Re: Rich Pensioners.

This is something that the Conservatives in the US have been wanting to do. They simply HATE social programs and decry ANY money going to help the poor and the elderly... they would MUCH rather all that money go to tax breaks for Corporations and the wealthy. Republicans have wanted to privatize our Social Security and Medicare (healthcare for seniors) for years.. so their wealthy friends can get more money. Don't be fooled by them.. They are not looking to take more from the rich. They are looking to turn social programs into Welfare. Once you let them start means testing your social programs.. they will not stop with those with incomes over 50,000... Every year the dollar amount will be ratcheted down until NO ONE is getting pensions or healthcare except only the very poorest of the poor. The Middle Class will get screwed. I am VERY against means testing for paid in benefits.

Re: Rich Pensioners.

Having an income of £50k + is not excessive. Plenty of people earn that much and I'm not talking about Barristers, GPs etc... Should pensioners always be expected to take a huge drop in income?

I keep returning to the point that the higher the salary, the higher the contribution that you make through tax etc... I am not suggesting that higher earners should get more in state benefits (they will most likely have better occupational pensions), but their contributions should be recognised and they should not be penalised by being denied them.

We're already being screwed by the broken promises of past and present governments, so I'm going to take every penny I can get. It will enable me to help my own family who face a more uncertain future.

Re: Rich Pensioners.

I think everyone always sees someone just above them on the pay scale as rich, to me with two of us working we get well less than half of the £50,000 so it looks like a kings ransom to us, but to anyone earning that much they would think it just enough to live on and no more.

So we need to look at where benefits should stop, for me I would stop anyone on over £25,000 getting any sort of benefit.

We keep saying we cannot afford for people to retire well how much easier that may be if we stopped universal benefits for people who could/should manage without !

Re: Rich Pensioners.

Again... I must plead ignorance to the British system. I can only speak about the US with any confidence. We have two paid in benefit programs here. One is Social Security (which is the old age, or disability pension) The other is Medicare, which is healthcare for anyone over 65 or who has a severe disability. BOTH programs are funded by a tax called FICA. ( Federal Insurance Contribution Act) which is paid from payroll taxes. Unfortunately, people are only taxed on income UP TO $113,000. Everyone despite their wealth is entitled to both programs. Where the unfairness comes in is that a Millionaire is only taxed on his first $113,000 which may only be a tiny percentage of his entire income.. while a middle class person making $50,000 is taxed on 100% of their income. A sure fix to our funding of these programs is to collect the FICA tax from 100% of EVERYONES income.. However, guess who is against that as it would mean higher taxes for the already wealthy who don't particularly need SS or Medicare.. It would never fly with our Republicans.


BTW... L50,000 is only $80,970 US dollars.. so I have to agree that while a nice comfortable income.. it is FAR from being rich by any stretch of the imagination.

Re: Rich Pensioners.

Hi Audrey... very basically, in the UK we all pay two things...
Income tax which is payable on all income above a set allowance (planned to rise to £10k - about $16k per year) - this is graduated - the more you earn, the higher percentage you pay. It gets to the stage where it's mor confiscation than taxation.
There is also National insurance which pays for health care, pensions etc.. This is payed both by the employee and the employer.

The main thing about the UK is that health care is 'free at point of delivery' to all. This is unlimited and of good quality - but the organisation of the system (NHS) is often slow and inefficient. For this reason, many people have private health care too for less serious problems.

The average UK salary for a experienced person in a big company is in excess of £40k ($73k) pa. It is not uncommon for families with two people working to have joint salaries before tax of £70k - £80k ($110k-$130k) - conversions are very approximate.

Re: Rich Pensioners.

That description is pretty similar to ours.. We pay a graduated income tax also. Then we pay the FICA tax which funds Social Security (pension) and Medicare (for the elderly) our FICA tax is 6%. The difference in our systems is that Medicare is only for those 65 and older. Those of us younger must get employer sponsered healthcare, or purchase our own from the private market or do without healthcare.

I'm sure you have heard of the hoopla over Obamacare.. or the Affordable Care Act. which will allow people under 65 to purchase very affordable healthcare from group exchanges.. and obtain subsidies from the US government depending on income. Of course the Republicans are fighting it tooth and nail... even just shut down the US government and threatened default in debt to try to defeat it. GOD forbid everyone should have healthcare... Poor and unemployed people should just die I guess... serves them right. What these morons don't understand is that the poor wait until their illness is so severe, the show up half dead at the Emergency room and end up costing taxpayers big bucks anyway. Penny wise and pound foolish...

The median income in the USA is $46,000 or approx L28,000.
However, a huge portion of Americans make substancially less, so this number is skewed by the vast income inequality here, with 10% of the US population holding 71% of the wealth.

Re: Rich Pensioners.

George matey you forgot to mention that Income Tax is 'capped' at 45p in the £ once you you reach the 'ceiling' - At that point, income tax remains at 45p in the £, irrespective how high the earnings go.


"I keep returning to the point that the higher the salary, the higher the contribution that you make through tax etc..." That point George matey only remains true if the person doesn't evade or avoid tax, which as you well know is not the case - many £Billions in tax are currently being avoided by devious means by those who can pay tax expert accountants to do just that!!!.

Re: Rich Pensioners.

That's very true and should be far better policed than it is, we go after benefit fraudsters so why not people who avoid paying at the other end of the scale ?

Re: Rich Pensioners.

Firstly, I have never suggested that people should break the law to avoid paying tax. If you avoid it by legally exploiting loopholes or exceptions in the tax law , then that suggests badly drafted laws. Whether or not you think this is morally wrong is another matter.

You may be correct about the cap of 45% on income tax, but I would suggest that this is little better than confiscation - a punishment for being successful. I resent greatly having been an honest taxpayer, being careful with my money and then being told that I shouldn't enjoy some benefits from my contributions.

I'll take every penny I can get.

Re: Rich Pensioners.

If we all started from a level playing field and all had the same opportunities in life I would absolutely agree with you but where some are able to make vastly better lives for themselves I am not sure they shouldn't help those who need it. There fore we should tighten up laws and take what we can from richer people to redistribute to poorer people.