Southerners and Northerners are paying higher taxes, but only the Southerners are benefiting.

varian

Polarisation alright.

"UG" refers to "Brexiteers- v -Remaniacs"

The very terminology reveals her blatant bias, just as it would mine if I referred to "Brexidiots- v -Remainers"

Goodness, varian. You're brave.

I used a derogatory term for Leave voters ONCE to illustrate a point similar to yours and was harassed about it for months

Your point about national salary scales going further in the North is fair; but the housing situation still underpins it.

It is easy (financially at least) for someone in the South to relocate North, as selling a house in the South will probably buy a far better one in the North, or an equivalent with a nest egg left over, but the same does not work in reverse. This puts Northerners at a massive disadvantage when it comes to career prospects, so they are more likely to stay near the bottom of the national salary scales, whilst Southerners have a better chance of moving up, irrespective of merit.

Polarisation alright.

"UG" refers to "Brexiteers- v -Remaniacs"

The very terminology reveals her blatant bias, just as it would mine if I referred to "Brexidiots- v -Remainers"

lemongrove

Urmstongran

Maybe this polarisation of views is the problem? Lines are drawn. Nuance and grey areas are much less apparent. We are pitted against one another. Our tribe against yours.

Boomers -v- snowflakes
Brexiteers -v- Remainiacs

Other examples abound, but you get my drift.

Yes, and I’m sick of it.
Too much division and hostility between people right now.
Plenty of low income and low priced housing in many parts of the country in any case, certainly not a North/South divide.

I totally agree, I am sick of the assumption that everyone in the South is living in expensive properties, and are all wealthy. Yes, my house is now worth far more than we paid for it, but conversely, our children are highly unlikely, despite earning good salaries, to be able to afford to buy anything of their own, in fact the ones living in London struggle to rent anything decent for their budget. It goes two ways. A couple on national salary scale living in some areas of the North of England, such as nursing, police etc., are more likely to be able to buy their own home and secure their own future, than mine here in the south are. I am not asking for sympathy, just a bit of understanding that it is not all as simple as the press would have us believe. This manufactured division into 'them and us' is a diversionary tactic to keep attention away from the people that do the real damage to all of us.

GrannyGravy13 - you made an interesting remark here:

^"There is no such thing as everyone earning equally. Which is where the State comes in to help those who need it.

Rising wages should help the lowest paid."^

The problem as others have said is the division between rich and poor - which is marked across the country, and in isolated pockets in south-east England.

Listening to a caller the other day on James O'Brien's LBC show, she entered the debate by implying that the harder you work, the greater the financial rewards.

Needless to say this is and was rejected as arrant nonsense, but the further we drive the debate about welfare and wellbeing down the cash only path, the more it seems to me we will enter the world of knowing the cost of things, but nothing of the value.

The present "government" are deliberately loading the cost of recovery from the pandemic, and every other crisis onto the poor in society. We do not have a democratic electoral system, and winner takes it all does inevitably rely on those with wealth being able to access and use society's facilities, systems and processes better - for their individual benefits.

My parents did not own a property or have much savings. When they became so ill that they needed a care home it was the devils own job to find a decent one for what the LA would pay. My mother, not too bad, but my father had vascular dementia which needed specialist care. Many care homes, despite their CQC accreditation, were dire, although the council pushed us to accept one of those as so much less costly. We did manage eventually after a LOT of pressure to get him into a beautiful one. If he had been wealthy there would have been no problem. I think it is disgusting that in this day and age we are still part of a society that offers such substandard choices to those who have worked hard all their lives but due to circumstance have not managed to accumulate great wealth (and decent care is VERY expensive).

Doesn't really help NHS as it's the same surgeon and anaesthetist who do private as do NHS! There not a special room full of spare medics! Nurses are usually private but I've been nursed by an NHS nurse doing a bit on 'side' while recovering from a hip replacement in private care!

GrannyGravy13

Whitewavemark2 I do not think it’s a simplistic as your OP suggests.

