3 Sep
12:35pm, 3 Sep 2024
17,727 posts
|
jda
There’s also a good case for making some benefits universal so that even richer people have some buy-in to the system. Child benefit being one historical example. Rich people being the tip of the pyramid you don’t save all that much by cutting them off. We could means-test the NHS and school education too for those who are keen on this approach. |
3 Sep
12:42pm, 3 Sep 2024
4,433 posts
|
Cheg
Means testing NHS and school education happens by itself to some extent. The rich don't fancy the wait times or the large class sizes, so go private.
|
3 Sep
12:59pm, 3 Sep 2024
50,834 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Controversial opinion - there should be no private education or health treatment, should be free to all and one standard. Hmm.
|
3 Sep
12:59pm, 3 Sep 2024
45,910 posts
|
SPR
The single person discount isn't about ability to pay though. That's why I said there's no point in a single person discount if we think it should be means tested. Just assess everyone's ability to pay.
|
3 Sep
1:00pm, 3 Sep 2024
25,496 posts
|
larkim
There's a complete difference between a service being universally available without means testing and the provision of cash benefits. Comparing the two feels like whataboutery to me. Child benefit paid to those on higher salary levels was really simply the legacy of making payments simply without having to impose complex rules throughout the lives of (originally) mothers in terms of earnings info. It was a relatively trivial level of over-spend but it was the very definition of putting money into people's pockets that really didn't need it, and if the welfare state had developed in a more data-accessible time it would never have been a 16/18 year universal payment. I'm not sure the "buy in" argument really works with benefits in the same way that it does with tax obligations and other sorts of engagement with "civic society". But I'm open to hearing about how that works; I suppose I can only comment that I always felt uncomfortable receiving child benefit, and whilst I probably failed on the next step of disposing of that cash to other more appropriate people (like I say, these things are not universally agreed upon in my household!) I was quite pleased when the decision was taken out of my hands. We had a similar issue early on with my son; DLA (as it was then) was claimable for him from about 18 months / 2 years, I seem to remember, and whilst we jointly filled in the forms honestly and properly and accordingly were awarded DLA payments, there was genuinely no additional cost up to the age of about 14 which were a consequence of him having his disability levels. (And even after that, it was very limited) Yet for other families who weren't in the position of having mum off work (which was a choice we made irrespective of his disabilities, because we have other sons too), I can see how that money was well used on funding for taxis to hospital appointments, access to support groups, school transport etc even for someone with a very similar profile to my son. So it wasn't that the system was awarding the wrong amount of money for the benefit it was intended to deliver, it was that it was sending it to our family not taking account of the domestic arrangements that we had both financially and "operationally". |
|
3 Sep
1:03pm, 3 Sep 2024
45,911 posts
|
SPR
Or we could just scrap council tax and increase income tax percentages instead so it's a progressive tax.
|
|
3 Sep
1:07pm, 3 Sep 2024
45,912 posts
|
SPR
en.m.wikipedia.org The nature of the Council Tax The Valuation Tribunal Service has cleared up many previous doubts regarding the exact nature of Council Tax and states that: The tax is a mix of a property tax and a personal tax. Generally, where two or more persons reside in a dwelling the full tax is payable. If one person resides in the dwelling then 75% is payable. An empty dwelling attracts only a 50% charge unless the billing authority has made a determination otherwise.[4] [a] Basically as @paulcook described. |
3 Sep
1:32pm, 3 Sep 2024
28,314 posts
|
TROSaracen
Scrapping Council Tax and lumping it on income tax would be the very thing Labour’s manifesto pledged not to do: increase tax on working people. It would leave owning a £1m property virtually untaxed, and is against current trajectory of taxing unearned income (and assets/wealth?) more. I’d be quids in so would be happy personally mind…. |
3 Sep
1:44pm, 3 Sep 2024
33,023 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
J2R, it was Old Hunstanton beach. A day after he got sick we noticed there was an information board on the beach telling bathers it was not safe to bathe. If you go on swiminfo Hunstanton beach has big red signs indicating don't bathe here.
|
|
3 Sep
1:53pm, 3 Sep 2024
33,024 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
Council Tax has increased because the Tories lopped 40% off the block grant. Hey, WE aren't increasing your taxes! It's your council! It's not entirely fanciful to suppose that council tax might become more manageable if the government reinstated the block grant. But I doubt that will happen. |
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Nov 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018
