MSE News: Benefits 'may be linked to pay, not inflation'

diamonds

ILW wrote: »

Food vouchers are the way to go. For a set amount of healthy food for each family member.
Cannot be used for McD or fags and a criminal offence to sell them or buy them.

I know, lets say local authorities have to give rent free shops to the farmers WE pay to grow stuff, those on benefits & tax credits get a substantial discount near cost, those that can afford it buy cheaper than Tesco & the likes, its called co-operativing - we take it back to a community lifestyle not a brand name.


A few hours a month in a co-operative or charity easing local authority services/resources should be = tax refund on them hours from main employment...should save billions in admin & service providing between government bodies if we give tax back.

I hate these threads because its just a reminder of all the idiotic things government do instead of adopting common sense & saving money rather than borrowing & spending it.

hanes

Sack the whole goverment, let chaos rule the streets, abandon all hope let in those from far flung countries allow them tosuck the sap from the country. Increase the hardship on the working class. Hammer down the hatches, dig in tight and lets get messy!

Oh right its happening already....

MissMoneypenny

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

There are 2.5m unemployed in the UK, and a very optimistic 500,000 jobs available, so when all of those have been taken up, what do the remaining 2,000,000 do?

"Two sides of the same coin" is what this government called welfare and immigration. They are shutting the door fast on low skilled immigration; as oppose to the open door the last government had. Amazing really as the Labour policy harmed their own voters the most. It takes time for this to be felt, just as the benefit cuts will also take time.

They have also just scored a massive victory in changing EU law recently, that doesn't make the UK such an attractive place to those low skilled using the EEA route to live in the UK. Rome wasn't built in a day.

bluestarlight

Ddraig wrote: »

I am a mother of 4 children who are all clean, well kept, well fed, well educated. I do not smoke or go out and some of my clothes are older than my kids, I economize and pay everything I owe. Yet I am made to feel ashamed every time my husband reminds me that our tax credits are still benefits, so I then sit down and work out how much 40 hours on NMW would earn me and how much childcare I would need to pay as 30% of a weekly childcare bill from an average wage of £200 pw after tax.

No offence, but why have four children if you are struggling so much?

Gordon_the_Moron

chris_batchelor wrote: »

I've thanked you for your post [there being more joy in Heaven over 1 sinner that repenteth] - but I'm wondering whether this is the only appalling Tory idea which you oppose, or if you are now considering your allegiance?

I'll consider my allegiance when a better alternative comes along, I don't vote Conservative because I like everything they say or do, I just think they are better than the alternatives Labour or the Dim Libs offer, now more than ever we do need a 4th party but UKIP sure as hell isn't what we need!

sparkycat2

I think the government's position is being misrepresented. David Cameron has stated he wants benefit yearly increase to be which ever is the lowest CPI or Average Earnings.

If you link to the lowest of CPI Inflation or Average Earnings you end up eventually with people on benefits getting too poor to survive, because they would share the pain in economic downturns (lose ability to buy a basket of goods due to increase less than inflation, increase in real poverty) but not the gain in economic good times (increases never higher than inflation, increase in relative poverty).

Freezing benefits for two years will just make this increase in real and relative poverty faster.

The current system linking to inflation means in theory they stay static in the basket of goods they can buy, they never get poorer and they never get richer in real terms just in relative terms.

The Unemployed have been getting poorer in relative terms over the years. Unemployment Benefit JSA as a percentage of Average Earnings. September 1971 20.9% . April 2010 10.9% for 25+ year olds, 8.7% for under 25 year olds.

The problem is low paid worker wagers have also not kept up with Average Earnings. If JSA had kept pace with earnings it would not be April 2010 £53.45 for under 25 year olds, £67.50 for 25+ year olds, it would now be what about £129.43 a week.
Too close for comfort in my view to take home pay on minimum wage April 2010 £145.52 for 16-17 year olds, £180.88 for 18-20 year olds, £210.80 for 21+ year olds

The problem is income disparity in the working population. Low paid jobs are too low paid. This might be in part because the alternative to taking on a low paid job might well be claiming benefits. So low pay wages compete with welfare benefits, because we never have a shortage of low skilled low paid workers. Since the link to average earnings was removed from unemployment benefit, and unemployment benefit has failed to keep pace with increases in average earnings, so have the wages for low paid jobs.

Benefit uprating

1974 Labour linked benefits to the highest of the two annual increases RPI Retail Price Index and AEI Average Earnings Index.(because inflation was higher than wage increases and they wanted to prevent a increase in real poverty amongst those on benefits)

1976 Labour shift to use a forecast to estimate the movements in prices and earnings (because they wanted people to not suffer real poverty due to benefit increases being time lagged relative to price increases)

1979 Conservative change link to use the usualy lower RPI only

1983 Conservative shift back to using an historical basis to calculate the RPI increase

1983 Conservative change link to use the lower ROSSI (RPI (All Items) less housing costs) to uprate

1987 Conservative benefit increase date shifted to April

1992 Conservative change link to use the lower New ROSSI (RPI (All Items) less rent, local taxes and mortgage interest payments)

2011 Conservative change link to use the lower CPI Consumer Price Index

2012 Conservatives propose a 2 year benefit freeze followed by changing the link to the currently lower Average Earnings, or more likely to whichever is lower Average Earnings or CPI