Where will the cuts fall

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Generali wrote: »

I think that many people in the public sector earn more than is necessary for them to be paid. I'd pay nurses more as there is a shortage of them, teachers in London too.

Areas where there aren't shortages I'd definitely cut wages though or more accurately let inflation take care of the problem.

Can you give a few examples of over paid public sector workers so we can examine your post to see if we agree?

Kittycat1981

Low paid public sector worker here. I would be paid more to go sit on the check out at aldi however i choose to work in my area to help others.

Since the start of this government our service has seen huge cuts, staff shortages and an increase of workload. I work full time, hardly ever get a lunch break (I'm lucky if i get to eat a sandwich while driving to my next appointment)

I work with lots of public sector workers (across health, social care and education) and everyone on the front line is feeling the pressure but we continue on to provide a service to the public!

I see on a daily basis the how the cuts are savaging families, childhood poverty IS on the increase, children not having a hot meal unless its at school, parents using food banks (and working parents too!) families becoming homeless, children not having a bed to sleep in, or sharing a bed with 2 others. Families huddled together in one room under a quilt because they cannot afford to put the heating on- they've used the last bit of cash to buy food.

We live in one of the richest countries in the world, its 2015 and some of the conditions people are made to live in are frankly of Victorian standards. Slump landlords, high rents, shortage of social housing, minimal job prospects.

So while everyone is nice and warm at home, sat with a full belly of food,- laptop on their knee- slating public sector workers who are out there helping to try and make a difference and improve the life chances of those born without much choice- have a think about WHY some people choose to work in the public sector.

Teachers, nurses, police service, social workers, housing officers, fire service, domestic violence services, youth services just to name a few front line public sector staff, who see every day what many people fail to see. A deprived unequal society where the gap between the rich and the poor is ever expanding and little hope of it narrowing.

michaels

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Seems some tory proposals have been leaked tonight detailing these very cuts.

Downing street has quickly come out and stated it's not policy. And that's very true - it isn't....yet. But George Osbourne and Iain Duncan Smith have spent rather a long time discussing these changes over the past 2 weeks.

So....

Carers allowance to be cut completely for anyone not on universal credit.

Disability allowance, personal independance payments and attendance allowance to be taxed. (easier to say they will tax them than cut these benefits I guess).

Council tax allowance to be removed from the majority and instead only those on universal credits will receive it.

Regional benefit caps. Those in London would get a highr cap. Maximum 23k. So those in other regions could see lower caps. (Can imagine wales getting slaughtered here).

Limiting child benefit to TWO children (and, it seems removing it from anyone currently receiving it for more than two children).

Industrial industries compensation scheme to be axed.

Contibutory element of ESA and JSA allowances to be scrapped, seeing 300,000 families lose £80 a week.

And all that only puts us halfway to the £12bn savings needed.

I would assume this leak is going to be pretty damaging to the election campaign.

The govt have announced they intend to save 10bn from the welfare budget and Graham is surprised the dwp (that is the department not the govt) have been looking at possible savings and assume that such modelling must be govt policy?

He also seems to object to benefits being mean tested (the UC stipulation basically rules out those with large savings) and yet he frequently protests that old age benefits are not means tested?

NI is a con, the amount it raises has nothing to do with the amount spent on benefits. Logic would be to simply include it in income tax including removing the upper threshold and aligning the start point with the tax free allowance. Much simpler so less scope for avoidance and much more progressive. Doing this would also mean that there would be no case for paying any non means tested benefits such as contribution based jsa. Private insurance products are readily available.

Graham_Devon

michaels wrote: »

The govt have announced they intend to save 10bn from the welfare budget and Graham is surprised the dwp (that is the department not the govt) have been looking at possible savings and assume that such modelling must be govt policy?

He also seems to object to benefits being mean tested (the UC stipulation basically rules out those with large savings) and yet he frequently protests that old age benefits are not means tested?

Give it a rest michaels.

