The Budget

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Plus, to add salt to the wounds, this is what Cameron stated on the leaders Question Time running up to the elections...

Remember when Danny Alexander let slip regarding the child tax credits and their plan to reduce them?

Well Camerons response on live TV was:



There really should be something done when all out lies are stated in the run up to an election. Especially when it turns out they didn't just fall, they were drastically cut.

Has he cut child tax credit I'm not sure he has, only by limiting it to 2 kids for new claims.

ukcarper

cells wrote: »

A single parent with two baba working for an annual wage of £8k will be £1344.20 worse off the poor darlin

She will have to somehow survive on her new take home pay of £359.26 per week with no? council tax or rent to pay that seems quite doable

What makes you think they will not have to pay rent or council tax in my area they would have to pay full council tax and about a third of their rent.

Prothet_of_Doom

lvader wrote: »

I'm sure the 100k civil servants being affected will survive. The vast majority of them will be on salaries well above the average and will most likely be re-employed in the private sector in no time at all.

Although to be perfectly honest, the one's I've met, are a bit Jobsworthy, to survive in the real world.

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Firstly, on that amount, no, they most certainly WON'T get all of their rent and council tax paid.

You are quite right, I put into a full benifits calculator. Woman 2 kids works full time and gets paid £12,950 and rents for £300pw and it says for this year

She would get £222.54pw of her £300pw rent paid
No council tax support (£20pw)

So in her example she has £390.90 take home and needs to pay £97.46 for her rent and CT leaving her with £293.44

Take out another £40pw for utilities(gas/eletric/water/TV/internet)

Leaves her with £253.44 to buy food/cloths/etc
That seems quite reasonable still

cells

ukcarper wrote: »

What makes you think they will not have to pay rent or council tax in my area they would have to pay full council tax and about a third of their rent.

in my area they get £222 of the £300pw in HB for that example woman with two kids but no council tax supports

Even after rent and council tax she is left with £293pw post yesterdays changes

ukcarper

cells wrote: »

in my area they get £222 of the £300pw in HB for that example woman with two kids but no council tax supports

Even after rent and council tax she is left with £293pw post yesterdays changes

Similar in my area but someone not working will get £225 and pay no council tax or rent. I thought they were trying to make work pay.

Graham_Devon

cells wrote: »

She would get £222.54pw of her £300pw rent paid
No council tax support (£20pw)

Where is this out of curiosity?

Rent seems extortinate, and council tax seems a little on the low side?

I don't agree with you, at all, by the way. You clearly have no comprehension of the tax credits system if you think it's all this easy. it's well known to be one of the most complicated benefit systems there is, paying late, payign too little for a year only to pay too much the next.

Secondly, I note she works, but has absolutely no transport costs. Miraculous.

I think you are seeing this as someone on benefits. She's not, shes working a full week.

You may well believe £254 a week is enough to live on. But I'd like to see you try with 2 children. Might be alright if you never spend a penny on a car, transport....never have to move and pay tenancy fees, deposit, never have to buy a washing machine etc etc.....but to put it bluntly, that's not reality.

She's working a full week, 37 hours, but will never have enough money to save if she has a fairly normal routine that most parents with kids have. You make your point as if you see her on benefits, not deserving of anything more than an existence.

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Where is this out of curiosity?

Rent seems extortinate, and council tax seems a little on the low side?

I don't agree with you, at all, by the way. You clearly have no comprehension of the tax credits system if you think it's all this easy. it's well known to be one of the most complicated benefit systems there is, paying late, payign too little for a year only to pay too much the next.

Secondly, I note she works, but has absolutely no transport costs. Miraculous.

I think you are seeing this as someone on benefits. She's not, shes working a full week.

You may well believe £254 a week is enough to live on. But I'd like to see you try with 2 children. Might be alright if you never spend a penny on a car, transport....never have to move and pay tenancy fees, deposit, never have to buy a washing machine etc etc.....but to put it bluntly, that's not reality.

She's working a full week, 37 hours, but will never have enough money to save if she has a fairly normal routine that most parents with kids have. You make your point as if you see her on benefits, not deserving of anything more than an existence.

I think a single mother of two working full time is unrealistic. Maybe 20 hours a week and earning £6,240 is more realistic or not working at all

If she works 20 hours a week. She will have a take home of £16956.60 (£326.09) next year

From that £326.09 a week she will have to pay
-£40.50pw in rent
-£16.57pw in Council tax

Which leaves her with £269PW for everything else

I dont think such a person needs a car and should get a job within walking distance as all jobs pay the assumed min wage she is on

PS I know she isnt going to be able to live a life of luxury but I think I would be able to live, with two kids, for £269PW which is what you have after rent and CT is paid.

But if you are saying £269PW is not manageable I cant argue with you as I havent two kids to know for sure

PS2. Such a person gets >£26k in benefits which is more than half the working population get in wages pre tax

Graham_Devon

cells wrote: »

I dont think such a person needs a car and should get a job within walking distance as all jobs pay the assumed min wage she is on

I'd have to strongly disagree here.

She may not need a car, but to find a job within walking distance of home and never have to use transport with 2 kids seems a little fanciful. Even in London that would be difficult.

With all due respect, the majority of people in the scenario you talk of will need some form of transport.

Look at most SOA's on the debt board and they all have transport costs, as it's completely normal.

If were going to have a debate on tax credits and then use the anomally of someone with 2 kids, who goes to work and doesn't have transport costs, we'll never come to any conclusion.

I do have 2 kids. I know that a simple kids party costs at least a tenner when you have included a gift and transported them there. A pair of school shoes, £30. A school uniform, £30. A school trip, £15. It all adds up quite significantly.

I'm not saying it's not enough to live on. It is, if you cut back and do without. What I'm saying is that shes working, and in my view, that should, in an ideal world make her better off than her non workign neighbour with the same circumstances.

Unfortunately, this tax credit cut makes working financially pointless, more so if she has to shell out for transport costs or work clothes. Before the cuts, she was a step ahead for going out there and working.

cells

ukcarper wrote: »

Similar in my area but someone not working will get £225 and pay no council tax or rent. I thought they were trying to make work pay.

The problem with a welfare system is that the marginal tax ends up as 80-100% so there is an extreme disincentive to work or to work more hours or to get a better paid job as all your work and effort, or at least 80-100% of it goes to the state not yourself.

IDS was trying to reduce this marginal tax rate to 65% via universal credit but we don't have that yet and even 65% marginal tax rate is very high (although a hell of a lot better than 90%)

The problem is there is no easy solution.

You either have the fairly kind system we now do, or you punish the poor who are poor and have kids.


One thing I would do is get as many poor people out of London as is possible. Sell off all the council homes in London and put an overall £20k a year benefit cap on all including working which will mean no poor people can live in London. That might be ugly but asking poor and average people to pay £25k a year rent for poor people to live in London is not fair