tax credit cuts

[rob murray]

see this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34548733

Plenty like this women are going to lose big time over tax credit cuts..........this could become cameron and osbournes poll tax !!!!!
Under the government's plans, the earnings level above which tax credits are withdrawn will be lowered from £6,420 to £3,850, and the rate at which the benefit is lost as pay rises will be sped up. Ministers argue the impact of the cuts will be mitigated by the new National Living Wage and higher tax thresholds. ( which is not being impleneted until 2017 ) Labour says three million families face losing an average of £1,000 a year.

[Redsnapper]

Unless its a rant against the SNP you won't get many responses on here.

[rob murray]

Unless its a rant against the SNP you won't get many responses on here.

Its not............................................... ................and so what ?

[Shabbychic]

see this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34548733

Plenty like this women are going to lose big time over tax credit cuts..........this could become cameron and osbournes poll tax !!!!!
Under the government's plans, the earnings level above which tax credits are withdrawn will be lowered from £6,420 to £3,850, and the rate at which the benefit is lost as pay rises will be sped up. Ministers argue the impact of the cuts will be mitigated by the new National Living Wage and higher tax thresholds. ( which is not being impleneted until 2017 ) Labour says three million families face losing an average of £1,000 a year.

She was one of the 24% of those eligible to vote in the UK, who actually voted Tory, because she thought they were going to be nasty and horrible to everybody else, but not her. My heart bleeds for her! Home to roost and all that.

[tonkatojo]

She was one of the 24% of those eligible to vote in the UK, who actually voted Tory, because she thought they were going to be nasty and horrible to everybody else, but not her. My heart bleeds for her! Home to roost and all that.

Totally agree, all those wannabe torys will get their comeuppance at some stage of the near future. LOL

[theone]

see this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34548733

Plenty like this women are going to lose big time over tax credit cuts..........this could become cameron and osbournes poll tax !!!!!
Under the government's plans, the earnings level above which tax credits are withdrawn will be lowered from £6,420 to £3,850, and the rate at which the benefit is lost as pay rises will be sped up. Ministers argue the impact of the cuts will be mitigated by the new National Living Wage and higher tax thresholds. ( which is not being impleneted until 2017 ) Labour says three million families face losing an average of £1,000 a year.

So what's the truth?

Will the tax credit changes be mitigated by other changes, or will 3 million families lose £1000?

Somebody must know............

[rob murray]

So what's the truth?

Will the tax credit changes be mitigated by other changes, or will 3 million families lose £1000?

Somebody must know............

I think a large trache of the Tory party "know" enough to be concerned for various reasons......Osbourne has to save c£4 billions from TC cuts.The independent Institute for Fiscal Studies have warned millions of people will lose up to £1,300 a year from the Budget changes. Torys in marginal seats and "rebels", up to 70 of them, are "worried"....Boris JOhnson has very vocally joined the fray, seemingly peers are ready to launch a last-ditch bid to kill off the tax credit cuts in the House of Lords. A rare “fatal” motion is expected to be tabled this week, with a potential vote next Monday. The move would almost certainly to lead to a Government defeat because the Tories do not have a majority in the Upper Chamber.Peers could inflict the blow because the tax credit cut was not outlined in the Conservative election manifesto.

Crossbencher Baroness Meacher, who is putting forward the motion, urged the Government to “think again” and protect the “very, very bottom”. She told the BBC: “The most vulnerable people in our society are going to lose money as a result of this regulation. “It is unbelievable to me that people go out to work and they earn as little as £3,850 - and even at that level of earnings they will be losing tax credits.”Lady Meacher said there were “clearly a lot of Conservatives very concerned about this”....hence over the week end "tweaking" the proposed changes has leaked out....but Osbournes seems not for turning.....could be then that this turns out to be his poll tax

[BetterTogether]

Well no one is going to claim there won't be anyone affected by the cuts or maybe that the way they are being implemented may need restructuring but one thing is for sure that particular system does need sorting out.

Although I'm always sceptical of a Conservative voter embarrassing a Conservative Minister on a notoriously left biased BBC programme. We only have her word that she voted conservative " this time" who have her previous votes been for.

The interviews after in her house didn't seem to show a person living on the bread line.

[Mr P Cannop]

there is a debate about this in the house of commons today

[rob murray]

Well no one is going to claim there won't be anyone affected by the cuts or maybe that the way they are being implemented may need restructuring but one thing is for sure that particular system does need sorting out.

Although I'm always sceptical of a Conservative voter embarrassing a Conservative Minister on a notoriously left biased BBC programme. We only have her word that she voted conservative " this time" who have her previous votes been for.

The interviews after in her house didn't seem to show a person living on the bread line.

