Steep
Nutcrack Rapids
- Messages
- 16,656
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Pretty certain that if the rate of tax was lower your salary would be lower too, so that's a non argument.
and please use their services
LET THOSE WITH THE BROADEST SHOULDERS BEAR THE HEAVIEST BURDEN….
- Thread starter BBR
- Start date
Pretty certain that if the rate of tax was lower your salary would be lower too, so that's a non argument.
- Messages
- 29,465
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
Then don't work the overtime.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Pretty sure it wouldn't. The amount my employer pays has no bearing on the tax rate.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But then I wouldn't be able to stash away extra money for my retirement. As I said the 40% threshold leaves too many people in catch 22.
- Messages
- 29,465
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
So work the overtime and pay the tax.
It's the complaining that's a mystery to me.
It's a choice.
- Messages
- 6,882
- Name
- Carl
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 115,214
- Name
- The real Chris
- Edit My Images
- No
My dear old dad (GRHS) had the right idea, he said to me from a young age,If you keep working 11-12 hrs Sat & Sundays...............you might reach retirement.
"Yep work all hours god sends you and earn a shed load of money, but also take some time off to relax and spend some of it."
Very true
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
On occasion I work 12hrs on weekdays too.If you keep working 11-12 hrs Sat & Sundays...............you might reach retirement.
- Messages
- 6,469
- Name
- Ned
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It does in the long run - wages are benchmarked against cost of living and tax is a direct factor in that equation. Over time it would normalise to the new regime.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've always worked overtime when I could, but because the 40% threshold has barely moved in recent years I now find myself in the 40% tax bracket, when I shouldn't be.
- Messages
- 6,469
- Name
- Ned
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Maybe once I'd have agreed with you but it's quite a simplistic view. I've seen how much a trap having no positive role models can be - how can you know that a job and an education will give you more in life when all you've ever seen is your parents/gandparents/siblings/friends on benefits? That becomes the norm and it is a self fulfilling downward spiral. Who's fault is that? the kids? nope, but you have to feel sorry for them.
- Messages
- 115,214
- Name
- The real Chris
- Edit My Images
- No
I think that's the (Most peoples) point, TBH.
Not only that but
20 Mar 2013 - The starting point for paying 40% tax is to be cut from £42,475 to £41,451
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No, but they get exposure to working teachers, and in what is a mobile culture, the chance to get out of the squaler from which they have come.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Our wage rises have always exceeded the cost of living even if only by .25%. For quite a few years we get 2yr pay deals where the 2nd year is a guaranteed percentage above inflation the month before our rise. One year inflation shot up for a couple of months for that month and the next then fell back to the lower level again. We got a 12% pay rise that year.
My employer would physically have to cut my wages for the rate of tax to have any bearing on how much I got paid.
D
Deleted sulking member 63079
Guest
Pay more into your pension? You get tax relief on that.
- Messages
- 6,469
- Name
- Ned
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Our wage rises have always exceeded the cost of living even if only by .25%. For quite a few years we get 2yr pay deals where the 2nd year is a guaranteed percentage above inflation the month before our rise. One year inflation shot up for a couple of months for that month and the next then fell back to the lower level again. We got a 12% pay rise that year.
My employer would physically have to cut my wages for the rate of tax to have any bearing on how much I got paid.
But if tax were set at 20% only inflation wouldn't ever get that high.
Anyway, I now remember that I don't get into these political threads - they're more like roundabouts where everyone forgets to get off
- Messages
- 6,882
- Name
- Carl
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My dear old dad (GRHS) had the right idea, he said to me from a young age,
"Yep work all hours god sends you and earn a shed load of money, but also take some time off to relax and spend some of it."
Very true
That's pretty much been my philosophy since starting work & done more than my fair share of Saturdays, but I never relied on overtime for expenses/living costs, it was mainly used for `extras`.
A good friend of my missus, who in reality could afford not to work, used to put as many hours as poss in @ work (inc overtime) and put ALL her wages into savings so she & her hubby could retire in their early 50's. Although not `tight` with their money, they didn't really do much of anything.
She dropped down dead at 44 years old.
I've known a few folk who maybe didn't enjoy life as much as they could, saving for retirement etc & popped their clogs well before retirement age. It's no good saving for a very comfortable retirement if you don't have the health to enjoy it.
My missus had a serious health scare a few years ago & it does make you re evaluate what's actually important. Life is for living!
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Even the dregs get to school...
