Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
fru-gal

Labour's Frank Field Says Tax Credits Should Be Abolished By 2020

Recommended Posts

He is quite correct. Why should taxpayers subsidise low wage employers.....

Field is the only one in the Labour party who had the balls to tell Blair how it was on regarding the benefit culture. Blair saw his potential voter base evaporate so promptly sacked him.

Edited by geezer466

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's not quite true is it.

What he is saying is that employers should be, at the same time, forced to increase wages to the level of the living wage rather than the minimum wage.

If you don't do this then it's possible/probably they won't (depending to some extent on supply of labour by the end of the parliament)

As far as I'm aware Osborne is not proposing, nor likely to propose, any such thing.

He proposed the Low Pay Commission be replaced with a fair wage commission that will aim to force sectors to adopt the living wage of £7.85, or £9.15 in London, as opposed to the minimum wage of £6.50
. - See more at: https://www.politicshome.com/economy-and-work/articles/story/cut-tax-credits-says-labours-frank-field#sthash.hGfI1vlk.dpuf Edited by R K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the proposed solution always wage increases, rather than falls in the cost of living?

If the minimum wage effectively goes up to £8, is my employer going to be similarly forced to give me a 20% wage rise?

It's like a psychological disease, this obsession with ever-increasing numbers with no basis in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is the proposed solution always wage increases, rather than falls in the cost of living?

This is what makes things like H2B so abhorrent, and makes me believe the theory that governments aren't necessarily there to improve living standards, but simply to control populations and make them "malleable" to their ends. H2B is such a poison - an accelerant - to the economic problems the UK is suffering from. We could have a much lower cost of living if the government wasn't hell-bent on making it so high, while pretending to deal with our economic problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and if wages go up - prices go up, benefit rates go up, pensions go up, exports become more expensive

it is not so simple - costs of the basics should come down - housing, utilities, transport

that said - I agree with Frank Field that tax credits should go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's not quite true is it.

What he is saying is that employers should be, at the same time, forced to increase wages to the level of the living wage rather than the minimum wage.

If you don't do this then it's possible/probably they won't (depending to some extent on supply of labour by the end of the parliament)

As far as I'm aware Osborne is not proposing, nor likely to propose, any such thing.

From The Times article;

In comments that will prove a huge headache for Labour’s four leadership contenders, Frank Field said that the chancellor should set a target of five years to entirely abolish tax credits which top up salaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The younger generations are saddled with £100Bn to pay back for each and every year we extravagantly pretend the UK is "recovering". The boomers will be dead/retired by the time those bills need to be paid. Something needs to be done to reduce the welfare bills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frank Field understands welfare.He isnt always right of course,but he knows what drives welfare and the affects.He cares about a safety net.He understands benefits have become a trap and also a free for all for employers to pay minimum and rentiers to take the housing benefits.

The left should thank Frank and engage in the debate instead of simply pretending people getting £500 a week in tax credits etc is sustainable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does the money come from, to increase wages?

God forbid maybe some Chief Execs (and other senior execs) could cut their pay to a measly £500k or something and allow the plebs at the bottom a living wage. Don't be foolish enough to think the money isn't there, corporate profits have never been so high. I'm not a socialist but there is plenty enough money around to pay people a living wage. Do you not think there is a strong correlation between the 1% doubling their wealth since 2008/09 and declining living standards for the bottom 90%? Problem strikes me as obvious but in a globalised world, we are held to ransom by these shysters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's not quite true is it.

What he is saying is that employers should be, at the same time, forced to increase wages to the level of the living wage rather than the minimum wage.

If you don't do this then it's possible/probably they won't (depending to some extent on supply of labour by the end of the parliament)

As far as I'm aware Osborne is not proposing, nor likely to propose, any such thing.

well the way to do that is to seriously streamline business employment and tax legislation, so they won't feel the pain of having to up wages by another £1 per hour.

all of the pointless laws take up horrendous amounts of accountants and lawyers time(and company money to comply with absurd statutes)

lets take vehicle taxation as a prime example.

they could have just as easily got rid of road tax altogether,and put £20 on the cost of an MOT and 5p on a gallon of petrol to compensate, and STILL made a net profit....but NOOOO, the government have to take the scenic route don't they!

how much does it cost to have:

1)an army of dvla pen-pushers to produce a tax disc(ok smartarse it's computerisednow but it still needs miss "computer says noo on the other end at £10 per hour)

2)an army of "inspectors" to make sure everybody has one

3)an army of beaurocrats to process those who don't have one

4)an army of lawyers to defend&prosecute said person(at £200 per hour)

bearing in mind that if your car does not pass an MOT, you have a 7 day grace period to make the repairs and get re-tested, or in theory that vehicle is SORN anyway

it smacks of excessive duplication of roles

not at all efficient is it?

Edited by oracle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God forbid maybe some Chief Execs (and other senior execs) could cut their pay to a measly £500k or something and allow the plebs at the bottom a living wage. Don't be foolish enough to think the money isn't there, corporate profits have never been so high. I'm not a socialist but there is plenty enough money around to pay people a living wage. Do you not think there is a strong correlation between the 1% doubling their wealth since 2008/09 and declining living standards for the bottom 90%? Problem strikes me as obvious but in a globalised world, we are held to ransom by these shysters.

Spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God forbid maybe some Chief Execs (and other senior execs) could cut their pay to a measly £500k or something and allow the plebs at the bottom a living wage. Don't be foolish enough to think the money isn't there, corporate profits have never been so high. I'm not a socialist but there is plenty enough money around to pay people a living wage. Do you not think there is a strong correlation between the 1% doubling their wealth since 2008/09 and declining living standards for the bottom 90%? Problem strikes me as obvious but in a globalised world, we are held to ransom by these shysters.

All the more reason not to subsidise artificially low wages with tax credits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the proposed solution always wage increases, rather than falls in the cost of living?

If the minimum wage effectively goes up to £8, is my employer going to be similarly forced to give me a 20% wage rise?

It's like a psychological disease, this obsession with ever-increasing numbers with no basis in reality.

It's not so much wage increases as a shift in the responsibility from state to employers. Osborne wants to cut welfare payments with no corresponding mandatory increase in wages. He thinks no doubt the imaginary "market" will sort it out (which it never does).

Field is proposing mandated increases to a living wage to offset reduction in state transfer payments which seems far more rational.

Housing costs (not house prices - which is a capital asset) of course have fallen as a % of income due to low int rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the more reason not to subsidise artificially low wages with tax credits.

Wages (+ property purchases,etc.) should not be subsidised by the taxpayer.

Those subsidies distort everything, they are unfair and they turned the whole society into slavery.

Pensions should not count as "benefits". If the part of my salary is going towards my pension, and once I get pension, I did not "benefit" from it. It is like saying that I "benefit" from my savings which is ridiculous and taking a p**s.(Not to mention very low interest rates both on pensions and savings).

Interesting coincidence is that the alleged deficit (taxes which government did not collect in a single year) of some £125bn equates to total amount of benefits ( excluding pensions).Where did the rest of our taxes go? (NHS cost is allegedly around similar figure, but still-the huge amount of taxpayer's money has dissapeared.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does the money come from, to increase wages?

Where does the money come from to pay benefits?

Replacing wages by benefits just smothers the economy. Either it's a handout to highly-profitable businesses (unlikely), or it's a prop to support inefficient businesses at the expense of more-efficient prospective competitors (the socialist zombie economy - much more likely).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4)an army of lawyers to defend&prosecute said person(at £200 per hour)

Where do you get a lawyer that cheap? Are you outsourcing to India or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   65 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.