[Politics] Are baby boomers taxed enough?

[JamieR]

No doubt Boomers have done well but there's no point in punitive IHT taxes as that won't solve the issue of high asset prices. One thing we have to nail down is the cost of social care. No way should the cost be shifted to taxpayer, you have assets, you pay for it. The 'I've paid my taxes, I'm entitled' mantra gets on my wick.

 

[portlock seagull]

No doubt Boomers have done well but there's no point in punitive IHT taxes as that won't solve the issue of high asset prices. One thing we have to nail down is the cost of social care. No way should the cost be shifted to taxpayer, you have assets, you pay for it. The 'I've paid my taxes, I'm entitled' mantra gets on my wick.

Agree entirely

 

[Berty23]

I thought taxation was based on wealth, not age . Frankly, what has age got to do with it? I live on a pension, supported by a modest company pension and we get by but have no spare money . What is there to tax?

I took this chat to be about closing loopholes that allow those boomers with wealth to sit on it when gained through certain routes.

Obviously until now the tax system is designed to please older people because these are the people who always vote but with young people getting more engaged in politics since the older generations (yes I know not all but on average the older you are the more likely to support brexit) gave brexit then we might see more policies designed for the workers/younger rather than the old voting base who are no longer the wealth generators.

Time will tell.

Interesting times ahead.

As I have said several times. This is not about me. I am going to do very nicely out of the current rules. But my mortgage is almost gone so my inheritance will go to helping my kids giving them a chance to own a home. They are lucky that their grandparents happened to live in a poor rural village in the 70s/80s which then became desirable. No skill. Just luck.

 

[Berty23]

No doubt Boomers have done well but there's no point in punitive IHT taxes as that won't solve the issue of high asset prices. One thing we have to nail down is the cost of social care. No way should the cost be shifted to taxpayer, you have assets, you pay for it. The 'I've paid my taxes, I'm entitled' mantra gets on my wick.

I agree with this.

Why do we feel they should sit on assets and not pay for care while young families can’t afford to buy a home and have kids. It is so backward.

 

[portlock seagull]

Something that escapes many younger generations complaining about Boomers, and I include myself to some extent, is they are rapidly becoming ‘past tense’ anyhow.

Like the greatest generation are now all but gone, I don’t think people realise the passage of time!

Perhaps worth saving your wrath about Boomers if so, because - like the internet - you’re increasingly screaming into a vacuum!

Who else can be blamed therefore? Proceed with the witch hunt

 

[portlock seagull]

I took this chat to be about closing loopholes that allow those boomers with wealth to sit on it when gained through certain routes.

Obviously until now the tax system is designed to please older people because these are the people who always vote but with young people getting more engaged in politics since the older generations (yes I know not all but on average the older you are the more likely to support brexit) gave brexit then we might see more policies designed for the workers/younger rather than the old voting base who are no longer the wealth generators.

Time will tell.

Interesting times ahead.

As I have said several times. This is not about me. I am going to do very nicely out of the current rules. But my mortgage is almost gone so my inheritance will go to helping my kids giving them a chance to own a home. They are lucky that their grandparents happened to live in a poor rural village in the 70s/80s which then became desirable. No skill. Just luck.

My ancestors lived in a small poor rural village outside London in the 1700’s.

Called Chelsea.

Wish they’d bought their property

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

Been a lot of comment on here about the demand for housing outstripping supply, the consequence of which is property prices will increase if supply cannot match demand.

For as long as I can remember, there has been a drive to build more housing in this country, and in my borough, in the 22 years I've lived here, growth of housing has been significant.

But, if our little island, with it's limited space and capacity to build endless new homes, then surely the focus should switch to trying to cool the demand. Somebody wrote the net-migration numbers in an early post, and the news is full of boat-people, seeking asylum in an already over-populated UK. All these, immigrants, currently in hotels and floating barges are also going to want a home to live in, so does it not make more sense to focus on the causes of the housing crises?

Someone else wrote that the birth-rate is dropping and inferred this will create a hole in HMRC income. Well, what about the reduction in housing demand that this will create, is that a positive? If the demand decreases, the law of economics states that prices will fall. Can't see many folk being pleased about that?

 

[nicko31]

And the expense of marriage is also putting people off. More kids born out of wedlock. Another issue linked to house prices. https://ifstudies.org/blog/marriage-is-disappearing-from-britain

Got 3 sets of boomers of my family; 2 divorced, 1 widowed all sitting in over sized 3 / 4 bed houses.

