Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
kjw

Workers 'could Be Forced To Pay £5 A Week' To Get Benefits

Recommended Posts

I was made redundant 7 years ago i can tell you a serial dole scrounger is treated far better that someone who as worked saved some money and paided in to the system.

Perhaps the best way would be make dole benefit based on how long you been at work and be very up front about this to the dole scroungers

Yes 33 years of paying NI and when I lost my job I got sweet FA pension stopped me getting anything. After paying mortgage and council tax I would have had £30 a month to live.

If you put any money away you are basically paying your own dole. The more iraisponceable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes 33 years of paying NI and when I lost my job I got sweet FA pension stopped me getting anything. After paying mortgage and council tax I would have had £30 a month to live.

If you put any money away you are basically paying your own dole. The more iraisponceable

Sadly, that is the reality in a Pay Your Own Way World.

Deficit Spending makes it appear that Government can pay for everything. It only works because money is make beleive. You cant do it with real things, like time, food, air and water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think there should be a base level of benefits that is set low, and then additional benefit should be based on either genuine need (eg the disabled) or some proportion of the tax you have paid over your working life (capped at some level of course).

I don't think the disabled should get a penny more. However I think they should get free help with the things they can't do and free aids like wheel chairs ect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes 33 years of paying NI and when I lost my job I got sweet FA pension stopped me getting anything. After paying mortgage and council tax I would have had £30 a month to live.

If you put any money away you are basically paying your own dole. The more iraisponceable

33 years of full employment is a good run to have had. Be grateful for this and not the benefits you may have been entitled to in a different scenario. These life long benefit recipients have no life at all.

The proposal is an insult by the way, that's what national insurance is for anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33 years of full employment is a good run to have had. Be grateful for this and not the benefits you may have been entitled to in a different scenario. These life long benefit recipients have no life at all.

The proposal is an insult by the way, that's what national insurance is for anyway.

I am just disgusted that I got less than someone that just got off the boat. I hold liblabcon responsible. totally out of touch..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to hear them trying to justify it with old sound bites like "It'll hardly cost more than the price of a pint of beer a week" that they've used time and again for most of their dodgy scams over the years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NI just goes into the tax pool...any justification for what it is for, like any other tax, is just a lie to salve the victims.

I do not think anybody noticed your reply.

You are right. NICS and PAYE are just put together in the pool as "general taxation". I thought everybody, or nearly everybody, understood this.

The lack of knowledge on this forum is not in isolation as I have had to explain this to several people.

It is time that NI is at least given a new name (as recently proposed by some conservatives) or even better still integrated into PAYE (as UKIP propose)

Currently lower end tax is 44% (20% paye 11% employees NI 13% EMPLOYERS)

People who earn over 50,000 only pay 40% tax and over 150,000 45% tax. It is time we had a flat tax system and raised the tax threashold on ALL tax to £15,000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everybody knows the truth about where the NI money goes.

But there is a polite fiction about it's purpose, you have things like records of NI "contributions" and such. This means even the polite fiction is history.

The state is always disingenuous but charging people for something in theory already paid for is taking it to a new level. It's no longer even a polite fiction, it's a bald lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think there should be a base level of benefits that is set low, and then additional benefit should be based on either genuine need (eg the disabled) or some proportion of the tax you have paid over your working life (capped at some level of course).

That is how it currently works, and that is how it will continue to work under UC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everybody knows the truth about where the NI money goes.

But there is a polite fiction about it's purpose, you have things like records of NI "contributions" and such. This means even the polite fiction is history.

The state is always disingenuous but charging people for something in theory already paid for is taking it to a new level. It's no longer even a polite fiction, it's a bald lie.

Spot on! We all know all taxes go into one big pot. I recall Tony Blair saying he increased NI to increase NHS funding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think anybody noticed your reply.

You are right. NICS and PAYE are just put together in the pool as "general taxation". I thought everybody, or nearly everybody, understood this.

The lack of knowledge on this forum is not in isolation as I have had to explain this to several people.

