CleverBear Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Obviously benefits shouldnt go up by 5.2% (they always go up by septembers rpi) whilst savers are getting 1% (on most instant access accounts) and workers are getting 2.7%. This is so obvious that I am surprised it even needs debating. Can you imagine if JSA goes up 5.2% and so do all the other joke benefits. It will truely mean work wont pay. Option 1 will be: Go to work. Get 2% pay rise (most getting no pay rise), pay extra tax, and pay extra money on petrol to get to work. Option 2 will be: stay at home. Pay no petrol. Get 5.2% pay rise for doing no job. I not one who bashes benefits as I know that being unemployed sucks and nobody choses it. However, 5.2% rise would be simply ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilchardthecat Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 are you saying he should, or that he is? link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lulu Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Obviously benefits shouldnt go up by 5.2% (they always go up by septembers rpi) whilst savers are getting 1% (on most instant access accounts) and workers are getting 2.7%. This is so obvious that I am surprised it even needs debating. Can you imagine if JSA goes up 5.2% and so do all the other joke benefits. It will truely mean work wont pay. Option 1 will be: Go to work. Get 2% pay rise (most getting no pay rise), pay extra tax, and pay extra money on petrol to get to work. Option 2 will be: stay at home. Pay no petrol. Get 5.2% pay rise for doing no job. I not one who bashes benefits as I know that being unemployed sucks and nobody choses it. However, 5.2% rise would be simply ridiculous. Indeed, in a world where the 'workers' are getting naff all in the form of pay rises it is obcence that those who can afford Sky TV and sit around on their arses (or enter the Xfactor) get such high increases.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CleverBear Posted November 2, 2011 Author Share Posted November 2, 2011 are you saying he should, or that he is? link? Its reported in the FT that he is looking to switch from inflation linked rises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I not one who bashes benefits as I know that being unemployed sucks and nobody choses it. You sure about that? It can be the rational choice, circumstances etc. And the fact there is a massive black market in this country - without it, few immigrants could afford to live in London. Reluctance to criticise the benefits system is highly naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I never imagined the Conservatives, sorry, coalition, would cut benefits all that much. But with rampant inflation (real, not the CPI) the opportunity to make them near-worthless is too good to be true, I doubt they will fail to grasp it. There's just the minor worry of riots and civil unrest to balance. And Osborne, while you're about it, please rename the wretched things to "Temporary Assistance" (TAs) and put time limits on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Democorruptcy Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The coalition have just blown a load of cash increasing public sector pensions by 30%, somebody has to pay for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olebrum Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Yeah, the poor the sick and the unemployed, ruining our economy. If only we could shoot them or something, hey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 When complaining about the status quo, don't fall into the easy trap of looking down....look up. The so called middle class is being shafted both from above and from below. Far more from above, granted, but it doesn't alter the morals. Yeah, the poor the sick and the unemployed, ruining our economy. If only we could shoot them or something, hey? Don't have any problem with the genuinely sick gaining assistance. I see it as a moral duty in society. Nor do I have any problem with the short-term unemployed being given short term temporary assistance, provided they have a prior record of working and supporting themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crash2006 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Obviously benefits shouldnt go up by 5.2% (they always go up by septembers rpi) whilst savers are getting 1% (on most instant access accounts) and workers are getting 2.7%. This is so obvious that I am surprised it even needs debating. Can you imagine if JSA goes up 5.2% and so do all the other joke benefits. It will truely mean work wont pay. Option 1 will be: Go to work. Get 2% pay rise (most getting no pay rise), pay extra tax, and pay extra money on petrol to get to work. Option 2 will be: stay at home. Pay no petrol. Get 5.2% pay rise for doing no job. I not one who bashes benefits as I know that being unemployed sucks and nobody choses it. However, 5.2% rise would be simply ridiculous. They do that what stops them from turning to crime? and how much would that cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeT Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Whilst the doley getting a 5.2% rise in his/her giro may seem obscene when average wage rises are far less than this, there are other important factors. I thought Council tax was to be frozen for another year. As most doleys get Council Tax benefit they have seen no rise in that portion of their (notional) income. Similarly Housing Benefit caps are likely to reduce the income of many claimants. Whilst pay from employers may not be keeping up with CPI, let alone RPI, I thought we were promised more generous tax free allowances as the coalition slowly move to make income of less than £10,000 free of tax. That should help net pay move ahead of gross pay rises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Whilst pay from employers may not be keeping up with CPI, let alone RPI, I thought we were promised more generous tax free allowances as the coalition slowly move to make income of less than £10,000 free of tax. That should help net pay move ahead of gross pay rises. Raising the starting income before you become liable for tax was a progressive, well thought out Lib Dem policy. IMO it's also morally correct. Do that and simultaneously make "benefits" worthless, and we might get somewhere in terms of repairing the fabric of our broken society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crash2006 