There are areas in the South which are poor, extremely high unemployment, one of the poorest and most deprived areas in England is in East Essex (Jaywick).

The cost of living is generally higher in the South also.

The people you're talking about will not be property owners neither will they have savings in xs of20k !! Do pay attention! Alternatively if it assessed the percentage of wealth . I.e. 15%? 65% X 100k = 65k leaving an estate of 35k 65% X 500k = 325k leaving an estate of 175k proportional ya? But is it fair? Not really. Why should those better off subsidise those less well off ? The gov has made their problems-our problems! Slick. We do all pay the taxes as due. I really think it's time that elderly care be put into the hands of public ownership and the industry completely overhauled! Private care is just not working! There should be a basic level of care provided by state and if one wishes to add frills-go ahead at cost.if not well just get the basic yet decent and standardised complete care package. It should not be the case that one can only access clean, qualified staffed and well run care ONLY if one is stinking rich!! As healthcare if I want frills, I go private but I still get the same surgeon and Meds etc for the same ailments on NHS for free at point of delivery, just a duff menu and maybe undesirable co-habitants to put up with on an open/mixed ward! Current care appears to be uncontrolled unmonitored and unregistered where perverts bullies and violent Individuals can be employed at rubbish wages to keep costs down and residents can end up being abused and even worse in these awful dumps while local authorities and they pay ridiculously high fees! It's a free for all with our most vulnerable bearing the brunt of the appalling system in many cases. When they go bust(probably for taking too much out of profits) the residents are dumped into local authorities without warning and treated like rubbish to be disposed of . We should be thoroughly ASHAMED of the way we treat our elders in this country! Both my grandparents were cared for at home by my mum until they passed away at home at the ages of 93&85 my mum and dad did without holidays etc but we all loved being able to be with them up to the end and pop in whenever we wanted .it wasn't easy but it was the least she could do! And for £1500/week she could have employed a night nurse!!!!! I'd babysit for evenings and for a week or so for £1500/month!!!

Calistemon

Yes, I was!
And another Gransnetter but I can't remember who it was now (elderly memory).

Was this to be ringfenced for the NHS? Not as high as Scandinavian countries but higher than we pay here.
Don't ask me which thread please! It could be more than one.

Thanks, Calistemon.

I think I would have argued against it. In fact, I recall a thread where I did because of this, from GG13's post:

^(I have you to thank for my knowledge regarding Country economics versus household, I cannot understand why journalists both print, tv and radio hardly ever highlight this)*

Thanks for that, too, GG13.

I couldn't subscribe to the view that taxation doesn't fund spending and at the same time call for higher taxation to fund the NHS!

OTOH, I would call for higher taxation of those who try to gain as much of the the nation's money as they can for themselves, and then don't recirculate their 'wealth' by spending it into the 'real' economy, but squirrel it away into tax havens where it lies unused. So I'm talking about the super rich, not people like GG13, relatively 'small' business owners who pay their taxes and spend their profits into the economy. In other words, who contribute to the circulation of money which keeps people in jobs and keeps the economy moving. They add value. Money in tax havens adds nothing.

I won’t be voting Tory again either. BUT Labour need a strong leader in order to succeed the last few leaders haven’t been good. I suggest everyone write to their local MP, as I have done, and mine is labour, to complain about the scaling down of the North for the last TEN years. At least they will learn how individuals in the North feel, or maybe you can’t be bothered?

We live in the South and really had to struggle to save a deposit to buy our first home, working two jobs (9-5 and 6pm- 10pm) never going out, just to afford a one bed room flat. If we had lived in the North, we could have afforded to buy a detached house for what we had to pay for a small flat. There wasn't the big outcry then about the differences in affordability. The cost of living in the South is far greater.

The horrible division is between those who have the right sort of illness and those who have the wrong sort. And between the sort who always rented and spent every penny on going to the grand prix, a trip to Aussie etc - and now have no resources so everything is paid - and the rest of us.

Also better economic education in schools.