The Tax Credit issue was a political hot potatoe long before the BBC incident, it does need sorting out yes, but politically there has to be a minimum of losers if cuts are as wide as the IFS and some elements of the Tory party claim as well as house of lords..whatever the issue this is political and one "weepy" voter on BBC hasnt caused all this .

[weezer 316]

Well no one is going to claim there won't be anyone affected by the cuts or maybe that the way they are being implemented may need restructuring but one thing is for sure that particular system does need sorting out.

Although I'm always sceptical of a Conservative voter embarrassing a Conservative Minister on a notoriously left biased BBC programme. We only have her word that she voted conservative " this time" who have her previous votes been for.

The interviews after in her house didn't seem to show a person living on the bread line.

Implying only folk on the brink should get tax credits? If that's the case you prior support for pensioners freebies is absurd, they should get nothing unless they are on the breadline, which was ironically my argument.

Tax credits doenst so much need reformed as wages need to rise. The tories could solve this at a stroke keeping their reforms in place and simply raise the minimum wage again to about £8. Simples. Nobody looses anything and some of that cash companies hoard will get back into the economy

[rob murray]

Implying only folk on the brink should get tax credits? If that's the case you prior support for pensioners freebies is absurd, they should get nothing unless they are on the breadline, which was ironically my argument.

Tax credits doenst so much need reformed as wages need to rise. The tories could solve this at a stroke keeping their reforms in place and simply raise the minimum wage again to about £8. Simples. Nobody looses anything and some of that cash companies hoard will get back into the economy

and what about companies who wont recruit if wages were set at £8.00 an hour, you cannot make them rercuit, so a wage hike will cost wages, ie through the loss of jobs that companies wont create, prefering staff to work harder, and use over time, more flexible working rotas : you only put wages up when youve got the profits and market share, the greedy will hold back anyway but if you look at the highlands there are 15k micro businesses employing < 5 people...how many of them do you think could pay £8 per hour ?? This will impact upon the small companies, the very companies we want to grow...we have a low wage economy in the UK thats why we have tax credits, a wage subsidy to get people of benefits and into work. You could of course stop the lot, including JSA and people have to work at the prevailing rates...what they are worth, but importantly what an employer will pay....a free market ! That will go down a storm eh

[weezer 316]

and what about companies who wont recruit if wages were set at £8.00 an hour, you cannot make them rercuit, so a wage hike will cost wages, ie through the loss of jobs that companies wont create, prefering staff to work harder, and use over time, more flexible working rotas : you only put wages up when youve got the profits and market share, the greedy will hold back anyway but if you look at the highlands there are 15k micro businesses employing < 5 people...how many of them do you think could pay £8 per hour ?? This will impact upon the small companies, the very companies we want to grow...we have a low wage economy in the UK thats why we have tax credits, a wage subsidy to get people of benefits and into work. You could of course stop the lot, including JSA and people have to work at the prevailing rates...what they are worth, but importantly what an employer will pay....a free market ! That will go down a storm eh

Mate you have a race to the bottom with wages anyway where you have the upper reaches awarding themselves more and more and the workers less and less. I've worked for a few small companies and this was the case, not just at the big ones.

Also, that extra money going into workers pockets means more money for these very same business customers to spend.

The gap between wages and productivity has grown massively in the past 25 years. How, in the ace of this, can you justify not arguing for wages to be forced up? Clearly the market, in this instance, is not doing its job as efficiently as it should be.

[rob murray]

Mate you have a race to the bottom with wages anyway where you have the upper reaches awarding themselves more and more and the workers less and less. I've worked for a few small companies and this was the case, not just at the big ones.

Also, that extra money going into workers pockets means more money for these very same business customers to spend.

The gap between wages and productivity has grown massively in the past 25 years. How, in the ace of this, can you justify not arguing for wages to be forced up? Clearly the market, in this instance, is not doing its job as efficiently as it should be.

Youve answered your own points, IM not justifying wages not going up far from it, free market ideologoy / neo classical economics mate the economic bobole of the right.......work for what you can get or are lucky enough to work for what you can demand, ie supply / demand of labour, withdraw tax credits ( wage subsidies ) and let the market dicate wages....I thought you proclaimed you were right wing,...so markets dont always work do they ??

[weezer 316]

Youve answered your own points, IM not justifying wages not going up far from it, free market ideologoy / neo classical economics mate the economic bobole of the right.......work for what you can get or are lucky enough to work for what you can demand, ie supply / demand of labour, withdraw tax credits ( wage subsidies ) and let the market dicate wages....I thought you proclaimed you were right wing,...so markets dont always work do they ??

I am a bit of everything mate.

