Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

fru-gal

Cameron To Tell Eu: Cut All Tax Credits To Migrants

Recommended Posts

No. I think you could tweak it by requiring 10 years residence. This would apply to UK nationals and EU migrants.

I would much prefer no tax credits and a contributory benefit system for UK nationals too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I think you could tweak it by requiring 10 years residence. This would apply to UK nationals and EU migrants.

I would much prefer no tax credits and a contributory benefit system for UK nationals too.

Well, they've obviously got something planned. They have UKIP snapping at their heals, the deficit rising and due to rise further, unsustainable welfare state, most of which goes to pensions but this is going to increase so they will need to cut further down the line, the most unpopular of benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron promised immigration in the 10's of thousands before the last election.,..before this eleciton he is promising to do something about immigration.

He's 4 years too late.

The UK NEEDS immigration. The ponzi-economy NEED more idiots. The banks and big businesses NEED more idiots.

This is the problem with a perpetual growth model where stability is based on more growth which is based on, well, more people.

IMHO, Cameron is a liar, he cannot and will not do anything about immigration, the elite demand it.

f he has any intention of listening to the British people he;d have done it 4 years ago.

I'll be voting UKIP.

q.e.d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the aim is for equal/same/similar monetary and fiscal rules.....the united states of Europe.

We are only a small cog in a greater stronger establishment working its way slowly to one aim/ ultimate goal....collective strength and power in units/ states/numbers.imo. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably if the UK changed its welfare system so that it was contribution based, the EU would be happy as it would be more in line with countries like Germany and France. We've got to be mad to have the present system where you can get paid to have kids and you get more money based on "need" even when the need is entirely self inflicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is so taboo about moving to a contribution based benefits scheme for all adults (UK & Non-UK)? Most EU benefits schemes are contributions based. Only UK & RoI base it on a 'needs' basis.

Nothing, in fact I'm all for it. It just makes me laugh that Cameron is suddenly talking sense because he's looking over his shoulder at UKIP. As stated by a poster above, "too little, too late".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing, in fact I'm all for it. It just makes me laugh that Cameron is suddenly talking sense because he's looking over his shoulder at UKIP. As stated by a poster above, "too little, too late".

It is not what he says, but whether he can actually implement the changes he talks about.... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is so taboo about moving to a contribution based benefits scheme for all adults (UK & Non-UK)? Most EU benefits schemes are contributions based. Only UK & RoI base it on a 'needs' basis.

Apart from anythin else, its not a savings scheme. That would be stupid. Its social insurance.

Imagine you start work in 2008 then are made redundant through no fault of your own in the recession. Alternatively you may start work in 2010 and still be employed and not need to call on it.

Little different to any other form of insurance. Its there for small numbers of claims and paid for by everyone - as insurance against unpredictable events. If you write your car off youre not required to have paid £20k in premiums before you can claim - that would be ludicrous.

I dare say despite Camerons claim that every Pole is sending back £8k pa. to his family in Poland, the actual numbers are probably small enough to not really be worth bothering about. Certainly not making it an in/out of EU ultimatum.

In fact, it has become insanely difficult to claim social insurance, not easy. Needs to swing the other way.

The fundamental problem with UK is a woeful underprovision of social housing for rent and ease of social insurance to facilitate job mobility, remove frictions, and enable a more productive economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got the usual professor wheeled out by the BBC, an expert on immigration, and of course the figures say they are beneficial to the Exchequer. Of course they are, they are of working age. No mention of accruing liabilities (off balance sheet ) in future health, disability and state pension costs which would put a bazooka under any short term gains. Is this a question you are not allowed to ask, does the current revenue position include the trillions in welfare obligations in the future, is it beyond any member of the BBC staff to ask these professors the question or is it a closely guarded secret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He can say whatever he wants at this point. The Conservatives are very unlikely to get a majority at the next election and Con+UKIP are not likely to be able to form a majority of MPs either.

The only way to pass a vote on this in the 2015-2020 Commons will probably be to get Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP, or some combination thereof to vote for it. All three of those parties are strongly pro-EU.

This is all just pre-election propaganda from Cameron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron is promising something he cannot achieve in parts, so that when he fails he will blame the EU and drop ALL of the reforms.

Even the stuff he is promising has devils in the detail. In work benefits, err no it should be all benefits.

Amending the benefits rules is easy, you add a residency requirement. I suggest 18 years, this would include time from birth. Hey presto those born here or long term residents qualify for money, the others don't. The pensions system would be reformed so that if you live abroad, no money whoever you are.

Personally why bother with all the faffing about, introduce a citizens income with the residency rule above. Also simplify the tax system to a flat rate on all earnings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from anythin else, its not a savings scheme. That would be stupid. Its social insurance.

Imagine you start work in 2008 then are made redundant through no fault of your own in the recession. Alternatively you may start work in 2010 and still be employed and not need to call on it.

Little different to any other form of insurance. Its there for small numbers of claims and paid for by everyone - as insurance against unpredictable events. If you write your car off youre not required to have paid £20k in premiums before you can claim - that would be ludicrous.

I dare say despite Camerons claim that every Pole is sending back £8k pa. to his family in Poland, the actual numbers are probably small enough to not really be worth bothering about. Certainly not making it an in/out of EU ultimatum.

In fact, it has become insanely difficult to claim social insurance, not easy. Needs to swing the other way.

The fundamental problem with UK is a woeful underprovision of social housing for rent and ease of social insurance to facilitate job mobility, remove frictions, and enable a more productive economy.