It is time that NI is at least given a new name (as recently proposed by some conservatives) or even better still integrated into PAYE (as UKIP propose)

Currently lower end tax is 44% (20% paye 11% employees NI 13% EMPLOYERS)

People who earn over 50,000 only pay 40% tax and over 150,000 45% tax. It is time we had a flat tax system and raised the tax threashold on ALL tax to £15,000

It's actually 44%/113% = 39%. And 40/45% taxpayers pay 2% ee NI and 13% er as well, making their tax rates 48% and 53% respectively. Ignoring any child benefit withdrawal and personal allowance withdrawal and certain thresholds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NI is of course just another tax but it has been made separate and different because its also a way of departmentalising and categorising people as well as fooling them. Of course it just goes into one big pot.

For instance the different categories depending whether you are employed, self employed etc and plenty of people have been fooled by the different categories in the past including lots of females who paid a lower rate for various reasons and thought they were paying towards a (half) decent pension but weren't. It's also a way of fooling people into thinking that they are paying a lower rate of income tax than they really are.

So it's served a purpose for those who introduced it although generally speaking it's been an extremely dodgy purpose. It's another form of social engineering by the LibLabcon.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to hear them trying to justify it with old sound bites like "It'll hardly cost more than the price of a pint of beer a week" that they've used time and again for most of their dodgy scams over the years.

Yeah, like Income Tax... something like 1% when it was introduced. It's a bit higher now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lack of knowledge ....

Currently lower end tax is 44% (20% paye 11% employees NI 13% EMPLOYERS)

People who earn over 50,000 only pay 40% tax and over 150,000 45% tax. It is time we had a flat tax system and raised the tax threashold on ALL tax to £15,000

That is so far from the truth it offends.

Leave off the correction that has already been made, once you add in the various allowances and thresholds it changes it all dramatically.

Someone on 20k for instance does not payvincome tax on half their income! This drops their effective tax rate to somewhere near 20%.

For the people who earn 50k they get the same 10k free, the next chunk at the lower marginal rate and the higher tax on the remainder. Takes it to about 28% before employer nics, which push it up considerably nearer 40%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Food for thought. In the late 1970's a single persons tax free income was £1165 (average income was around £4000). Income tax rate was 33% on any income over personal allowance and NI combined was 20% with no upper earnings limit on employee contributions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Food for thought. In the late 1970's a single persons tax free income was £1165 (average income was around £4000). Income tax rate was 33% on any income over personal allowance and NI combined was 20% with no upper earnings limit on employee contributions.

I didn't see you over paying your income taxes for the last 40 years because you thought the rates were too low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tax rates have been too low made up for by selling off the silver, wasting the proceeds of North sea oil and gas and consumer debt. What would you have done since 1979 to change things if you were in my position ?

Edited by campervanman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tax rates have been too low made up for by selling off the silver, wasting the proceeds of North sea oil and gas and consumer debt. What would you have done since 1979 to change things if you were in my position ?

It is a bit rich that after enjoying 40 years of largess to turn round and say it's not my fault, I only lived through it.

Same thing goes today for anyone who only bought themselves a house to live in. There will be consequences whether you like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Workers could be forced to pay at least £5 a week into a personal “welfare account” to get higher benefits if they lose their job, under a plan being considered by George Osborne.

In a report published today, the Policy Exchange think-tank proposes a shake-up of the welfare system to strengthen its original “contributory principle”, under which the amount people receive in benefits is linked to how much people have paid in.

Allies say the Chancellor is keen to extend “personal responsibility” in the welfare system. The report is being studied by the Downing Street Policy Unit and such reforms could be signalled in the Conservatives’ general election manifesto.

The Policy Exchange plan would set up a “compulsory collective insurance scheme”, into which everyone working more than 20 hours a week would pay £5 a week.

It would be run by private-sector providers such as insurers and fund managers, but guaranteed by the Government.

The think-tank calculates that the shake-up would save the Government £2.5bn a year as people became more self-reliant [more at link...]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/workers-could-be-forced-to-pay-5-a-week-to-get-benefits-9794571.html

Just another tax...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tax rates have been too low made up for by selling off the silver, wasting the proceeds of North sea oil and gas and consumer debt. What would you have done since 1979 to change things if you were in my position ?

Id of gone to live in france and then got so bored I spent my life on a british internet forum concerning british issues pontificating as though I wasn't a half wit. Oh wait, thats what you did do.

Share this post


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.

  • 399 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.