We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Tax credits and universal credit
Comments
-
gorgeyetsun wrote: »In an overpopulated world, why are we giving people a cash incentive to breed?
For votes, I'm afraid.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
I've been thinking recently about the phasing out of child and working tax credits, and the introduction of universal credit.
It started because I was looking ahead and trying to find out what's likely to happen to me. My situation (widowed with kids at school) isn't hugely common, and it's been quite hard to find the information I was looking for, so in the process of searching I've learnt quite a lot about UC and how it's going to work. Two things have struck me.
Firstly, once the lengthy transfer process has completed, and the people on transitional relief have eventually got off it, I think there will be a lot of the sort of people who currently qualify for WTC/CTC who won't qualify for any UC at all. People with more than 16k in capital, for example (capital including cash, shares and property that you don't live in yourself), or people at the top end of the income distribution of CTC claimants.
Secondly, I think the ethos and "feeling" of UC will be quite different from CTC/WTC. The current CTC feels rather like child benefit - if you have kids then you can get it even if you're really quite well off, and it's administered by HMRC not the DWP. This means that many people perceive claiming it as somehow not putting them into some kind of "benefit class", and still manage to look down on those who claim housing benefit and JSA and other out of work benefits. UC, however, is going to feel nothing at all like CTC, and a lot more like all those other benefits - the means testing is going to be much more like the current means testing for HB, JSA etc, and people who've only ever claimed CTC and CB are going to find that intrusive and uncomfortable. Some of them, I think, may even get outraged that they are being treated like "benefit scum".
So I thought it might prove an interesting topic for this board, to consider what the likely effects will be on (a) the economy, (b) house prices, and (c) anything else.
[Please note that the hateful phrase "benefit scum" is in quotes because I do not lump all benefit claimants into one category and consider them deserving of contempt. But other people do, and I am interested in how those people may respond to finding themselves part of the same system as those they despise.]
I found it very interesting the other day talking to a family head who was working full time and so was his wife, they have 5 kids and get quite a high amount of tax credits one way or another. The two oldest ones are getting too old soon and they will be losing tax credits soon.
I commented so you will be getting less benefits then when they get too old?
They said we do not get benefits like the "benefit scum on JSA and suchlike" Well what would you call it then?
You are right, when UC replaces everything, everyone will be lumped together.0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »So how did we get where we are then ? Is it just a coincidence that after 13 years of Labour this is one of the biggest issues of the day ? I don't remember it being such a big deal in the 1997 election, or before that (although no doubt there were some idle welfare scroungers even then). It got out of hand under Labour. Even a lot of their own supporters now apparently believe that they gave away too much in welfare, spending too much and creating an entrenched underclass. It is a coalition Conservative/LibDem government that is trying to do something about it. Would Labour have done the same ? I doubt it -- too much political capital in keeping it the way it is.
If anyone who points out these realities is to be accused of being "prejudiced" then I think it says more about the attitude of those making the accusation than about those accused.
I only use the word prejudice because yo will only see good in the conservatives and everything that labour touch as bad. I can accept that there is good and bad in both parties.
There have always been a small minority of welfare scroungers, there always will be. When we have shave d another x% of the welfare bill are these peole simply going to dissapear, is the economic outlook suddenly going to turn rosy. Are we suddenly going to get nice fat tax rebates?
The reason there is such a feeding frenzy now is because the conservatives have decided to make it one. It divides and diverts attention from the real problems of the country.
We have got here by decades of slow burn decline presided over by governments. They are all culpable.
In 1997 we hadn't just had a GFC and a long period of global crisis for the western economies. No doubt these are the fault of labour too."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
gorgeyetsun wrote: »In an overpopulated world, why are we giving people a cash incentive to breed?
Because as society we have all failed?"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »I only use the word prejudice because yo will only see good in the conservatives and everything that labour touch as bad. I can accept that there is good and bad in both parties.
There have always been a small minority of welfare scroungers, there always will be. When we have shave d another x% of the welfare bill are these peole simply going to dissapear, is the economic outlook suddenly going to turn rosy. Are we suddenly going to get nice fat tax rebates?
The reason there is such a feeding frenzy now is because the conservatives have decided to make it one. It divides and diverts attention from the real problems of the country.
We have got here by decades of slow burn decline presided over by governments. They are all culpable.
In 1997 we hadn't just had a GFC and a long period of global crisis for the western economies. No doubt these are the fault of labour too.
No it won't solve everything overnight. But I believe in running scared. It is a global race for prosperity. If we don't have the vast majority of the population pulling its weight I am convinced that we will lose the race and slip down. At present we are going in the opposite direction and carrying an increasing number of passengers, on the back of 'social justice' and failing to sufficiently support and reward those who can bring about economic growth. You have to start somewhere to reverse that trend.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »No it won't solve everything overnight. But I believe in running scared. It is a global race for prosperity. If we don't have the vast majority of the population pulling its weight I am convinced that we will lose the race and slip down. At present we are going in the opposite direction and carrying an increasing number of passengers, on the back of 'social justice' and failing to sufficiently support and reward those who can bring about economic growth. You have to start somewhere to reverse that trend.
You are right to an extent. But its a good job we never went on to the Euro or we would be in the !!!!!!.
At least we can still print billions more pounds sterling and people still think its worth something.0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »and failing to sufficiently support and reward those who can bring about economic growth. You have to start somewhere to reverse that trend.
Loading up "real"students with the massive baggage of debt is wonderful support, that £40K of debt helps no end. Gets them off on the right foot with an additional tax take of 9%, makes the greasy snakes and ladders of life so much more rewarding.
They don't mind who they shaft."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »Loading up "real"students with the massive baggage of debt is wonderful support, that £40K of debt helps no end. Gets them off on the right foot with an additional tax take of 9%, makes the greasy snakes and ladders of life so much more rewarding.
They don't mind who they shaft.
But seriously, how many students ever pay off that 40K and the 9% interest?
Nearly everyone defaults these days, unless they get a good job and that does not happen that much.
In the USA they say the debt can never be defaulted on, even bankruptcy the student debt remains.0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »Loading up "real"students with the massive baggage of debt is wonderful support, that £40K of debt helps no end. Gets them off on the right foot with an additional tax take of 9%, makes the greasy snakes and ladders of life so much more rewarding.
They don't mind who they shaft.
Hang on a minute, before Blair decided to try to put 40% through higher education, without a clue how to pay for it, there was not a crisis of funding.
How would you propose to fund it then ? More debt with China ?No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »Hang on a minute, before Blair decided to try to put 40% through higher education, without a clue how to pay for it, there was not a crisis of funding.
How would you propose to fund it then ? More debt with China ?
"real" being the operative word. The ones that will be the innovators and movers of the future. The ones that are going to keep the engine running.
40% is mad you are right."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards