Previous Tory voters

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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%

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.

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

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 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.

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?

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

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?

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

M0nica

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.

I know Doctors retired and I realize reasons why.

We know quite well to balance pension and extra leave against income. I think that's a very good thing looking to the future.

However I suggested raising all bands by a significant amount, attempting to 'help' low earners whilst not burdening average high earners. I was attempting by numbers, to raise the 0%, 20% and 40% bands, add another for people who do indeed high earn and capture money at the top.

Better ideas?

winterwhite

OP, please tell us where you would "quite happily make many cuts in the current tory budget".

In a GE it's common to judge the outgoing government on its record and opposition parties on their manifestos. I don't think it's enough to snuffle through opposition policies picking holes. What is about the tory party's record that impresses people so much?

Apart from what I wrote in the op

I would cut 10% of spending across all categories
apart from education, local government, policing and possibly defenece.

Then start again from there.

fancythat

winterwhite

OP, please tell us where you would "quite happily make many cuts in the current tory budget".

In a GE it's common to judge the outgoing government on its record and opposition parties on their manifestos. I don't think it's enough to snuffle through opposition policies picking holes. What is about the tory party's record that impresses people so much?

Apart from what I wrote in the op

I would cut 10% of spending across all categories
apart from education, local government, policing and possibly defenece.

Then start again from there.

Why would you do that when every area you propose to cut funding from is falling apart because of underfunding?

Oh ignore the last. I misread the relevant sentence.

What 'other categories' are you proposing to cut funding from? Justice? NHS? Social Care? Roads?

Why do you think they need it on top of the cuts the tories have been making for the last 13 years?

I agree with a poster up thread.
You seem to be of the opinion that printing money is the answer to everything, there are no repersussions, and the national debt is not real debt anyway.

To answer your question here. It is like in one's own budget. There are always areas[well nearly always] when savings can be made, with no little difference to the way we live.

I would like to have written more.
But my memory is bad.
Sometimes we hear of government spending on the tv, and I think, I would cut that part right out altogether.
From now on, I will make a written list. So that when questions like this come up, I will be more ready with my answers!

I was answering your first post.
Now see you have written a 2nd.