being claimed it will go to. I just think it would be better to make the very well off pay for this change rather than making the poorer in society also pay for it.
Better still, why not cut down on the horrendous waste of money that goes on in the NHS and the stupid bureaucracy that it's riddled with. I've seen the waste that goes on, countless wrong supplies sent to my daughter after she came home from surgery a few years back, and all anyone would say was "dont send it back, throw it/them away"
Its criminal the amount of waste within the NHS.
 

ColchesterFC

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
5,401
I'm in no way part of the very well off. But, they already pay a significant portion of the tax bill. How much more do we think they will pay? Previous attempts to raise higher rate tax has resulted in a reduction in tax income.

There are multiple places to go for the extra cash.
People providing for their own care through capital gains.
Going after the black economy.
Efficiency savings in other departments.
Reform of the NHS.
Higher pay across the board.
Massive tax rises on crap food, tobacco and booze.
Very controversial but. Maybe stop intervening to keep people alive for the sake of keeping them alive. I wouldn't like to guess at what it cost to keep my grandma, and my wife's grandma alive for a few extra months when they were completely unaware of anything going on around them.

The burden of looking after society should fall on us all.

Maybe a flat rate of tax on everyone is the fair answer.
I agree with much/most of what you post but the simple fact is that the very well off and the big multinationals will do everything they can to reduce the tax that they pay because they can afford to pay the best accountants to get them the best deal. It's not tax evasion but it is tax avoidance and there are loopholes that could be closed to avoid this happening. How can it be right that companies such as Starbucks or Amazon can pay less in corporation tax in a year than a sole trader electrician (for example), despite making billions in profits, which has happened in the not to distant past?

I would like to see massive tax rises on crap food, tobacco and booze being a cost neutral tax with any profits from that put into reducing the cost of healthier foods. For example, if you raise £1 billion from taxing turkey twizzlers then you use that to reduce the price of fruit and veg.

I've never understood why we don't have a central processing location for all NHS orders. The NHS is such a massive organisation, that would be ordering in massive quantities, that they would be able to get huge discounts on the upfront cost of everything from plasters and lightbulbs to ECG machines to toilet paper. Have a massive warehouse in Birmingham that orders in everything that's needed and ships it out to the individual facilities across the country.
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
923
Location
Leicester
Better still, why not cut down on the horrendous waste of money that goes on in the NHS and the stupid bureaucracy that it's riddled with. I've seen the waste that goes on, countless wrong supplies sent to my daughter after she came home from surgery a few years back, and all anyone would say was "dont send it back, throw it/them away"
Its criminal the amount of waste within the NHS.
This is often used against the NHS, if it were to be true you would expect that other similar economies would be paying less for their healthcare, where the reality is we are near the bottom of that league. The US, the often lauded as the land of efficiency, pay more than twice what is paid in the UK yet have poorer outcomes..
 
Top