Meanwhile my neighbour on one side lives in a 4 bedder alone age 70, on the other in a 4 bedder alone age 80. Both never have anyone to stay.

All need to to downsize and free up the housing stock for families, but the problem is a lack of suitable retirement properties available. Need 2 bed dwellings which are mobility friendly ideally with some outdoor space

 

[LamieRobertson]

Got 3 sets of boomers of my family; 2 divorced, 1 widowed all sitting in over sized 3 / 4 bed houses.

Meanwhile my neighbour on one side lives in a 4 bedder alone age 70, on the other in a 4 bedder alone age 80. Both never have anyone to stay.

All need to to downsize and free up the housing stock for families, but the problem is a lack of suitable retirement properties available. Need 2 bed dwellings which are mobility friendly ideally with some outdoor space

Do they actually want to move….or is this the case of you think they should?

 

[The Clamp]

Been a lot of comment on here about the demand for housing outstripping supply, the consequence of which is property prices will increase if supply cannot match demand.

For as long as I can remember, there has been a drive to build more housing in this country, and in my borough, in the 22 years I've lived here, growth of housing has been significant.

But, if our little island, with it's limited space and capacity to build endless new homes, then surely the focus should switch to trying to cool the demand. Somebody wrote the net-migration numbers in an early post, and the news is full of boat-people, seeking asylum in an already over-populated UK. All these, immigrants, currently in hotels and floating barges are also going to want a home to live in, so does it not make more sense to focus on the causes of the housing crises?

Someone else wrote that the birth-rate is dropping and inferred this will create a hole in HMRC income. Well, what about the reduction in housing demand that this will create, is that a positive? If the demand decreases, the law of economics states that prices will fall. Can't see many folk being pleased about that?

If the birth rate falls we then have huge problems paying for old people. We need people to live shorter lives. But that is not an option.

As for blaming immigrants for the housing issue? Well, nobody is arguing that we need to stop people arriving on small boats. There are some differing opinions on how to achieve that but no, it’s not their fault.

We also need immigrants to look after our old people and our children.

We also need more housing. The top 50 landowners in the U.K. currently own 7,331,243 acres which equates to over 12%of Britain's landmass.
We need to take some of that back and get building on it.

That won’t happen as the more properties that are built, the less valuable the property portfolios of the wealthy become. And we can’t have that now, can we.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm 38 and I've no problem with people benefitting from the fruits of their labour, unless that labour is exploiting the labour of people being paid a subsistence wage whilst you swan about in a rocket.

Like yourself, I'm quite lucky in that my parents did well for themselves in the 90s through hard work and, when the time comes, the result of that work will find its way into my and my brothers hands. If I'm honest, I don't know how comfortable I am with this. I have friends - hard working, good people - who won't have this luck. That's not their fault, it's not their parent's fault, it's not my fault. It's just the luck of it, I guess.

And I think this is what winds people up about 'boomers'. There's a level of sneering from some of them. Some of them. That meme of "Oh if you youngsters stopped eating so much avocado toast you'd be rich by now" exists for a reason.

There's this idea that if people just grind away and put the hours in then they'll reap the rewards when, the sad reality is, that just isn't the case for a lot of people. And when those people question why that is they're called lazy. Which is frankly bollocks.

As I say, I've no axe to grind with boomers or Gen X or Z or Y or whoever else but I do have an axe to grind with people using this stuff to create wedge issues to divert our attention away from the actual problems. Which we can see happening, in real time, in this topic.

the avocado meme is invented by gen x & z writers, the boomers wouldn't know about what the young'uns spend money on. think about that. the point is not about grafting to get something and saying younger gen don't, it's about sense of entitlement that young generations seem to have: they have so much, want more, and don't want to make choices. if you're spending 50 quid a week on lunches it damn well will be harder to save for that mortgage.

 

[Blues Guitarist]

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

I paid 18% interest on my first mortgage. From that perspective youngsters have got it easy today!

 

[Weststander]

The alarm bells posts about a declining population are a million miles away from the reality in the UK.

The numbers rise year on year by 100,000’s. Births and immigrants more than covering deaths, angry 25 years olds seeking the 40c heat and skin cancer of Sydney, hospital consultants moving to Canada and couples having to delay having kids.

Despite the miserable image of this country from some natives, millions would love to live here.

 

[Bakero]

the avocado meme is invented by gen x & z writers, the boomers wouldn't know about what the young'uns spend money on. think about that. the point is not about grafting to get something and saying younger gen don't, it's about sense of entitlement that young generations seem to have: they have so much, want more, and don't want to make choices. if you're spending 50 quid a week on lunches it damn well will be harder to save for that mortgage.

