MSE News: Summer Budget 2015: Millions to face benefit cuts

andrewmp

zagfles wrote: »

Right long term, but in the first year it's only £2500 due to income increase disregard.

£2500 extra will not reduce tax credits in the first year, £500 tax plus £300 NI extra, gives £1700 net!

The following year, same gross would give £1200 less as tax credits would be based on previous year. To make up that £1200, income would need to increase £1765.

The next year, tax credits will drop £847, so to make that up, need an increase of £1246.

And so on. So £8500 is right long term, but that increase can come over a number of years.

That's great then, Beccles can up her hours gradually to 24 extra hours a week, great stuff. :rotfl:

They're punishing the working low paid and aren't making work pay, sad really, no wonder IDS was so happy.

Urgent_advice_needed

Why does the government feel it makes sense to attack the low paid as opposed to people who aren't working at all? I don't understand the logic, can someone explain?

beecher2

Urgent_advice_needed wrote: »

Why does the government feel it makes sense to attack the low paid as opposed to people who aren't working at all? I don't understand the logic, can someone explain?

they've chosen to protect pensions and with tax credits costing so much, it was inevitable really. It shows why the tories didnt' specify which benefits would be cut - they hoped those on tax credits wouldn't define themselves as benefit claimants, and so would think they would not be affected.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jan/08/uk-benefit-welfare-spending#img-1
shows the figures from 2011 - 2012

Weary_soul

Urgent_advice_needed wrote: »

Why does the government feel it makes sense to attack the low paid as opposed to people who aren't working at all? I don't understand the logic, can someone explain?

Oh they've done both. Remember this is a Tories and they hate both groups equally.

beecher2

Weary_soul wrote: »

Oh they've done both. Remember this is a Tories and they hate both groups equally.

They've been quite efficient in using 'divide and rule' tacticts where people react by saying 'why me? why not them?' where 'them' refers to other disempowered people, rather than the bankers or the landowners, or the rich. The media help in this of course.

Weary_soul

beecher2 wrote: »

They've been quite efficient in using 'divide and rule' tacticts where people react by saying 'why me? why not them?' where 'them' refers to other disempowered people, rather than the bankers or the landowners, or the rich. The media help in this of course.

Oh I agree. And sadly the general population bought into it hook line and sinker.

Thing is you could tell what there agenda was right from the start and imo only an idiot wouldn't guess what they would end up doing.

beecher2

Weary_soul wrote: »

Oh I agree. And sadly the general population bought into it hook line and sinker.

Thing is you could tell what there agenda was right from the start and imo only an idiot wouldn't guess what they would end up doing.

I have a colleague who will rant and rave about benefit claimants and who was happy the tories got in as they would cut the welfare bill. I can only imagine their face when they realised they were the one being hit.

I do blame Labour for this though as tax credits and housing benefits have allowed employees and landlords to be the real benefit claimants, making money out of both through low wages and high rents.

bloolagoon

Urgent_advice_needed wrote: »

Why does the government feel it makes sense to attack the low paid as opposed to people who aren't working at all? I don't understand the logic, can someone explain?

I'm not sure you can say people are low paid as Tax Credits propped up wages (even part time ones) to that often at a cost per hour more than those paying for the tax credits.

Someone may only be earning £11,000 but when you add on their tax credits their true wage is higher. Eg someone earning £25,000 (3 children) is really earning £35,000.

Tax/NI on £35,000 is £8000. So people with no children or those with 2 children pay that. Therefore someone with 2 children gets no tax credits, meanwhile someone on the same take home rate with 3 children gets £6,000 TC.

So Mr £35,000 no tax credits is annoyed at Mr £25,000 I get tax credits. Mr £25,000 is annoyed that Mr £6,000 part time - I want date days so refuse to work FT gets pretty similar and nearly double per actual hour. Mr £6000 is better of than Mr Unemployed.


Soooo how does that answer your question. Tax credits needed addressing and those over the limits were screaming how unfair it was that they were not better off than those claiming benefits (tax credits are benefits). Not going to be popular but you have 5 years to get over it. Mr I don't get TC is happy and hopefully over the 5 years things settle down. People may get migrated to UC and get more so say (it was just a year or so).

Meanwhile you are now annoyed at the unemployed. They have a cap - perhaps they lower it in a year or so as they've already lowered it. They could reduce CTC - but then your money goes down too. So any changes they make to their TC affects yours. Anti poverty groups and human rights are already screaming that children are starving. Low income families stick up for them. So he waits until Mr on tax credits realises (not many do) and then shouts that Mr unemployed gets hit. He duly does this and doesn't give a flying pig as they were never going to vote for him anyway. He doesn't need to leave 5 years.

Weary_soul

beecher2 wrote: »

I have a colleague who will rant and rave about benefit claimants and who was happy the tories got in as they would cut the welfare bill. I can only imagine their face when they realised they were the one being hit.

I do blame Labour for this though as tax credits and housing benefits have allowed employees and landlords to be the real benefit claimants, making money out of both through low wages and high rents.

Oh I agree, but what the Tories have done is cut off a life line to many at a time where there is still so few opportunities for people to gain more paid work and so it's going to bring much financial hardship and extreme poverty to even more people.

bloolagoon

Weary_soul wrote: »

Oh I agree, but what the Tories have done is cut off a life line to many at a time where there is still so few opportunities for people to gain more paid work and so it's going to bring much financial hardship and extreme poverty to even more people.

Extreme poverty? Can you give me an idea of what you mean by that