Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Labour Proposes 'tough But Fair' Jobs And Welfare Scheme


Recommended Posts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jan/04/ed-balls-welfare-work-scheme

Labour will move to protect itself from the politically damaging charge that it is soft on welfare claimants, by proposing that every adult aged over 25 and out of work for more than two years should be obliged to take up a government-provided job for six months, or lose benefits.

The "compulsory work or lose benefits" announcement by the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, and the shadow work and pensions secretary, Liam Byrne, comes ahead of what threatens to be a fraught second reading debate on Tuesday over Labour's refusal to back a government bill restricting increases in benefits and tax credits to 1% a year for the next three years – which is likely to represent a 4% cut in real terms.

Are these going to be "public sector" jobs ie street cleaning etc... or is Tesco et al about to get a huge pool of cheap labour at the expense of current paid workers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9779453/Labour-plans-pension-tax-raid.html

The shadow chancellor said those earning more than £150,000 should only receive basic rate tax relief on their retirement savings.

This would mean they could only get tax relief of 20 per cent on their savings, compared with 50 per cent today, and 45 per cent from April. It would cost high earners thousands of pounds each year.

The money raised from the scheme, estimated to be at least £1billion a year, would be used to effectively pay private firms to hire the long–term unemployed.

Mr Balls's pensions tax raid would be introduced in addition to Coalition plans to restrict annual retirement savings. It is one of Labour's first major tax announcements as the party comes under growing pressure to disclose its policy plans.

Another pension raid proposed from Labour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another pension raid proposed from Labour.

I've spotted something that will tear you apart...

The proposed pension raid will target those earning over £150K so will affect all those public sector troughers. :o

I really like this bit of the Telegraph article - pure comedy:

Experts have warned that the proposed system risks ruining company pension provision as high–earning executives would close down their schemes for workers.

So executives would close the scheme? Except they are forced to run one for their workers by law, starting October 2012. ;)

Edited by What's'isname
Link to post
Share on other sites

When posting that thought did occur to me that the top public sector troughers would be affected.

Free labour to any commercial organisation will inevitably drive down wages.

I expect Miliband wants to target the pension funds and pension tax arrangements of those earning over £150k.

For public sector employees, they don't generally have to make contributions, so the tax arrangements are non-existent. And their fund is... us.

So don't start opening the champagne any time soon. We're about to get screwed again. From both ends. Another spit-roast of the private sector where the public sector gets off scot-free.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Free labour to any commercial organisation will inevitably drive down wages.

I expect Miliband wants to target the pension funds and pension tax arrangements of those earning over £150k.

For public sector employees, they don't generally have to make contributions, so the tax arrangements are non-existent. And their fund is... us.

So don't start opening the champagne any time soon. We're about to get screwed again. From both ends. Another spit-roast of the private sector where the public sector gets off scot-free.

What utter nonsense!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a joke....a job means doing WORTHWHILE work that people are prepared to pay for....not doing anything of little or no value subsidised by others just for the sake of it.

Why not create or call it a six month training programme....at least they might gain something of value out of it at the end of it. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So executives would close the scheme? Except they are forced to run one for their workers by law, starting October 2012. ;)

Thank god all pension schemes are equally good, and especially that the mandated one is not just another tax aimed mostly at the working poor. You can just imagine the conversation:

employee: four percent of my salary seems to have disappeared?

employer: we enrolled you into a pension, and will also contribute the next couple of payrises you were going to get

employee: I'll qualify for the MIG when I retire, can I please have the money as before

employer: sign here

employee: and the payrises?

employer: no, of course not, we are not allowed to give you those even if we wanted to

employee: so I am paying the whole thing, really. It's a choice between not getting a half of the money now, and the government helping themselves later?

employer: yep, your choice

employee: didn't the company previously have a scheme that was lots more generous?

employer: yes, but only people who would benefit from having a pension used it, so it could be afforded. Now that we have to contribute for everyone, it cannot be afforded any more. It's a lucky coincidence the executives noticed now that they themselves cannot benefit.

employee: so you have lots of people coming to you, enthusiastically noticing they are better off?

employer: you would be the first but maybe they'll turn up eventually, seeing as they voted for all this.

It's not that I am against making people save for their retirement, but it would be sort of nice if they then were better off as a result. It would also help if there was not a mandated saving product that the government can tax at will.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another pension raid proposed from Labour.

Seems a bit OTT since they have already lowered the maximum contribution to £50k and the total pot limit to £1.8m.