I think the avocado meme was actually first started by an Australia billionaire property magnate. It was then of course amplified:

And then of course the classic:

 

[The Clamp]

the avocado meme is invented by gen x & z writers, the boomers wouldn't know about what the young'uns spend money on. think about that. the point is not about grafting to get something and saying younger gen don't, it's about sense of entitlement that young generations seem to have: they have so much, want more, and don't want to make choices. if you're spending 50 quid a week on lunches it damn well will be harder to save for that mortgage.

And of course house prices are 60% higher in real terms than in the 70’s and 80’s.

I’m not sure people who are saving up for a deposit are spending £50 on lunches. Young people I know are better with their money than I ever was. I was out pissing my wages up the wall from age 16 to 30.
They might be spending £150 a week on essentials these days though.



Sure, there will always be people who don’t want to work or waste their money and still moan when they can’t afford stuff. Always has been, always will.

I suppose we do have a lot these days. But the cost of tech and white goods etc is way less than it was a few decades ago.

 

[BBassic]

if you're spending 50 quid a week on lunches it damn well will be harder to save for that mortgage.

Agreed (though this particular sentence sounds very reminiscent of the sneering I mentioned)

The people I know who can't afford to get a mortgage also can't afford £50 on lunches a week. Not that they would because they're not idiots either.

I'm not denying there's a level of entitlement to some of my generation. The vast majority I know just want to be able to afford a home which they currently can't do because they're paying the mortgage of some other f**ker through rents that have risen way out of line with their wages.

That isn't the fault of the boomers who own the properties or of the millenials who spend £9.99 a month on Netflix

 

[Berty23]

I paid 18% interest on my first mortgage. From that perspective youngsters have got it easy today!

And what was that as a multiple of your salary.

Even when I got my first mortgage in 2004 it was only 3 times combined. Now it is 6 or 7 times. It is crazy. And what was the deposit required as a proportion of your salary ie how possible to save.

People say 50 quid a week on lunch. That is 200 quid a month. 2.4K a year. When you need a deposit of 30k to buy a house that is not really that much is it? Especially when the rate people pay is more then the mortgage repayment would be. It is nuts.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Agreed (though this particular sentence sounds very reminiscent of the sneering I mentioned)

The people I know who can't afford to get a mortgage also can't afford £50 on lunches a week. Not that they would because they're not idiots either.

I'm not denying there's a level of entitlement to some of my generation. The vast majority I know just want to be able to afford a home which they currently can't do because they're paying the mortgage of some other f**ker through rents that have risen way out of line with their wages.

That isn't the fault of the boomers who own the properties or of the millenials who spend £9.99 a month on Netflix

Indeed

Most of the people I know spending £50 a week on lunch are from my generation and have benefited from low cost mortgages and low taxation for the past 20+ years.

 

[studio150]

No doubt Boomers have done well but there's no point in punitive IHT taxes as that won't solve the issue of high asset prices. One thing we have to nail down is the cost of social care. No way should the cost be shifted to taxpayer, you have assets, you pay for it. The 'I've paid my taxes, I'm entitled' mantra gets on my wick.

So when you reach 60, sell your home and move into rated accommodation, either blow the proceeds from the house sale on numerous holidays, cars etc, or gift it to your children and hope not to die in the next seven years, and then get the taxpayer to pick up your social care bill later in life as you no longer have any assets.

Brilliant idea

 

[Berty23]

The alarm bells posts about a declining population are a million miles away from the reality in the UK.

The numbers rise year on year by 100,000’s. Births and immigrants more than covering deaths, angry 25 years olds seeking the 40c heat and skin cancer of Sydney, hospital consultants moving to Canada and couples having to delay having kids.

Despite the miserable image of this country from some natives, millions would love to live here.

Another wow post.

The immigrants are required to fill the gaps we have NOW. the economic migrants who come to work in care, hospitals, and often low paid roles. This is an issue for the present day.

The issue with birth rates falling is the impact this will have in 20-30 years. We will need even more immigrants or a drastic change in life expectancy. If those immigrants that come here aged 35 then retire here we will be even more screwed.

I would not be shocked if in 20 years there is a serious discussion about how we reduce the burden on the state of caring for old people.

With the state expected to pay for older people’s care and transport, what else should they pay for? Holidays? It all feels so contradictory that some feel that selling a house to pay for you own care is unacceptable. As a 44 year old if i can’t afford something I will have to sell my home and pay for it. Why should older people not pay for something they need? I genuinely don’t understand.