Thanks for responding to my substantive point. However, I never suggested that it be a savings scheme of any sort. I simply suggested that adults meet a certain minimum threshold contribution to the common good before they are eligible for benefits. Transitional arrangements may be required for those leaving education and entering the workforce. Other allowances could be made for those contributing to the common good ( carers, etc.). However the fundamental message must be sent that welfare is a safety net, not a lifestyle choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guardian link is full of twists, turns and contradictions and attempts to mislead. If anyone wants the full monty of delusion and attempts to delude and mislead then the full text of the speech is in the bbc link below


http://

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30250299

But if I am Prime Minister after the election, we will go further.

It's as if after 5 years he's had a sudden awakening but he thinks he's fighting the 2010 election - because it's just like the stuff he was coming out with then.

Most of his speech is so for mass immigration to the UK that any observer might think he's going to double it and as all his "promises" will only apply after the general election and given his track record on the truth who could be that confident it wouldn't turn out to be exactly that. After all the net migration figure now is more than double the amount he "promised" before the last general election - and he makes no mention of how the numbers are going to be housed.

If there is a referendum and the vote is Yes based on the negotiations then what are the odds that the "negotiations will be ditched afterwards - odds on?

He has the temerity to think he can pull the wool over the UK people yet again. He's still Prime Minister :o


The ambition remains the right one. But it's clear: it's going to take more time, more work and more difficult long term decisions to get there.

5 more years and he would be back again with the same old dodgy promises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the guardian link


The Conservatives claim Cameron’s package will deliver the toughest system on welfare for EU migrants anywhere in Europe. The key reforms will mean that in future EU workers will:

• Not get in-work benefits until they have been in the UK for four years.

• Not get social housing until they have been in the UK for four years.

• Not get child benefits and tax credits for children living elsewhere in Europe no matter how long they have paid taxes in the UK.

EU jobseekers will not be supported by UK taxpayers, and will be removed if they are not in a job within six months.

Anyone could drive a coach and horses through that half baked glib stuff. He knows it's never going to be implemented - either he gets back in and he'll renege on it yet again or he doesn't then he'll be off to a sinecure job.

Just to start with there's no mention of those who set up as self employed and claim the tax credits etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron is promising something he cannot achieve in parts, so that when he fails he will blame the EU and drop ALL of the reforms.

Even the stuff he is promising has devils in the detail. In work benefits, err no it should be all benefits.

Amending the benefits rules is easy, you add a residency requirement. I suggest 18 years, this would include time from birth. Hey presto those born here or long term residents qualify for money, the others don't. The pensions system would be reformed so that if you live abroad, no money whoever you are.

Personally why bother with all the faffing about, introduce a citizens income with the residency rule above. Also simplify the tax system to a flat rate on all earnings.

So a UK citizen whose parents took them overseas when they were a child becomes a second class citizen until 18 years have passed since they got back. Nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got the usual professor wheeled out by the BBC, an expert on immigration, and of course the figures say they are beneficial to the Exchequer. Of course they are, they are of working age. No mention of accruing liabilities (off balance sheet ) in future health, disability and state pension costs which would put a bazooka under any short term gains. Is this a question you are not allowed to ask, does the current revenue position include the trillions in welfare obligations in the future, is it beyond any member of the BBC staff to ask these professors the question or is it a closely guarded secret.

I think it's more the case that, since they aren't controlling immigration for whatever reason, they're attempting to justify it... i.e. "don't worry about the large figures, they're a net benefit."

In which case, why not just import 100 million Chinese? We'd be the richest country in the world!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Conservatives claim Cameron’s package will deliver the toughest system on welfare for EU migrants anywhere in Europe. The key reforms will mean that in future EU workers will:

• Not get in-work benefits until they have been in the UK for four years.

• Not get social housing until they have been in the UK for four years.

• Not get child benefits and tax credits for children living elsewhere in Europe no matter how long they have paid taxes in the UK.

EU jobseekers will not be supported by UK taxpayers, and will be removed if they are not in a job within six months.

It's not necessarily glib, but here's the question I'd ask:

Given they're able to rush through laws on terrorism, when are the above going to be rushed into law? This week? Next week?

Oh... I see, Mr Cameron... IF you remain Prime Minister and IF you win an outright majority next year and IF Venus is rising over Saturn.

And you wonder why people are turning to UKIP and other alternatives in droves?

If you were serious, you'd be implementing that list today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily glib, but here's the question I'd ask:

Given they're able to rush through laws on terrorism, when are the above going to be rushed into law? This week? Next week?

Oh... I see, Mr Cameron... IF you remain Prime Minister and IF you win an outright majority next year and IF Venus is rising over Saturn.

And you wonder why people are turning to UKIP and other alternatives in droves?

If you were serious, you'd be implementing that list today.

Not necessarily glib but only not necessarily because it's not persuasive any more.

It's Mr Dave - it's glib.

glib

marked by ease and fluency in speaking or writing often to the point of being insincere or deceitful <a glib politician>

Agreed on the question of why not now.

Just to add - referring to the stuff that you put under biilybong ......said - that is:

snapback.png

The Conservatives claim Cameron’s package will deliver the toughest system on welfare for EU migrants anywhere in Europe. The key reforms will mean that in future EU workers will:

• Not get in-work benefits until they have been in the UK for four years.

• Not get social housing until they have been in the UK for four years.

• Not get child benefits and tax credits for children living elsewhere in Europe no matter how long they have paid taxes in the UK.

EU jobseekers will not be supported by UK taxpayers, and will be removed if they are not in a job within six months.

I didn't say that (refer my post) - it's a bit misleading as those aren't my words as I was quoting them from the OP's guardian link. As I mentioned in that earlier post my view is that those Conservative claims are half baked and glib.

Just saying - to be clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   209 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.