It will probably stop them putting the money into pensions (which I guess is the goal.. get them spending instead of investing), but it means for anyone who does put money into a pension they will be taxed at 65% (25% putting it in, and up to 40% taking it out) :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

< snip > For public sector employees, they don't generally have to make contributions, so the tax arrangements are non-existent. And their fund is... us. < snip >

Let's take the Local Government Pension Scheme as an example.

LGPS employee contributions (%) as of April 2012

Whole time Pay Rate Contribution rate Proportion of membership in that band

Up to £13,500 5.5 8.7

£13,501 to £15,800 5.8 10.6

£15,801 to £20,400 5.9 25.2

£20,401 to £34,400 6.5 38.8

£34,401 to £45,500 6.8 11.2

£45,501 to £85,300 7.2 5.1

More than £81,100 7.5 0.5

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's take the Local Government Pension Scheme as an example.

LGPS employee contributions (%) as of April 2012

Whole time Pay Rate Contribution rate Proportion of membership in that band

Up to £13,500 5.5 8.7

£13,501 to £15,800 5.8 10.6

£15,801 to £20,400 5.9 25.2

£20,401 to £34,400 6.5 38.8

£34,401 to £45,500 6.8 11.2

£45,501 to £85,300 7.2 5.1

More than £81,100 7.5 0.5

Why don't you you remind us who has to make up any shortfall?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you you remind us who has to make up any shortfall?

Agreed . Whether the ps trough ers pay any contributions or not from our taxes the amount is not enough .

If you are one of those plodding uncommitted secondary school teachers ( we all had them ) working 30 hours a week for 39 weeks a year and you are in your 50's on 35k per annum you probably pay about £300 a month into the scheme.

If you retire at 60 and you get one small promotion between then and now you could easily retire on an indexed linked government guaranteed £25k a year for life . This would require a pot of about £750k . The ( growth included contributions over thirty five years 1980-2015) would actually be nearer £250k that's five hundred grand your equivalent private sector person would have needed to make . If your average punter contributes 15% per annum and your mean salary is 50% your final then saving 500k would mean an extra 15k per annum .

This means the average 45-50k public sector joe is getting a pension that would normally be saved by a person earning 135k . Headmasters, town hall managers etc are getting way more .

The big injustice however is that the shite in the public sector are getting the same as many of the miracle workers who contribute massively within our public services . Labour and the unions are wholly to blame for that injustice .

Link to post
Share on other sites

The big injustice however is that the shite in the public sector are getting the same as many of the miracle workers who contribute massively within our public services . Labour and the unions are wholly to blame for that injustice .

You make a valid observation, but I can't help feeling political bias trips you up at the end.

There are 9469 Tory councillors in the UK and only 4379 Labour ones (and the Tories usually enjoy more seats at local authority level than Labour).

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom

It's not a one party problem and frankly if a Tory led government can't sort their own out at local level (and the evidence so far is that they can't) it would be far more productive to pressure them to do so than to shift the blame for cheap political points.

Both Labour and the Tories have contributed significantly to this mess. What's needed now is action not more bloody finger pointing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You make a valid observation, but I can't help feeling political bias trips you up at the end.

There are 9469 Tory councillors in the UK and only 4379 Labour ones (and the Tories usually enjoy more seats at local authority level than Labour).

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom

It's not a one party problem and frankly if a Tory led government can't sort their own out at local level (and the evidence so far is that they can't) it would be far more productive to pressure them to do so than to shift the blame for cheap political points.

Both Labour and the Taories have contributed significantly to this mess. What's needed now is action not more bloody finger pointing.

Tory local councillors have no influence whatsoevee on local government or teacher final salary pensions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tory local councillors have no influence whatsoevee on local government or teacher final salary pensions.

No, but they do employ a CEO on £200000 round my way and another 40 "consultants" on £100000+ each.

All I'm saying is that it would be nice if they could get their own in order before blaming the unions/teachers/nurses/fairy on the soap.

My local Tory council is so corrupt I'm almost waiting for them to announce Berlusconi has been given a consultancy position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but they do employ a CEO on £200000 round my way and another 40 "consultants" on £100000+ each.

All I'm saying is that it would be nice if they could get their own in order before blaming the unions/teachers/nurses/fairy on the soap.

My local Tory council is so corrupt I'm almost waiting for them to announce Berlusconi has been given a consultancy position.

You ain't seen nothing until you've worked for a Labour council like Brent Council as I have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You ain't seen nothing until you've worked for a Labour council like Brent Council as I have.

As I said, I think both are culpable.

Colour of the rosette means very little - left in power long enough it will corrupt.

The problem here is that the Tories could put rat poison in the water and they still wouldn't get voted out (I suspect this is also the problem with rotten Labour councils).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 434 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.