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 (edited) Raising the starting income before you become liable for tax was a progressive, well thought out Lib Dem policy. IMO it's also morally correct. Do that and simultaneously make "benefits" worthless, and we might get somewhere in terms of repairing the fabric of our broken society. ts broken Society isn't broken because of benefits, its broken because of government policies, its broken because of employers. Britain has the lowest paid unemployment benefit in Europe. Then there are countries that have limited benefits and they are in a mess so is benefits system too blame NO, people are falling for the propaganda being put out, its the rich employers and government policies that have got us here. the rising benefits system is just a symptom of the problem not a cause. Edited November 3, 2011 by crash2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone baby gone Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Society isn't broken because of benefits, its broken because of government policies, its broken because of employers. Britain has the lowest paid unemployment benefit in Europe. Wash your mouth out! This HPC, where the solution to all problems is simply to debase the workers a little more. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the benefits thing is a smokescreen - they pay out far more on state pensions than they do on income support and unemployment benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crash2006 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Wash your mouth out! This HPC, where the solution to all problems is simply to debase the workers a little more. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the benefits thing is a smokescreen - they pay out far more on state pensions than they do on income support and unemployment benefit. Uunemployment benefit is around 5 billion now, almost half does not reach the pockets of the unemployed but to costs such as private company contracts to outsource job center work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone baby gone Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Uunemployment benefit is around 5 billion now, almost half does not reach the pockets of the unemployed but to costs such as private company contracts to outsource job center work. Of course, as I said, "cracking down on benefits" is just diversionary. A smoke-screen while they continue to allow their pals to loot the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cozza Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The coalition have just blown a load of cash increasing public sector pensions by 30%, somebody has to pay for it. In 2016/7, when the UK debt maturity comes a-calling, any such promises will dissolve into dust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashmonitor Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 In 2016/7, when the UK debt maturity comes a-calling, any such promises will dissolve into dust. A very small proportion of government debt, some of it has very long dates 30 years hence. And the billions of pounds in maturing final salary pots, where the fund actually exists, must be paid back into government bonds to secure the gold plated annuity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 He's removed the 'wages' inflation link (i.e. stealing from everyone else) so why would he stop there. May as well continue with his plan to impoverish everyone to pay his banker chums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 (edited) Indeed, in a world where the 'workers' are getting naff all in the form of pay rises it is obcence that those who can afford Sky TV and sit around on their arses (or enter the Xfactor) get such high increases.... As debated it should go up, and doesn't really cost anything. Most ends up back in the hands of the state or corporations. Using your example, some of it would end up in the hands of News International! If I were on benefits, I think I'd get around £550 per month, £300 in the form housing benefit + CT benefit, so half straight back to the "state" or the local Council. That leaves JSA/Income support, out of which £40 would go to the Water Company, another £40-50 on power to the likes of Centrica, or E.ON. The balance going to a mixture of Sainsbury's, Tesco's, Costcutter (off licence!) Broadband and telecoms, oh and probably Ladbrokes! So net amount of benefit actually going to me would be "zero." At least benefit claimants are spending 100% of their income which is good for the economy. Savers just sit on their fat *rses expecting riches, a bit like BTL landlords. If you don't like your meagre return, go build a factory, invent some products and employ some British workers! Edited November 3, 2011 by John Steed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 In 2016/7, when the UK debt maturity comes a-calling, any such promises will dissolve into dust. How much is due for payment then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Wash your mouth out! This HPC, where the solution to all problems is simply to debase the workers a little more. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the benefits thing is a smokescreen - they pay out far more on state pensions than they do on income support and unemployment benefit. +1 Agreed and the economy is just creating rubbish jobs that require a subsidy in the form of WTC anyway. Near me a plethora of P/T crap jobs 16 hours a week, or so called "apprenticeships" at £2.50 per hour. Some of them can't even guarantee hours. Sorry but that is sh*t management expecting your workforce to the take the risk of your business. Most HPC types on here, if unemployed wouldn't touch these jobs with a barge pole, and would be "flicking off to to Trisha" whatever they say on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 How much is due for payment then? Needs to flog £550BN of new bonds over the next three years. Unless Merv buys them of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie_George Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Paying obscene benefits to the lazy suits the rich. It distracts the middle class from complaining about their looting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 How much is due for payment then? Non-story. Tranches of UK government debt reach maturity every year, usually around 2 or 3 per year. But it's distributed over about 50 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.