TheCountOfNowhere Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33089711 5 years late but real cuts to follow ? You get what you vote for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meerkat Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Tough fiscal choice HTB more comprehensible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darwin Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Personally, I have no problem with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashmonitor Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Probably should also extend it to working tax credit more widely. Clearly a millionaire who files a tax return as self employed, may be doesn't put in the hours, shouldn't be getting benefits. Absolutely possible in a zirp era and the fact ISas are exempt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shindigger Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Personally, I have no problem with this. Nor me. Have kids? Pay for them yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtickle Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The only problem I have with this is the fact that it's been discussed now in the media. It gives way too much time for a backlash to be constructed, and for him to "decide not to do it after all", in a carefully stage-managed sequence of events. I was hoping that the fuss about child benefit would be part of the planned sequence, with the surprise announcement that in fact it was Child Tax Credits to be slashed that will be made in the budget on 8th July with no wriggle room or time for it not to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCountOfNowhere Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share Posted June 11, 2015 Nor me. Have kids? Pay for them yourself. I have kids and I 100% agree, Same for everything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairyland Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) +1. It makes perfect sense for everyone to be responsible for their own kids. Edited June 11, 2015 by Fairyland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairyland Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 If CTC reduction goes ahead will it bring some/lots of families under the £23K cap limit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zugzwang Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 So the bill for child tax credit has risen because 'big employers' refuse to pay their employees a living wage? And cutting CTC will address this iniquity? How? What flaring nonsense. It's the cost of living that's too high! The biggest single component of which is the astronomic cost of keeping a roof over your head. It makes no economic sense whatsoever to extend govt benefits to landlords while simultaneously removing existing benefits from their tenants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 How much do tax credits actually cost? What percentage of tax credits would this cut be? ~30bln. ~5bln. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 How many houses would £5b buy? .......give people a place to rent where their wages could cover the rent.....no tax credits required, no benefits required, only wages required....win, win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gf3 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 How many houses would £5b buy? one in London Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shindigger Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 So the bill for child tax credit has risen because 'big employers' refuse to pay their employees a living wage? And cutting CTC will address this iniquity? How? What flaring nonsense. It's the cost of living that's too high! The biggest single component of which is the astronomic cost of keeping a roof over your head. It makes no economic sense whatsoever to extend govt benefits to landlords while simultaneously removing existing benefits from their tenants. Quite. Get George to ask Tesco, ever so nicely, to pay for their kids instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gf3 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Quite. Get George to ask Tesco, ever so nicely, to pay for their kids instead. Well it should go along with an increase in the minimum wage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 So £5bn in savings from the poor and zero from the rich? Does George now want wages of the low paid to increase by 10% to make up for this? If wages don't go up what does he think is going to happen to aggregate demand and also tax revenues? Also it's nice to see that George appears to be blaming the low paid for being low paid because they lack the incentive to work. Unlike the rich who've got richer by the welfare of near zero interest rates and free money from the central banks. If only the low paid could be as industrious and this country would be rich. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The only problem I have with this is the fact that it's been discussed now in the media. It gives way too much time for a backlash to be constructed, and for him to "decide not to do it after all", in a carefully stage-managed sequence of events. I was hoping that the fuss about child benefit would be part of the planned sequence, with the surprise announcement that in fact it was Child Tax Credits to be slashed that will be made in the budget on 8th July with no wriggle room or time for it not to happen. Exclusive George Osborne under pressure to slow welfare cuts Chancellor urged to accept some ‘loss of face’ to avoid lasting damage to Tories amid warnings his spending plans will force him to slash child tax credits EU Cameron's mission to Well you didn't have to wait long, it was only a matter of hours, not even a day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sikejsudjek Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) This sums up the Tories, Osborne's right wing think tanks must be a bit like this ! Edited June 11, 2015 by sikejsudjek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crash2006 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) Exclusive George Osborne under pressure to slow welfare cuts Chancellor urged to accept some ‘loss of face’ to avoid lasting damage to Tories amid warnings his spending plans will force him to slash child tax credits EU Cameron's mission to Well you didn't have to wait long, it was only a matter of hours, not even a day. its simple they dont need to alter the claiming benefits but they could do what they have done for the NHs claiming it back from home nation, want they could agree is that the benefit bill should be passed over to the home nation for payment. Edited June 11, 2015 by crash2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtickle Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 So £5bn in savings from the poor and zero from the rich? They are NOT POOR. As long as they have a couple of kids and work 2 days a week, they are showered with money taking their income so far above proper full-time highly-skilled work that it's a complete travesty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashmonitor Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 They are NOT POOR. As long as they have a couple of kids and work 2 days a week, they are showered with money taking their income so far above proper full-time highly-skilled work that it's a complete travesty. Well indeed, poor is a word used loosely these days when you can pull in £25,000 a year in benefits especially if you are socially housed. A poor person might be someone who has to manage a £100 per week smoking habit to boot. At the end of the day we tend to judge rich and poor on the accumulation of balance sheet wealth and quite often the lifetime consumption of the poor person might often exceed the consumption of the wealthy person that has therefore accumulated the difference. But I guess we need ''poor'' high spenders to keep the economy ticking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spaniard Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 George is away at the 2015 Bilderberg with his pal Ed Balls. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33107662 Who is paying for Balls's trip? (I assume the taxpayer is funding George?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamnumerate Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Well indeed, poor is a word used loosely these days when you can pull in £25,000 a year in benefits especially if you are socially housed. A poor person might be someone who has to manage a £100 per week smoking habit to boot. At the end of the day we tend to judge rich and poor on the accumulation of balance sheet wealth and quite often the lifetime consumption of the poor person might often exceed the consumption of the wealthy person that has therefore accumulated the difference. But I guess we need ''poor'' high spenders to keep the economy ticking. I agree apart from this bit "But I guess we need ''poor'' high spenders to keep the economy ticking." we don't, cut their benefits and cut our taxes and it will be just as good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Sacks Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 the effects of implementing these cuts will be felt not just by those with children. What some people don't seem to understand about benefits is that claimants spend the money they receive directly into the real economy. You know, the thing with shops and stuff where people work and get paid wages? Duh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle_Kenny Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 the effects of implementing these cuts will be felt not just by those with children. What some people don't seem to understand about benefits is that claimants spend the money they receive directly into the real economy. You know, the thing with shops and stuff where people work and get paid wages? Duh! What you don't seem to understand is that the benefit didn't rain down from the sky free of charge. It was extracted from the productive population ultimately by threats of violence. A government cut is a citizen keep. Oh, one more thing, that pesky, ubiquitous broken window fallacy again. Don't get me started on the unquantifiable costs of the effect on the populations work ethic, morality, family and community cohesion, self reliance and so forth. 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.