I simply stated what the leaked documents state. If you can quote my "surprise" or my objections then fair play (good luck, btw). Otherwise, this forum jostling act is absolutely pointless.

cells

Kittycat1981 wrote: »

A deprived unequal society where the gap between the rich and the poor is ever expanding

Many of the problems of the poor (and of the middle and rich) is not down to money. But since you see the poor you perhaps only attribute it as their problems

eg I know one family who is well off. The husband has always been a bit of a drinker but this last past year or two has become a true alcoholic. Their family is pretty much falling apart and everyone is having a terrible time of it. From violence to the worries of suicide to coming home black and blue from picking fights with strangers. there are no young kids which would make the situation ten times worse.

From my own experience, which I can accept is probably a lot less than yours, families and individuals who are on state help/support function fine so long as they are stable people/families.

As for unstable individuals and families, I am not sure what can be done more to help them. Just like the well off family I mentioned falling apart, doesn't seem like there is anything anyone can do.

michaels

Then there are the poor who spend a lot of their income on debts incurred on nice cars, holidays, furniture and so on.

Switching industrial injuries compensation from the govt to the employer sounds like removing the subsidies to employers that many have called for and yet when included in an options study by the dwp it suddenly becomes another example of 'evil tories'?

CLAPTON

Kittycat1981 wrote: »

Low paid public sector worker here. I would be paid more to go sit on the check out at aldi however i choose to work in my area to help others.

Since the start of this government our service has seen huge cuts, staff shortages and an increase of workload. I work full time, hardly ever get a lunch break (I'm lucky if i get to eat a sandwich while driving to my next appointment)

I work with lots of public sector workers (across health, social care and education) and everyone on the front line is feeling the pressure but we continue on to provide a service to the public!

I see on a daily basis the how the cuts are savaging families, childhood poverty IS on the increase, children not having a hot meal unless its at school, parents using food banks (and working parents too!) families becoming homeless, children not having a bed to sleep in, or sharing a bed with 2 others. Families huddled together in one room under a quilt because they cannot afford to put the heating on- they've used the last bit of cash to buy food.

We live in one of the richest countries in the world, its 2015 and some of the conditions people are made to live in are frankly of Victorian standards. Slump landlords, high rents, shortage of social housing, minimal job prospects.

So while everyone is nice and warm at home, sat with a full belly of food,- laptop on their knee- slating public sector workers who are out there helping to try and make a difference and improve the life chances of those born without much choice- have a think about WHY some people choose to work in the public sector.

Teachers, nurses, police service, social workers, housing officers, fire service, domestic violence services, youth services just to name a few front line public sector staff, who see every day what many people fail to see. A deprived unequal society where the gap between the rich and the poor is ever expanding and little hope of it narrowing.

presumably the 'poor' you are referring to could go sit on the check out at Aldi and earn a decent wage but choose not to.

you clearly know nothing about the poor or why people choose to work in the public sector

kabayiri

I worry that many of those looking for work have made themselves unemployable, either through lack of skills or unrealistic expectations.

I've seen the comment cards. You see things like "I'd need at least £20/hour to cover child costs and transport. I'd need them to buy me a new coat and work clothes".

If people with few skills in demand think they are going to get £20/hour they are in dreamland. It's no wonder that immigrants are the people making your hotel bed; washing your car; picking your fruit n veg; making your coffee.

The cuts which *are* coming will do more than just save money. They will be a wake up call.

kabayiri

michaels wrote: »

Then there are the poor who spend a lot of their income on debts incurred on nice cars, holidays, furniture and so on.
...

I honestly don't think they care about the concept of contributing to society.

It's "the social / the state / the rich / the bankers" who pay for their lifestyle. It's as though it's not real people.

They don't seem to realise that it's the delivery driver / bus driver / ... etc who is providing the money.

It certainly isn't Sir Philip Green. He would rather send his dividends of half a billion out to Monaco to keep his wife in shoes.

Thrugelmir

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And all that only puts us halfway to the £12bn savings needed.

I would assume this leak is going to be pretty damaging to the election campaign.

It's been widely known and discussed for a long time that difficult decisions will have to be made to bridge the deficit gap. Hasn't made the media headlines as the main political parties have all avoided discussing the issue. Now the chickens are coming home to roost. All the parties are going to have to spell out their plans leading up to the election. As economic growth nor further borrowing are the answers to the problem that the UK faces. We'll now see who has the balls to be honest with the electorate.