Link
Suggested by a Tory peer of all people. Interesting idea. A way to get some funds to Gen Z, seeing as all you millenials are apparently going to be making out like bandits.
Citizens Inheritance
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
Suggested by a Tory peer of all people. Interesting idea. A way to get some funds to Gen Z, seeing as all you millenials are apparently going to be making out like bandits.
Seems a bit daft - maybe they could just tax them properly while they're alive and redistribute it. I'm guessing most of that £150k average will come from equity in a house so it's not real money is it? Build more houses, particularly more social housing, and that would be a better use of everyone's £10k.
A policy I hope Kier supports and implements.
Think it should be handed out to all 30-40 year olds too who aren't on the housing market.
It'll never happen so don't worry about it
It'll never happen so don't worry about it
This. Build a million homes and suddenly the Gen Zs will be able to afford a house and the rich millenials inheritance will be less because the house they are inheriting will be worth less
I'm not sure any of these 'give everyone X' things really work. You can see in Ireland with the first time buyers stuff that it has just fecked the housing market even further. They're just handy to implement things that don't require real thought and planning to address societal issues.
A tory? Supporting handouts? To the poor?
I never thought I'd see the day
I never thought I'd see the day
In the middle of a crypto bull market? Let’s go!
Landlords be rubbing their hands at this news
Is there a way to do this without inflating prices etc?
Like, every new kid born gets £5000 that stays in a tracker ISA until they're 18?
Issue is redistributed wealth programs rarely work properly because people always line up for it when they don't need it etc
Literally everything the government spend money on is a redistributed wealth scheme.
What I mean is by the time it reaches people
As a road or a school?
I meant more financial packages, funds to people. Not parts of the commons.
I'm 30 and would be entitled to this if it happened now but it's a really fecking stupid idea.
Must be an election coming up...
Tbh, paying people who don't deserve it money is actually generally not a bad economic strategy as long as it's come from people that wouldn't spend it like massive corporations or very wealthy people. But in this case it would be such a completely arbitrary method of not solving a problem that it would be very dumb.
I’m a millennial. Dad’s just agreed to marry for the third time to a girl my age. Has no assets. Mums modest 3 bed semi in the northwest will be split between 4 kids.
Give me £30k please. I have some friends my age and younger that will inherit 3-5x this comfortably.
Give me £30k please. I have some friends my age and younger that will inherit 3-5x this comfortably.
Quite transparent isn't it.
This is why you don't listen to a word political think tanks say.
A good first step to helping 30 something year olds would be to address why somebody on 65k with 2 kids can end up with less take home pay than a single person on 40k.
A good first step to helping 30 something year olds would be to address why somebody on 65k with 2 kids can end up with less take home pay than a single person on 40k.
How does that happen? Surely can’t be true. Are we talking UK tax laws here?
He's got it the other way round.. he means someone with 65k has less than someone with 40k with kids. But I doubt that's right anyway because you'd have to be getting 15k net from the government with 2 kiddies, which obviously ain't happening.
Last edited:
The rich will buy the cheap homes to rent out while thr gen zs pay their mortgage
A completely pointless exercise if the true effort is to redistribute wealth - a £10,000 ‘shot in the arm’ isn’t anywhere near enough.
Inside of 2yrs, every penny of those £10k will be in the pockets of the 1% again, whether in the form of part of a deposit for a house, the clearance of CC debt, or other such expenses.
Appropriate taxation, closing of loopholes, appropriate welfare services etc are what is needed to help close the economic gap in society.
Inside of 2yrs, every penny of those £10k will be in the pockets of the 1% again, whether in the form of part of a deposit for a house, the clearance of CC debt, or other such expenses.
Appropriate taxation, closing of loopholes, appropriate welfare services etc are what is needed to help close the economic gap in society.
The £10k will be spent pissed away by a lot of people so it’ll get recycled back into the economy and the windfall will raise prices at the same time, thereby screwing the poorer people even more.
Blame badly implemented tax clauses and child benefit arrangements. A single income household with kids is currently fecked over massively in the UK.
can we hear more about @Ady87’s top shagger dad.
it’d just be like help to buy and property prices would rise again as greedy feckers would assume everyone had an extra 10k. the problem is there are not enough houses. anything that doesn’t directly tackle that is just background noise.
But why? How could that happen? How does one person on 65k take home less money than another person on 40k, just because the former person has kids?
I'd leave it if I were you. He's talking nonsense.
It does seem a bit mad tbf. And I’m coming at this as someone who is in a single income family, with two kids!
What I'd imagine he's getting at is the child benefit repayment for high income. You could have 2 parents earning 49k each that keep all their child benefit, but a single income household on 60k has to repay back every penny.
Yeah this, also loss of tax credits.
This is what he said though?
“somebody on 65k with 2 kids can end up with less take home pay than a single person on 40k”
What he originally said is nonsense. A person earning £65k with 2 kids will have more take home pay than a single person on £40k. The single person isn't entitled to the child tax credits and child benefits so the fact that those are tapered off for the higher earner is a redundant point. Someone earning £65k will have roughly £15k more take home pay than someone earning £40k.
The mistake we are all making is trying to work out what we believe this poster actually meant without taking into account the fact that he's just a bit daft.
Need to keep the housing bubble from bursting by any means necessary. Once the bottom of the first time buyer market falls out the whole house of cards collapses and your house is worth as much as it's land value plus bricks and mortar. No more speculative value.
I'm trying to give the poster the benefit of doubt
Yeah it's not clear what he meant, was just adding to the other posters reply on what sorts of benefits are lost due to these situations.