Chancellor goes for Ltd Cos.

[Lucy]

I'm currently earning about 28% of what I earned as a contractor... however there's very little stress at work, so little that I'm often in danger of falling asleep.

Aren't you kind of old(ish) zeity ?

[wendigo100]

Aha...did you ever work in Croydon.... do you know what 'black bin-liner day' refers to?

Yes. I started there a couple of months after black bin-liner day.

I've long since moved on, but I believe it is still talked about in hushed tones by those who survived.

Were you there too?

[shoes]

Are you suggesting that the other 98% have sub-standard living conditions?

That is exactly what I am saying. Most people in the uk feel poor, and thats because they are. Wage inflation is not keeping up with with 'actual' inflation, taxes of various kinds keep rising, salaries do not. The amount you HAVE to spend here is growing all the time. It is a struggle to make ends meet. This is why so many people are in debt, its not all the 'have now pay later' mentality, although clearly this forms part of the problem. It is damn hard to make ends meet in the uk and people are leaving. Those earning the least are going first, as Gordon makes it harder for the rest of us we will follow.

[mcquiggd]

One interesting thing I was told at work today... if you invest in Onshore Bonds, you are subject to Capital Gains Tax on your profit when you cash them in (less so if you are not a higher rate tax payer when you do so).

However, if you happen to move abroad before you cash them in, no Capital Gains Tax is levied...

Food for thought. And soon to be part of my spread of investments - once I have checked the advice...

[dang65]

If you cannot have a decent standard of living on 50K then your expectations of what is a reasonable standard of living, is unreasonable.

tim

This is the way the government sees things, yes. You are one person and you have 50,000 pounds. How could you possibly "need" such an enormous sum when that guy over there has 20,000 pounds and he's doing fine.

Thing is though, my 50,000 pounds supports six people - me, her and four kids. It's my own fault I've got a wife and four kids - I don't deny that - but the only ways to sustain a family that size are either to drop out altogether and rely on getting council housing and full benefits... or to earn "big bucks".

There is no consideration whatsoever given to dependents in this country other than £18.10 a week child benefit for your first child and £12.10 a week each for any others. So the total weekly child benefit for four kids is about the equivalent of 2hrs work, after tax.

I know many people who earn far less than me, and pay far less tax than me, but who have far more holidays, nights out, new clothes and bigger tellies than I do. Simply because their money just needs to sustain them on their own.

[mcquiggd]

On the other hand, single people with no kids pay taxes that are then paid in child benefit to others... and pay council tax which is used to provide services such as council run creches, etc... a single person pays only 25% less than a family of two working adults.

Single people with no kids are usually the ones who lose out to the tax system, and support others through their 'ahem' generosity... for a myriad of services and amenities they do not use. I wouldn't begrudge them (i.e. me) holidays if they choose not to have children.

I take it you are not expecting your children to help you out in your old age, pay for care etc..? I pay my parents mortgage and helped subside their bills and purchase of a new car... repayment perhaps for what they did for me when I was child...

If you cannot financially support children, you shouldn't start a family. Sadly that message is eroded by 'social manipulation' under new labour.

[Troll]

Yes. I started there a couple of months after black bin-liner day.

I've long since moved on, but I believe it is still talked about in hushed tones by those who survived.

Were you there too?

It happend a while after I left - one of the few contracts I was truly glad to see the back of - I swore I would never do Govt work again

[dang65]

On the other hand, single people with no kids pay taxes that are then paid in child benefit to others... and pay council tax which is used to provide services such as council run creches, etc...

That way lies madness. We all pay large amounts of tax, and much of that tax pays for things which don't appear to benefit us personally.

If you cannot financially support children, you shouldn't start a family.

I'm not saying I can't financially support them. I can, and I do. And so do millions of other people, of course. But there's absolutely no question that it takes far more effort and money to raise a family than it does to not raise a family, and a single person supposedly subsidising that effort is simply investing in future tax payers who will subsidise his own needs later on in life. Or, stepping back in time, other single people with no kids paid taxes towards his own council run creches, or his education. That's just the routine in this society, and it's completely irrelevant to my point, which is that one person earning 50,000 doesn't necessarily equal one person with 50,000 to spend on himself.

[mcquiggd]

That way lies madness. We all pay large amounts of tax, and much of that tax pays for things which don't appear to benefit us personally.

I dont use creches a I have no children. Nor do I use state schools. Nor do I pay for parenting classes.

It's not that they simply don't appear to be benefit me, they never actually have.

I'm not saying I can't financially support them. I can, and I do. And so do millions of other people, of course. But there's absolutely no question that it takes far more effort and money to raise a family than it does to not raise a family

.. as you said, your choice... I really hope you had figured out that bit before you had kids.... and I take it you are claiming child benefit...?

... and a single person supposedly subsidising that effort is simply investing in future tax payers who will subsidise his own needs later on in life.

So you mean there is no point in me investing the money I earn now to be self sufficient later on, as other peoples children will be taxed to pay for me?

Well, in many ways you are right... as is commonly known people who actually save for their retirement, save money, often have to sell their houses to pay for care in residential homes due to means testing. I provide financial support to my own parents (one is retired), and my grandma. My grandma gets turned away from an NHS hospital having suffered a stroke and told to come back 'if it happens again'. My dad having suffered two heart attacks, is given drugs that make him incontenent, as they are 'cheaper than the ones we had previously subscribed'. These people paid into the NHS through tax and National Insurance for 30 years plus. They get vrtually feck all back.

The only increase in population is due to immigration, the birth rate is falling amongst the indigenous population. Many couples I know are unable to financially support children and have decided to not marry and do so. Perhaps because the tax burden falls heavily on them...? Abolishing Married Couples tax allowance was but the start....

Or, stepping back in time, other single people with no kids paid taxes towards his own council run creches, or his education. That's just the routine in this society, and it's completely irrelevant to my point, which is that one person earning 50,000 doesn't necessarily equal one person with 50,000 to spend on himself.

So you made a choice, and now you complain about it? Then dump the family if you are so offended by other people who chose a different route, earning the same money, spending what they have left after taxes on a holiday. My income is not there to subsidise your lifestyle.

[dang65]

So you made a choice, and now you complain about it? Then dump the family if you are so offended by other people who chose a different route, earning the same money, spending what they have left after taxes on a holiday. My income is not there to subsidise your lifestyle.

I've really got no idea how you've managed to turn my original comment - about one person's 50,000 pounds not being the same as another person's 50,000 pounds - into some strange tirade against people that have children! In fact, you keep mentioning your own example - you looking after your parents and grandma - which kind of suggests that it was a good idea for your parents to have raised you, seeing as the State is letting them down so badly now. I imagine you are more help to them than any financial investment.

Also, I'm not complaining about having a family, d'uh. I was responding to the original comment - "If you cannot have a decent standard of living on 50K then your expectations of what is a reasonable standard of living, is unreasonable." In other words, I am a "high earner" as an individual, but the six people in my family live very basically because my "high earnings" are split between us. It's not a problem, we're happy, but it is irritating to be considered some kind of high flier rich boy just because of my basic salary, taking nothing else into consideration. You sound like you're in a similar position - you just have older dependents instead of younger ones.

Oh, and I do "claim" Child Benefit as it's automatically issued. It may as well be given as a tax credit or in discount vouchers for school shoes, whatever, but instead it comes as a monthly payment into the bank account.

Presumably your parents "claim" State Pension? Is it much use to them?