Previous Tory voters

Norah bear in mind that doctors retired in droves or refused to work when it was realised that if they did extra sessions their pension payments would go over a specified limit and result in a huge tax payment.

DD, who I do not think is quite in the higher tax bracket is choosing to buy extra leave and feed her pension fund to avoid being too well paid and she is not alone in her company, quite a number of her colleaagues do this as well.

It helps to balance the extra pay coming to her with promotion.

JaneJudge

Germanshepherdsmum

As a single mother with a mortgage and little, often no, money from my ex - yes that would have been a great move.

this isn't unique to you, it applies to lots of women in a variety of job roles

Angela Rayner for example.

M0nica

I am not ignoring them Maizie that is the point. Add all other forms of taaxation to these high tax rates and, to repeat myself, those on the highest incomes will see more than half their earnings go in tax.

If the bands were raised, I doubt high earners would care or notice, needs are certainly met below a point - I'd bet a numbers, higher than now could work for high earners and be better for all.

I am not ignoring them Maizie that is the point. Add all other forms of taaxation to these high tax rates and, to repeat myself, those on the highest incomes will see more than half their earnings go in tax.

DaisyAnneReturns

^It would lead to people swapping salary hikes for more time off work and longer holidays. people would turn down promotions, plus of course, redirectng salary into pension funds and retiring early.^

What is so dreadful about that M0nica?

Nothing. Those are good results, imo.

I am nowhere near being a higher rate tax payer and never have been, but I beleive all of us should be contributing to the cost of the public welfare, not just schools and hospitals, but the roads we drive down the town planning rules that restrict development in unsuitable places, the police and everything else.

If you persist in believing that taxation comes before government spending, MOnica why are you ignoring all the other forms of taxation that we are all subject too? And the tax collected by the multiplier route of money circulating in the economy. They all contribute. too.

It would lead to people swapping salary hikes for more time off work and longer holidays. people would turn down promotions, plus of course, redirectng salary into pension funds and retiring early.

What is so dreadful about that M0nica?

Germanshepherdsmum

An apprenticeship in law or accountancy isn’t only intended for young people Jane. At my last firm we had people in their 40s and older changing to a career in the law. Their life experience was a valuable qualification.

that is good to hear

tbh Daisy, I hadn't even thought of post grad training programs and graduate jobs as apprenticeships

MaizieD

Norah

MaizieD

Income tax is not the only tax, MOnica. Looking at income tax alone distorts the picture.

As it is, the top 10% of people in receipt of income, pay a slightly lower percentage of that income in tax than does the lowest 10% (govt. figures).

The 'middle' 80% pays a lower percentage than those at either end.

It seems to me changing the bands and adding to the top band would yield the government and people more spendable money.

Up to £20,000 -- 0%
£20,000 to £70,000 -- 20%
£70,000 to £170,00 -- 40%
over £170,000 -- 50%

I agree that that would be a solution, Norah.

After all, the extra money that the people in the lower bands would spend will be subject to indirect taxation, and the suppliers of the goods and services they buy will be taxed on their profits, so the government would still be getting the tax in one way or another.

Why is consideration not given to bands moving upward and increasing at the top - if that could indeed be a logical solution?

Why should anyone on a high salary end up paying more of their salary to the government than they get to spend themselves.

It would lead to people swapping salary hikes for more time off work and longer holidays. people would turn down promotions, plus of course, redirectng salary into pension funds and retiring early.

And as I have said, those right at the top of the income tree would relocate to other countries with better tax regimes. In the modern day and age it will be quite easy to do a high powered UK based job, while spending most of your time in aanother country.

I am nowhere near being a higher rate tax payer and never have been, but I beleive all of us should be contributing to the cost of the public welfare, not just schools and hospitals, but the roads we drive down the town planning rules that restrict development in unsuitable places, the police and everything else.

Norah

MaizieD

Income tax is not the only tax, MOnica. Looking at income tax alone distorts the picture.

As it is, the top 10% of people in receipt of income, pay a slightly lower percentage of that income in tax than does the lowest 10% (govt. figures).

The 'middle' 80% pays a lower percentage than those at either end.

It seems to me changing the bands and adding to the top band would yield the government and people more spendable money.

Up to £20,000 -- 0%
£20,000 to £70,000 -- 20%
£70,000 to £170,00 -- 40%
over £170,000 -- 50%

I agree that that would be a solution, Norah.

After all, the extra money that the people in the lower bands would spend will be subject to indirect taxation, and the suppliers of the goods and services they buy will be taxed on their profits, so the government would still be getting the tax in one way or another.

I dont think apprenticeships are aimed at under 25s not people changing career gives an accurate view of Apprenticeships Jane. You might find it useful to read the article this comes from.

Degree-level Apprenticeships are described as “equivalent to an undergraduate degree.”[10] In fact over eighty Degree Apprenticeships have been approved or are in development at level 7 (master’s or postgraduate degree level) including apprenticeships for occupations such as, district nurse, doctor, AI data specialist and architect. Such important factual errors in the report should be corrected by the IFS. It also ignores the inclusion of higher apprenticeship provision at level 5 so disregards important associate professional roles such as associate nurse that support and facilitate routes into professional job roles.

It is understandable that so many voters are ignorant about what is being accomplished and look backwards to bygone days; after all what are they told and who by? But it is reprehensible that government, MPs, and the Institute of Fiscal Studies, on whose report Dr Mandy Crawford-Lee is commenting, are equally as ignorant.

www.fenews.co.uk/exclusive/making-sensible-recommendations-on-apprenticeship-funding/

Dr Mandy Crawford-Lee FRSA
Chief Executive at University Vocational Awards Council, Associate Editor of the journal, Higher Education, Skills and Work-based Learning

An apprenticeship in law or accountancy isn’t only intended for young people Jane. At my last firm we had people in their 40s and older changing to a career in the law. Their life experience was a valuable qualification.