MaizieD

^It was not that long ago that folks on GN were advocating for higher taxes, sighting high tax Scandinavian countries.^

You clearly have good memory, GG13. I haven't; I don't remember this. Can you perhaps point us at a particular discussion thread to jog elderly memories?

Not one thread in particular MaizieD just posters sighting high tax Countries having better social care on threads pertaining to tax/social care/NHS. As in our taxes pay for it

(I have you to thank for my knowledge regarding Country economics versus household, I cannot understand why journalists both print, tv and radio hardly ever highlight this)

But it’s also the inequity of those who need social care vs those who need care that is deemed medical, the latter would get their care paid for. It’s a mess which BJ claimed he had an oven ready plan isn’t it?

In all of these discussions I say the same thing, so sorry if you've heard this before, but IMO nobody should be paying for care, as we should all pay more tax. Every adult should pay, and get back when they need it. Those who choose not to pay should still be provided for, but only if they need it, and then they should be means-tested on their household income, or whatever it was that paid for them not to have to work (a trust fund or other financial provision).

I am not talking about those who don't work because they are caring for a disabled child, or a sick partner, or those who are themselves ill, disabled or otherwise unable to work; but those who choose not to do so, either because they have a partner who 'supports' them (so one partner pays one lot of tax for two adults and their children), or because they are rich enough not to need a salary to get by. Anyone unable to work should be credited for as long as necessary, but those who benefit from an education, a health service and all the other things paid for by tax and NI, but opt not to contribute should, IMO, have also opted out of the benefits, such as a pension and social care, unless the source of their support is no longer available.

Under that system, it wouldn't matter whether someone has a house or not, whether it is more or less valuable or how much they have saved. Everyone would get the care they need, and a decent pension in older age.

Yes, I was!
And another Gransnetter but I can't remember who it was now (elderly memory).

Was this to be ringfenced for the NHS? Not as high as Scandinavian countries but higher than we pay here.
Don't ask me which thread please! It could be more than one.

It was not that long ago that folks on GN were advocating for higher taxes, sighting high tax Scandinavian countries.

You clearly have good memory, GG13. I haven't; I don't remember this. Can you perhaps point us at a particular discussion thread to jog elderly memories?

GrannyGravy13

Whitewavemark2

As the CBI chap yesterday.

Rising wages, rising tax and rising costs all incomparable.

Not going to happen.

Are you suggesting that the lower paid do not have their wages increased?

It was not that long ago that folks on GN were advocating for higher taxes, sighting high tax Scandinavian countries.

Some increases will no doubt be passed on to the end user, not all.

I’m not suggesting anything it was the CBI chairman.

I cant help but think that those who can afford it will pay for their own care will stay well away from means tested care. It strikes me that those who live in the north but get a similar salary to those in the south - ie police, teachers, local authority employees etc must be a lot better off with the lower house prices as salaries do not reduce the further north you go.

The difference between north and south is, with regard to this thread, the average cost of housing. But as has been said there are rich and poor everywhere. I live in a beautiful area which attracts holidaymakers, second home owners and retired people like me but there is also dreadful poverty and considerable reliance on food banks. And no public transport. I really don’t see how the vast gulf between the haves and the have nots can be bridged. It was I fear ever thus but at least those with little or nothing are guaranteed state funding if they go into care, and the same standard of care as those who can pay for it.

I think you’ve over-personalised this growstuff. I’m sure nobody thinks that there aren’t poor people in rich areas and vice versa. But, as a generalisation, rather than as an individual circumstances issue it does hold - proportionately home owners in the north will lose out more than their counterparts in the south.

Whitewavemark2

As the CBI chap yesterday.

Rising wages, rising tax and rising costs all incomparable.

Not going to happen.

Are you suggesting that the lower paid do not have their wages increased?

It was not that long ago that folks on GN were advocating for higher taxes, sighting high tax Scandinavian countries.

Some increases will no doubt be passed on to the end user, not all.

Incompatible

As the CBI chap yesterday.

Rising wages, rising tax and rising costs all incomparable.

Not going to happen.