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's a company pension, we pay a set amount as does the company. Many of my friends with less company service paid into AVC's to boost their pensions, when they left the company a few years ago they found the avc's were virtually worthless. The only way I can pay in more is when I get a pay rise or if I get promoted.
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
We weren't talking about your grand parents though or even the times they hailed from.
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No. The post implied quite clearly that even coming from squalor that with education it is possible to escape squalor. I cannot see how your family history is relevant to the discussion, nor do I particularly care as I do not know you personally.
Everyone gets a free education upto the age of 18, and by law to 16, they get to interact with teachers, adults etc. People make their own life choices but an education, and the school ones are perfectly adequate are enough to get you started and employable.
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Or attendance at school. I thought there was a legal requirement for parents/gaurdians to ensure a childs attendance at school upto the 16th Birthday of said child, which is tantamount to an education until 16yrs of age. Perhaps its a Scottish thing.
- Messages
- 29,465
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
16 is a Scottish thing.
But what with you being so pro UK, so anti Scottish I know you couldn't possibly have meant that.
https://www.gov.uk/know-when-you-can-leave-school
And in all cases there are exceptions.
Just like some folk can legally begin to learn to drive a car on public roads at 16.
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am very Pro UK. I do not know if you mean that in a negative way. Thank you for the link. Therein lies my conclusion to our conversation tonight.
- Messages
- 4,353
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What do sections 7 and 8 of the Education Act, 1996 require, if not that?
- Messages
- 4,353
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Which section? It's a lengthy document and an examination of the index offers no assistance.Since it's the Education Act of 2002 your question is irrelevant
- Messages
- 29,465
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
I have absolutely no idea.
I simply pointed out that it's now the Education Act 2002, not 1996.
- Messages
- 402
- Name
- Jackie
- Edit My Images
- No
To those earning £50K>, giz a swap!
Oh, and you've got to understand how the most expensive machines in the hospital work, understand why the machines go *ping*, otherwise someone dies. And please remember to shove a broom up your @rse so you can sweep the floor at the same time. 
Oh, and you've got to understand how the most expensive machines in the hospital work, understand why the machines go *ping*, otherwise someone dies.
And please remember to shove a broom up your @rse so you can sweep the floor at the same time.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,353
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The 1996 Act wasn't repealed by the 2002 Act and the sections I referred to remain in force.I have absolutely no idea.
I simply pointed out that it's now the Education Act 2002, not 1996.
Which takes me back to questioning the source of your assertion that there is no law requiring education to 16.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'd answer by telling you what's involved in my workdays inclusive of overtime to get to £50k but I'd only get accused of making it a p'ing contest.To those earning £50K>, giz a swap!
Oh, and you've got to understand how the most expensive machines in the hospital work, understand why the machines go *ping*, otherwise someone dies.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That is already the case.
- Messages
- 402
- Name
- Jackie
- Edit My Images
- No
I'd answer by telling you what's involved in my workdays inclusive of overtime to get to £50k but I'd only get accused of making it a p'ing contest.
My just involves pressing the "silence" button and finding the lubricant for the broom.
Sorry, I'm a nurse, and I'm disgusting.
- Messages
- 2,816
- Name
- Kev
- Edit My Images
- No
That's pretty much been my philosophy since starting work & done more than my fair share of Saturdays, but I never relied on overtime for expenses/living costs, it was mainly used for `extras`.
A good friend of my missus, who in reality could afford not to work, used to put as many hours as poss in @ work (inc overtime) and put ALL her wages into savings so she & her hubby could retire in their early 50's. Although not `tight` with their money, they didn't really do much of anything.
She dropped down dead at 44 years old.
I've known a few folk who maybe didn't enjoy life as much as they could, saving for retirement etc & popped their clogs well before retirement age. It's no good saving for a very comfortable retirement if you don't have the health to enjoy it.
My missus had a serious health scare a few years ago & it does make you re evaluate what's actually important. Life is for living!
I used to save as much as I could and pay extra towards the mortgage, 2 self catering holidays a year, 1 abroad. Oldish cars, did all my own maintenance, never bothered with the latest gadgets or fashions, Ate sandwiches at work and if we went out for days, what I called "careful" with money although others viewed it as being "stingy"
I stopped work at 54, my wife went part time at 55 and stopped at 60. I am now 67 and enjoy an active interesting life with normally 6 holidays a year, 2 abroad the rest in the UK.
I know a few people who did the same as me and are enjoying their extra free time. No good living a long life if you don't have the money to enjoy it.