To say markets always work is like saying markets never work. Both are wrong. they work to varying degrees, which is stating the obvious. However, in a marketplace where wages have not kept pace with productivity, but have have vastly outstripped it for some, namely the top 5% of wage earners (Roughly 67k per annum). If the market was efficient, this discrepancy wouldn't have happened. Its not. So, either govt subsidises them at the bottom or takes from the top. If that costs jobs (it wont, it never does, see the CBI's 40 years of things costing jobs that never did) then so be it, it will put the tax payer and those at the bottom on a better footing and possibly limit wage growth at the top.

[rob murray]

I am a bit of everything mate.

To say markets always work is like saying markets never work. Both are wrong. they work to varying degrees, which is stating the obvious. However, in a marketplace where wages have not kept pace with productivity, but have have vastly outstripped it for some, namely the top 5% of wage earners (Roughly 67k per annum). If the market was efficient, this discrepancy wouldn't have happened. Its not. So, either govt subsidises them at the bottom or takes from the top. If that costs jobs (it wont, it never does, see the CBI's 40 years of things costing jobs that never did) then so be it, it will put the tax payer and those at the bottom on a better footing and possibly limit wage growth at the top.

AGree, markets work only in some circumstances, but people of a certain persuasion are 100% wedded to the concept of leaving things to the "market" as their ideological belief ( see below ) is that markets always work ( given time or "the long run" ) and that includes determining wages ( bull, and disproved but still trotted out by the neo cons ) ......top 5% of earners...are you counting bankers and 6 figure bonuses here...as £67k is not exactly in that catgeory is it ??? Hell theres people in HIghland Council, at least 15 of them on more than £100k....£67k is not a high wage by any stretch

Neoclassical microeconomics of labour markets

Neoclassical economists view the labour market as similar to other markets in that the forces of supply and demand jointly determine price (in this case the wage rate) and quantity (in this case the number of people employed). if you want more info on the economics behind wage rates see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_economics

[BetterTogether]

Ahh the brave new world as Scotland's first ultra conservative socialist liberal stirs to tap his wand and make the whole countries problems vanish " poof " in one easy answer.

[weezer 316]

AGree, markets work only in some circumstances, but people of a certain persuasion are 100% wedded to the concept of leaving things to the "market" as their ideological belief ( see below ) is that markets always work ( given time or "the long run" ) and that includes determining wages ( bull, and disproved but still trotted out by the neo cons ) ......top 5% of earners...are you counting bankers and 6 figure bonuses here...as £67k is not exactly in that catgeory is it ??? Hell theres people in HIghland Council, at least 15 of them on more than £100k....£67k is not a high wage by any stretch

Neoclassical microeconomics of labour markets

Neoclassical economists view the labour market as similar to other markets in that the forces of supply and demand jointly determine price (in this case the wage rate) and quantity (in this case the number of people employed). if you want more info on the economics behind wage rates see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_economics

It doesn't sound high because you know folk on wages like that. You earn 100k you're comfortably in the top 3% of wages earners in this country.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statis...-and-after-tax

I actually tell a lie, 62k a year puts you in the top 5%, not 67, that's the top 4%.

Bettertogether, you seem a bit traditionalist. If so your mother must have told you if you haven't got anything constructive to say then don't say anything. If she didn't then I am.

[rob murray]

It doesn't sound high because you know folk on wages like that. You earn 100k you're comfortably in the top 3% of wages earners in this country.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statis...-and-after-tax

I actually tell a lie, 62k a year puts you in the top 5%, not 67, that's the top 4%.

Bettertogether, you seem a bit traditionalist. If so your mother must have told you if you haven't got anything constructive to say then don't say anything. If she didn't then I am.

Better write to Highland Council and when yout at it NHS, HIE and evrey damn quango in the Highlands as all CEO's / Deputy CEO's etc are all on way above £67k.....very few wages at that rate are locally available in the private sector, unless you own / have shares in a private local business thats doing well.

[weezer 316]

I know. That was my original point. Top is doing too well. Exactly why govt should just up the min wage, remove millions from govt assistance when they are at it, and it will help the wider economy.

Think about it. If you have a CEO on 100k, thats top 3% of workers, 97% earn less than him.

Now he has 20 employees on £7 and hour and eligible for tax credits of various flavours.

Up that to £8 an hour for them all. Yearly cost for a 40 hour week - £41600 in total + some NI. Now, unless CEO dude here is 11x more productive than the bloke on the minimum wage then the market has failed (I would bet he's not). Yet I would bet a 40k payrise for a successful company for Mr CEO would not break the company, and given how wages at the top have went in the past 30 years I am probably making an underestmation.

You can stretch that uplift over a few years if you want too. Premise is the same.

And thats why the govt should just mandate it. Jobs wont go anywhere simply because there is more money in the economy going round in more pockets.