MaizieD

Income tax is not the only tax, MOnica. Looking at income tax alone distorts the picture.

As it is, the top 10% of people in receipt of income, pay a slightly lower percentage of that income in tax than does the lowest 10% (govt. figures).

The 'middle' 80% pays a lower percentage than those at either end.

It seems to me changing the bands and adding to the top band would yield the government and people more spendable money.

Up to £20,000 -- 0%
£20,000 to £70,000 -- 20%
£70,000 to £170,00 -- 40%
over £170,000 -- 50%

I sort of agree.

But I cant say much. I have not been on this thread much myself. And am aware I have not answered someone's question to me yet.

I think, could be wrong, that there are quite a number of people like me, previous tory voters somewhere along the line.
Even today I saw something which said many voters have yet to make up their minds about who they will vote for at the next election.

I think there are many people who do not like to talk about who they vote for. Or who they might or might not vote for. Even, or maybe especially, online.
Which is fair enough.

It’s such a pity this thread has turned into the usual argumentative slanging match. I was enjoying reading why people voted the way they do and what has happened to change their minds.

apprenticeships are aimed at under 25s not people changing career

if you have already done higher education and received funding you generally cannot access any other higher education later in life (there are exceptions such as nursing iirc)

Lots of jobs that require education and skill are not well paid. I'm educated and skilled, my job is poorly paid. I've been told on here I should have chosen a career better but I chose something that makes me happy. In a life that has been very difficult for me, I think I deserve that. Atm my job is miserable but it is a means to an end as I will eventually run my own business. This is a luxury most people cannot afford and I can only plan for that because I am in a stable marriage and my husband earns well. It really doesn't take that much imagination to know that not all people have choices, for a variety of reasons and women bear the brunt of responsibility inside the home and inside families. Women are amazing, we really shouldn't do one another a disservice

Finally, we need people to do low paid jobs and they are often the most valuable, like carers, teaching assistants, HCAs and a whole host of other things. We shouldn't reduce people to the amount of money they earn

I still think what I outlined in my first post on this thread (page 1, second post) would go a long way to helping all citizens of the U.K.

GrannyGravy13

DaisyAnneReturns

I have asked GNHQ to delete my last post as it wasn't intended as a direct answer to MOnica, but as a general comment. I'll repeat it here to hopefully make sense of replies when it's gone.

^This thread seems to give a clear view of what "previous Tory voters" would want a wealth-driven oligarchy to do for the disentitled.^

It really is rather crass and lazy to lump together all ^previous Tory voters^

It probably should have been 'current supporters' GrannyGravy. However, what they outline does show why previous voters have such a difficult choice.

If you don't know GSM, I am not sure anyone can explain it to you.

I'm not surprised the to threads have crossed Maisie. We have a clear view that voting in a Tory government will bring with it a disentitlment to the basics of life and more. Without that you have government created destitution.

A good teacher can be an inspiration - but I can recall one primary school teacher, and one A level teacher, who fell into that category. My son can recall one, with whom he remains in touch. Both my parents left school at 14 - they weren’t by any means unintelligent but that was the norm for working class people. I would be surprised if things are much different now in state education, except that the leaving age has been increased. It really is up to the individual - if they can’t see for themselves that with some effort on their part they could be one of those people with a good job, nice house and nice car, what is the government supposed to do about their attitude and lack of aspirations?

DaisyAnneReturns

I have asked GNHQ to delete my last post as it wasn't intended as a direct answer to MOnica, but as a general comment. I'll repeat it here to hopefully make sense of replies when it's gone.

^This thread seems to give a clear view of what "previous Tory voters" would want a wealth-driven oligarchy to do for the disentitled.^

It really is rather crass and lazy to lump together all previous Tory voters

I have asked GNHQ to delete my last post as it wasn't intended as a direct answer to MOnica, but as a general comment. I'll repeat it here to hopefully make sense of replies when it's gone.

This thread seems to give a clear view of what "previous Tory voters" would want a wealth-driven oligarchy to do for the disentitled.

Ooops. This isn't the 'destitution' thread, though the two do seem to have merged.

This is the 'everyone can be a star like me if they just put a bit of effort into it and those who don't try deserve every bit of misery coming to them' thread 😂

Germanshepherdsmum

I don’t ask you to have any opinion of me DAR, but I do ask you not to take any possible opportunity to be rude to me. I have not ridiculed anyone - if you believe I have please tell me where.
I wouldn’t have become a legal secretary without paying attention and applying myself at school Casdon. All children are obliged by law to attend school unless they are ‘home schooled’. The rest is up to them. I had no special advantages. My husband often speaks of a lad he employed who was then at university. He attended the interview in a frayed shirt and ill fitting suit probably bought from a charity shop. He was black and one of a large working class family. He had no quiet place to do his homework at home and he had to help with the younger children. Nevertheless he worked hard at school and then at university and he proved to be an excellent employee. So it is entirely possible to achieve well if you apply yourself, no matter what your background.

You’re right in a sense Germanshepherdsmum, applying yourself is key. It really is the exception who is able to raise themself above the circumstances of their birth however, and the understanding that taking advantage of the educational opportunities can improve your earning capacity isn’t a given if a child receives no help or encouragement. Identifying exceptions who have achieved regardless doesn’t negate the reality for the vast majority.