[Politics] Are baby boomers taxed enough?

[Weststander]

When Boomers shuffle off this mortal coil they will leave us with a legacy of poverty and mass societal break down due to rampant climate change. I hope they feel guilty, they should.

You’re blaming the planet’s climate change on those born 1945 to 1965. Brits in particular by any chance?

Mankind’s been screwing the planet for centuries, but most notably since the Industrial Revolution. Folk born in the 1930’s or 1980’s for example are just as culpable. Young people very much love their flights, consumerism, the purchase of plastic ‘crap’ made in China, the lobbing of plastics from cars.

At the same time, there never was an idyll in 1935 or 1975. Always a mix of good and some injustices/evils in society.

 

[Goldstone Guy]

I do understand the boomers saying they had to work very hard to pay their mortgages and went without luxuries that today's youngsters enjoy and agree with that. However the "triple lock" pension guarantee, in place since ? 2010 seems very unfair - basically pensions will always rise in line with inflation whilst salaries of workers (in the public sector at least, not sure about private sector) mustn't go up anywhere near inflation rates, because that would fuel inflation apparently. Explain that one to me.

To those saying the boomers' wealth will all be inherited I agree it will (minus tax of course). However it's possible in 20-30 years time we'll have the ridiculous situation where the wealth of the average British person won't be defined by how hard they work, and how able/talented they are, but by how hard their parents worked, because most of people's wealth will be inherited. I don't think that will end well and will be bad for society/the country. Like anything which unfairly favours one section of society over another, it will cause anger, division, and social unrest.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

I’ve always agreed with you on this. No national insurance too, greatly simplifying things …. it’s never gone into a separate fund. Income tax would become the record for benefits and state pension.

A personal allowance of say £15k, then just one income tax rate significantly higher than 20%.

Overnight it would end all the tax planning/avoidance/evasion that is driven by key tax band thresholds eg £50,270 and £100,000. Hard work or enterprise wouldn’t be disincentivised by going over a punitive threshold. Other forms of income such as from BTL’s which currently avoid national insurance, would face the same higher income tax rate.

Absolutely this. I’d also add that everybody would get a personal allowance rather than the current system where between £100k and £120,400 you are effectively taxed at 60% whilst your personal allowance is removed before going onto the new lower 45% rate threshold

I would be interested to see whether there had been any published modelling on state income tax income if for example there was a personal allowance at say a flat 30%

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

When Boomers shuffle off this mortal coil they will leave us with a legacy of poverty and mass societal break down due to rampant climate change. I hope they feel guilty, they should.

It's like the industrial revolution never happened in the 1700s and everything just began in the 60's.

 

[Deleted member 37369]

Ffs. I just wrote a long explanation of why I think capital gains should be paid on property increases but it crashed.

In summary. My folks bought a place 2.5 times my dad’s income in 1980 for about 16k. It is now worth close to a million quid. So someone wanting to buy it would need 100k deposit and a wage of about 400k if borrowing 2.5 times. Clearly not happening in many cases. It is being clever and working hard earning all this free money is it. Ffs. It is just luck.

If not capital gains then it should be inheritance tax. Parents divorced and between them own three houses now worth a combined 1.2 million at a guess. My dad’s pension is more than my wage (which is over 50k). My brother and sister plus myself should get nailed for inheritance tax. Why should we get lots of benefit because my parents made so much cash just by living in a sodding house?

I would love to hear where final salary pensions exist In public sector. Linked to Average wage in civil service.

That really is an incredible return compared to my own personal experience.

I bought my first house late 1982 - a 2 bed semi-detached house in Poole - for £23,995. I've just had a look to see what they are selling for now. Ours was number 73 and same as number 5 and 117 below that sold for less than £300k last year! Assume your folks place must have been in London or similar to see that extraordinary house price rise!

 

[Deleted member 37369]

This.

Yet almost everyone (of the left, centre and right) fights new home schemes near them. Aided by vote chasing politicians.

