david cameron and tax credits

Pedent

bloolagoon wrote: »

Did you agree with the child tax charge on high earners?

No, I support universal child benefit. I think that it makes sense for people to pay higher taxes throughout their lives, and receive support in the periods of their lives when they have higher outgoings due to dependent children, especially because the expensive periods tend to come first.

bloolagoon wrote: »

Even IF they lowered by £700 per child per year it would be a sliding scale. They don't get the full CTC now, so it would be a reduction of the £700, so possibly £100 a year. Not too much buckling of belts there.

The impression I got was that the Child Element would be reduced by this amount. That would mean everyone's award being reduced by £700/child, except for those who receive less than this, who would have their awards reduced to zero. Until budget day, I guess we won't know the detail for sure though.

andrewmp

lyrical_gangster wrote: »

I think people who lack the ability to work, or have restricted employment prospects because of disability should be provided with generous benefits. Same as when people are sick. I'd also rather money paid out in working tax credits is used to enabled disabled people to go work by funding specialist equipment etc - rather than cutting available funding for employers, as is apparently the case now.


I'd also like to see uneployment benefits paid at a higher rate to people who have been in work for some time - like the German model where they pay a percentage of a persons salary for a fixed amount of time.

I agree. Strangely enough, one of the proposals is to abolish contributory JSA, they should be much increasing it in the short term and reducing support for the long term unemployed.

Pedent

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

I don't think I've read anything so far fetched since the last issue of The Beano.

"One ally of Duncan Smith told the Observer that a major problem had been that key figures did not expect to have to implement such heavy hits on welfare spending, assuming the pledge could be watered down during coalition negotiations with the Liberal Democrats." [http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/23/iain-duncan-smith-cabinet-row-welfare-cuts-12bn]

Pedent

lyrical_gangster wrote: »

I'm not sure. You see someone who walks into your office who's never been out of work before, has a four page professional C.V, several letters after his name and gets an interview in the first week or so, for a C.S job paying almost 40k a year, then it's hardly damning.

Telling him that he's better than one in a hundred of his peers isn't exactly praising him to the moon.

poppasmurf_bewdley

Pedent wrote: »

"One ally of Duncan Smith told the Observer that a major problem had been that key figures did not expect to have to implement such heavy hits on welfare spending, assuming the pledge could be watered down during coalition negotiations with the Liberal Democrats." [http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/23/iain-duncan-smith-cabinet-row-welfare-cuts-12bn]

And who said: "and they're too embarrassed to admit that they were bluffing and back down?" Minnie the Minx or Little Plum?

Pedent

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

And who said: "and they're too embarrassed to admit that they were bluffing and back down?" Minnie the Minx or Little Plum?

"Fears are being voiced at senior levels in Whitehall that targeting tax credits could inflict “enormous damage” on the Tories by hitting the working poor, who are meant to be at the heart of the new blue-collar Conservatism championed by Cameron in the election."

"One Whitehall source, whose concerns are shared among senior strategists in No 10, told the Guardian: “If we went after the working poor, we could gift the Labour party an easy route back. So the choice is: do we risk inflicting enormous damage to us at a time when we are riding high or do we accept that there will have to be a bit of a loss of face.”"

url]http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/11/george-osborne-pressure-slow-welfare-cuts[/url

poppasmurf_bewdley

Pedent wrote: »

"Fears are being voiced at senior levels in Whitehall that targeting tax credits could inflict “enormous damage” on the Tories by hitting the working poor, who are meant to be at the heart of the new blue-collar Conservatism championed by Cameron in the election."

"One Whitehall source, whose concerns are shared among senior strategists in No 10, told the Guardian: “If we went after the working poor, we could gift the Labour party an easy route back. So the choice is: do we risk inflicting enormous damage to us at a time when we are riding high or do we accept that there will have to be a bit of a loss of face.”"

[http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/11/george-osborne-pressure-slow-welfare-cuts]

Typical Guardian posting information by those too scared to provide their names. Or more like, made up comments. Maybe even they realise their mistake as the web address you provided shows:


Sorry - we haven’t been able to serve the page you asked for.

Pedent

I've fixed the link.

zagfles

Pedent wrote: »

"Fears are being voiced at senior levels in Whitehall that targeting tax credits could inflict “enormous damage” on the Tories by hitting the working poor, who are meant to be at the heart of the new blue-collar Conservatism championed by Cameron in the election."

"One Whitehall source, whose concerns are shared among senior strategists in No 10, told the Guardian: “If we went after the working poor, we could gift the Labour party an easy route back. So the choice is: do we risk inflicting enormous damage to us at a time when we are riding high or do we accept that there will have to be a bit of a loss of face.”"

URL]http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/11/george-osborne-pressure-slow-welfare-cuts[/URL

One thing you can certain of is if they did scale back the cuts, and as a result missed their deficit reduction target, exactly the same people who are vociferously opposed to cuts will also be highly critical of the govt for "failing" to meet their deficit reduction targets :rotfl:

andrewmp

zagfles wrote: »

One thing you can certain of is if they did scale back the cuts, and as a result missed their deficit reduction target, exactly the same people who are vociferously opposed to cuts will also be highly critical of the govt for "failing" to meet their deficit reduction targets :rotfl:

Surely only those who voted for them should be able to complain that they didn't fulfil their promises?

I doubt many who voted for them care about the working low paid.