Universal Credit
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 npn  Crowborough 25 Oct 17 3.42pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
UC a good idea in theory, but bungled (like most other things) by the government for ideological reasons and ineptitude. Makes work pay as long as you don't actually get a job as the taper rate is effectively a 63% tax rate (imagine the reaction on here and among Tory grandees if that was the top tax rate). Things like payment in arrears and unifying the system is all well and good but it has to be done competently and with proper transitional arrangements. Also the fact that cash no longer goes directly to social landlords is such a bad idea. A universal basic income, combined with proper top rates of tax, fair taxation of capital (vs income) would be a much better idea, easier to administer and have significant benefits to people's productivity. It would also have a massive beneficial impact on mental health. What, in your opinion, is a "proper top rate of tax"?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
Pussay Patrol  25 Oct 17 3.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
UC a good idea in theory, but bungled (like most other things) by the government for ideological reasons and ineptitude. Makes work pay as long as you don't actually get a job as the taper rate is effectively a 63% tax rate (imagine the reaction on here and among Tory grandees if that was the top tax rate). Things like payment in arrears and unifying the system is all well and good but it has to be done competently and with proper transitional arrangements. Also the fact that cash no longer goes directly to social landlords is such a bad idea. A universal basic income, combined with proper top rates of tax, fair taxation of capital (vs income) would be a much better idea, easier to administer and have significant benefits to people's productivity. It would also have a massive beneficial impact on mental health. It sounds a bad idea on the face of it and yes, there will be some wasters who will spunk it but, again, the idea is noble, that people should be responsible for their own budgeting and how they make ends meet. To move away from the notion that the government will give you a place to live and pay your rent for you is the right way. Yes, we should support the poor, vulnerable and those in need as we will always have an obligation as a society but lets make 'something for nothing' a thing of the past
Paua oouaarancì Irà chiyeah Ishé galé ma ba oo ah |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 25 Oct 17 3.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Pussay Patrol
It sounds a bad idea on the face of it and yes, there will be some wasters who will spunk it but, again, the idea is noble, that people should be responsible for their own budgeting and how they make ends meet. To move away from the notion that the government will give you a place to live and pay your rent for you is the right way. Yes, we should support the poor, vulnerable and those in need as we will always have an obligation as a society but lets make 'something for nothing' a thing of the past Would you tell us how the award of 1p per week universal credit to a mother of two facing losing her home is 'something for nothing'? Driving people into poverty for no reason except some perverted false ideology.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 25 Oct 17 4.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Would you tell us how the award of 1p per week universal credit to a mother of two facing losing her home is 'something for nothing'? Driving people into poverty for no reason except some perverted false ideology. Why doesn't her partner get a job and support her
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Oct 17 4.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Pussay Patrol
It sounds a bad idea on the face of it and yes, there will be some wasters who will spunk it but, again, the idea is noble, that people should be responsible for their own budgeting and how they make ends meet. To move away from the notion that the government will give you a place to live and pay your rent for you is the right way. Yes, we should support the poor, vulnerable and those in need as we will always have an obligation as a society but lets make 'something for nothing' a thing of the past Problem is, the situation tends to be a bit f**ked up the moment that any change in status occurs. Friend of ours when her son turned 18, she rightly contacted Social Services, and the change in benefit/tax credits meant her benefits were recalculated - and a result of this was that all her benefits were frozen for six or seven weeks in the process. The problem of course is that people on benefits don't have money to fall back on, and people don't suddenly stop wanting to be paid either. So six weeks on, she's now behind on all bills, in arrears on her rent, and basically has only managed to stay afloat on the 16 hours a week she works at minimum wage, borrowing money from other people, the grace of her landlord. Meanwhile her kids have to be fed, clothed, sent to school etc. The system is already a f**king travesty that fails people reliant on it. I wouldn't trust a British government to deal with Benefits, except to make it harder and f**k over more people. People on benefits or tax credits, don't need new systems - They need the capacity to earn more money themselves, by working. Increase the minimum wage and the hours they can work. Incentivise them back into work, where possible and provide a reasonable system for those who need it.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Oct 17 4.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Why doesn't her partner get a job and support her Maybe he's not in the picture, maybe he's a feckless dosser. Friend of mine, sadly, had a habit of feckless wastes of space as partners.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CambridgeEagle Sydenham 25 Oct 17 4.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Pussay Patrol
It sounds a bad idea on the face of it and yes, there will be some wasters who will spunk it but, again, the idea is noble, that people should be responsible for their own budgeting and how they make ends meet. To move away from the notion that the government will give you a place to live and pay your rent for you is the right way. Yes, we should support the poor, vulnerable and those in need as we will always have an obligation as a society but lets make 'something for nothing' a thing of the past What you've actually seen is that Landlords are unwilling to give new leases to tenants on UC simply because they don't trust them to make the payments. They're not even getting the chance. As I've pointed out the taper rate means that work doesn't pay. Figures following inflation data showed that real earnings have fallen by most for families working but still on UC, and those just on UC but not working have been more insulated. This isn't right.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CambridgeEagle Sydenham 25 Oct 17 4.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by npn
What, in your opinion, is a "proper top rate of tax"?
More importantly taxes on unearned income such as capital gains and inheritance needs looking at as it's way too low. It shouldn't be so much lower than income tax. Why you get taxed more on money you work for is grossly unfair. Reforming property tax so that your home isn't exempt from CGT would be a good idea as well and would help cool down the market. I would advocate replacing SDLT with CGT so that you pay taxes on exiting rather than going in, which would help first time buyers and tax large unearned gains. It would also mean if you've worked hard and saved to buy a bigger house you'd not be penalised by a transaction tax. This would have to still apply on inheritance and inheritance tax taken after CGT was charged on any property in a death estate.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 25 Oct 17 5.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Lyons550
Sadly don't know enough about it to comment You are not quite getting this General Talk lark. That makes you 100% qualified to
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 25 Oct 17 6.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Maybe he's not in the picture, maybe he's a feckless dosser. Friend of mine, sadly, had a habit of feckless wastes of space as partners. He is in the picture but the media have mentioned that her father's wages have to cover all of them as the step mother is disabled but absolutely no mention of why the partner isn't contributing as that would spoil the media's storyline
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 25 Oct 17 6.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
A range of sources... The Government quite rightly got rid of the extortionate phone advice line cost, hopefully they will listen to what's happening to people and halt the roll out until they can sort out the faults.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 25 Oct 17 7.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
A range of sources... The Government quite rightly got rid of the extortionate phone advice line cost, hopefully they will listen to what's happening to people and halt the roll out until they can sort out the faults. You are some optimist Nick that would really be a first !! I'll eat Mugabe if that happens !!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.