MSE News: MPs vote to limit benefit rises to 1%

princessdon

clemmatis wrote: »

Most of the benefits in question go to people in work

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/05/soldiers-nurses-teachers-benefit-curbs

@dori2o, yes; we could be in for a triple-dip recession.

Ok Clemmatis I admit I am not the best with figures so help me out here.

Rise to inflation was 3% - they are proposing 1%.

So for a couple with an income of £600 pw £31200 PA with 2 children, wife makes a lifestyle decision not to work and receive zero tax credits (as they are near the cut off), is going to lose £424 PA.

What was the benefit they were apparantly receiving to lose £424 PA at the rate of 2%?

I can't work the figures out. Saying they will lose 424 for 2% reduction means they get a whole whack of benefits and on £32K they'd not get virtually anything.

Sorry I need someone to explain it because maths and me don't mix.

clemmatis

I didn't check the figures, princessdon. They are, the piece says, from a Children's Society report. My point is simply that most of the affected benefits are paid to people in work.

princessdon

clemmatis wrote: »

I didn't check the figures, princessdon. They are, the piece says, from a Children's Society report. My point is simply that most of the affected benefits are paid to people in work.

Sorry I thought you'd read it and yes most benefits do go to working people, but I can't fathom any of the figures used in the article. If I look at my sister who gets CB x 2. she will lose £32 PA. That doesn't make a good article though does it.

They don't make sense, none of them make sense to me. Either the worse off is because of tax increases to higher earners or something?

scootw1

The vote has gone through. The cuts are happening

princessdon

Can't say I am suprised TBH

I'd rather some benefits were removed from the list like JSA but that wasn't up for the vote was it.

mrs_motivated

Has anyone considered that we are in a recession and limiting benefit increases to one percent instead of CPI rate will in effect take millions of pounds out of the local economy?

So the ghost town centres I often see in different parts of the country will become worse. More business' will close, resulting in more job losses and therefore more people claiming benefits?


And the rationale for the 1 percent limit is...........:doh: :wall:

princessdon

mrs_motivated wrote: »

Has anyone considered that we are in a recession and limiting benefit increases to one percent instead of CPI rate will in effect take millions of pounds out of the local economy?

So the ghost town centres I often see in different parts of the country will become worse. More business' will close, resulting in more job losses and therefore more people claiming benefits?


And the rationale for the 1 percent limit is...........:doh: :wall:

The rationale for the 1% limit is because many workers haven't had a pay rise and they are trying to equalise this.

As I said the £32 per year for the average 2 child family isn't going to stop them going to the high street.

flexrider

zoominatorone wrote: »

If you have a child, or indeed children, compared to a single person on JSA, the claimant is positively rolling in it, no matter how people try to spin that they aren't.;)

Please at 120 a for-night JSA is not rolling in it, Even By the Daily mail or newpapers you may read its 1% of 120 quid a forthnight so 118.24p or 236 pound a month without housing benefit you could not even pay the rent with that

flexrider

mrs_motivated wrote: »

Has anyone considered that we are in a recession and limiting benefit increases to one percent instead of CPI rate will in effect take millions of pounds out of the local economy?

So the ghost town centres I often see in different parts of the country will become worse. More business' will close, resulting in more job losses and therefore more people claiming benefits?





And the rationale for the 1 percent limit is...........:doh: :wall:

Yes one person gets it? thank you for a fantastic response the 1% does nothing anyway for every pound put back into tax 3 quid get eaten by the welfare bill so what does the 1% produce
:wall:

you get the economy working by creating jobs not hurting the lowest paid or unemployed ?

mrs_motivated

princessdon wrote: »

The rationale for the 1% limit is because many workers haven't had a pay rise and they are trying to equalise this.

As I said the £32 per year for the average 2 child family isn't going to stop them going to the high street.

I haven't had a pay rise for 3 years, however, I disagree with what you say, it will affect the high street and other local business. I am currently calculating the impact on the city I live in terms of local economy loss (part of my job) it is staggering without factoring in other welfare reforms.