We're obviously not fighting hard enough in Shoreham where huge blocks of flats are going up all along the river ... left right and centre

 

[dsr-burnley]

These two Twitter threads from excellent journalists linked to what you’re saying:

One "hidden" fact from that first graph is that there are twice as many households now as in 1980. Partly population increase, but also the increase in the number of single people, presumably split-up families, and perhaps people leaving home earlier? Either way, the proportion of mortgaged households is little different from 1980, and the interest rate rises are hitting the landlords (and by extension, their tenants) as well as the mortgaged households.

 

[Deleted member 37369]

I do understand the boomers saying they had to work very hard to pay their mortgages and went without luxuries that today's youngsters enjoy and agree with that. However the "triple lock" pension guarantee, in place since ? 2010 seems very unfair - basically pensions will always rise in line with inflation whilst salaries of workers (in the public sector at least, not sure about private sector) mustn't go up anywhere near inflation rates, because that would fuel inflation apparently. Explain that one to me.

You do realise that the triple lock was suspended in 2022? If the triple lock had been followed, the state pension would have increased by more than 8%. It didn't - it went up by 3.1%. Yes, the increase this year was 10.1% ... but the state pension isn't exactly a fortune! And at the moment there is only a 'pledge' to keep it in place until 2024.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Ffs. I just wrote a long explanation of why I think capital gains should be paid on property increases but it crashed.

In summary. My folks bought a place 2.5 times my dad’s income in 1980 for about 16k. It is now worth close to a million quid. So someone wanting to buy it would need 100k deposit and a wage of about 400k if borrowing 2.5 times. Clearly not happening in many cases. It is being clever and working hard earning all this free money is it. Ffs. It is just luck.

If not capital gains then it should be inheritance tax. Parents divorced and between them own three houses now worth a combined 1.2 million at a guess. My dad’s pension is more than my wage (which is over 50k). My brother and sister plus myself should get nailed for inheritance tax. Why should we get lots of benefit because my parents made so much cash just by living in a sodding house?

I would love to hear where final salary pensions exist In public sector. Linked to Average wage in civil service.

The reason Capital Gains Tax isn't charged on main homes is because to do that would be a massive drag on the housing market, by making it unaffordable to move. If you have a house worth £1m and you want to change jobs, or downsize because the children have left, or whatever, then you would pay tax at whatever rate and be left with £800k or £600k. Then with what's left you have to buy a new place. So you won't move to another part of the country because you couldn't afford a comparable house, and you won't downsize because you will have a less valuable property and no change.

Ditto people starting on the ladder. They buy a £100k house, and as it increases in value and they want to move up, the house has become worth £150k. They want to sell it and buy one worth £250k to raise their family, but they can't because the government has bagged £50k.

They charge CGT in full on second homes and commercial property, but not on main homes.

 

[ozzygull]

Not a boomer but Gen X and don't feel I can give an opinion as I don't know all the economics behind the question. I feel though with every generation there will be people who win and some that will lose and blaming people who are younger or older for your woes does not help. What we need is a strong government who can put policies in place that help give the majority a stable life. I can dream.

 

[Berty23]

It is simply a quirk of history and global economics.... in the 20s and 30s in the States in particular, people lost everything, so what!?.... to castigate a generation because they took advantage of an economic and social fair wind, is disingenuous... during the 70s I had high interest rates, high income tax, high unemployment, constant strikes, IRA bombings, social unrest... no computers, no mobile phones, ...... are you going to compensate me for those trials and tribulations?... no, so just get on with your lives, nobody is owed a living, if you can't buy a place, rent one... before the 70s, the vast majority of the great unwashed in this nation rented..... and if you don't want this ever increasing demand on housing to continue, then get off your moaning arse and do something about migration... 300k per year net inward flow... sort that one out.

Wow.

This is not about me.

I have a house. Almost paid off mortgage. I grew up without mobile phone and internet as well. I was a kid of the 80s. My old man was armed forces and we had experience of the impact of IRA on daily life. He couldn’t travel in uniform and we had big checks whenever we went on base. This is not about me. It is about the generation who can’t afford anything because of the actions of the boomers in the 80s and 90s when fake wealth with credit became a boon.

 

[Berty23]

So explain how the population of this nation is increasing by 500k per year then, half of which is migration... ?.... I dont see that easing any time soon, especially if Labour get in and open the gates.

Wow. This is very ignorant. We have an ageing population. That is why. And the pensions have to be paid. Primary school rolls are falling. So we will need further migration to fund the pensions of those clinging on.

High divorce rates increase demand on housing but then younger people are not getting married in the same numbers as they used to because they can’t afford it so that will also have an impact.

The mail, telegraph and express don’t want to tell you this though. Just make people shouty about immigrants. We need to process them and get them productive.

 

[The Clamp]

Tax the mega-rich. Scrap the Royal Family. Close tax loopholes. Throw the Tories in a ditch.

 

[Berty23]

That really is an incredible return compared to my own personal experience.

I bought my first house late 1982 - a 2 bed semi-detached house in Poole - for £23,995. I've just had a look to see what they are selling for now. Ours was number 73 and same as number 5 and 117 below that sold for less than £300k last year! Assume your folks place must have been in London or similar to see that extraordinary house price rise!

View attachment 165489

It was in a small village in south Devon that is now full of air bnb and second homes that people sit on. Local primary school had 125 kids when I went In 80s now has about 70 kids as families can’t afford to live in the area.

 

[Berty23]

You’re blaming the planet’s climate change on those born 1945 to 1965. Brits in particular by any chance?

Mankind’s been screwing the planet for centuries, but most notably since the Industrial Revolution. Folk born in the 1930’s or 1980’s for example are just as culpable. Young people very much love their flights, consumerism, the purchase of plastic ‘crap’ made in China, the lobbing of plastics from cars.

At the same time, there never was an idyll in 1935 or 1975. Always a mix of good and some injustices/evils in society.

Which generation invented the crap plastic to give their kids and package holidays?

 

[banjo]

Tax the mega-rich. Scrap the Royal Family. Close tax loopholes. Throw the Tories in a ditch.

That’ll do for a start.

 

[nicko31]

Millennials tend to be more educated, if you become more educated you're less vulnerable to being groomed by a handful of billionaire media barons. Its cutting off the supply of Conservatives.

No wonder there a war against the "remainer" universities

 

[Berty23]

Because the Government doesn't deserve a single f***ing cent of it is why.

Your parents took the risk, they deserve the reward.

If they had lost the house because they couldn't keep up with the payments the government wouldn't have bailed them out so they could keep it.

Yet when they pay it off and it goes up there's the parasitic Governments wanting their share of something they had no share or risk involved in.

That's why private owners and their families should get all the benefits from it.

But that is where we disagree. The level of risk was 2.5 times one Salary. Now you need 6 times joint salary. They afforded the massive interest rates easily so kept payments high when rented came down.

With such a high proportion. Of income going on paying mortgages and rent (used to pay off other person’s mortgage) means it is not money growing the economy. If mortgage costs were not insane then people would have more disposable income which would generate more growth and more tax which allows the government to invest in better services, improve education, health, infrastructure etc. better educated kids and people in better health only generates more growth.

The idea that governments should not get any money is ridiculous. Would you close hospitals, schools, prisons, let roads decay?

 

[Uh_huh_him]

The reality is that governments have not taxed at the required levels for nearly 50 years.
The shortfall is now becoming apparent across the economy.

Government needs to address this one way or the other.
Citizens of my age and older have benefited from the tax policies of the last half century and many may be better placed to take a higher percentage of the tax burden now required.

Age is not the issue, but wealth is.
Whoever has it should probably expect to see higher tax impacts over the next 20 years.

 

[The Clamp]

While we have a Royal Family that leach off the working people of the U.K. to the tune of 100’s of millions a year, a PM who spends tens of thousands a month on private jets to get to meetings in the next town, and corporations walking through tax loopholes the size of an elephant, we shouldn’t be thinking of taxing anyone any more than we already do.

And certainly not based on their date of birth.