Welfare myths

True but I don't think it's seen the same way.

Society isn't as much about reality as it is about about perception.

I make no comments on actual worth of different people, only engagement. In essence it's the real "big society" David Cameron keeps withering about but they're going about it the wrong way.

[timwilky]

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

Just to clarify what happened in 1992---------
The Labour shadow chancellor John Smith published a proposed budget before the election.What he proposed was not to raise income tax as such for the higher earners,but to abolish the upper limit for National Insurance contribuions which for some reason was then about £25000 and to this day is still set at about £35000.It would have been a massive simplification of the revenue raising system and could have allowed a considerable raising of tax thresholds generally,but certain elements in the media portrayed it as a massive hit on Nurses Teachers Army NCOs and god knows who else.No party sinse has published a proposed budget or anything similar.
I happen to think the late John Smith was a man of great integrity who might have done a lot of good if he had survived.Who knows?

No doubt John Smith would have been a man of integrety. But he had a posioned task after the untrustable Kinnock. But my god were we let down by his early demise. The Blair and Brown comedy double act. I might be a right wing tory boy, but I can listen to Tony Benn for hours. There is man of integrity. I might not like his politics, but I can understand his reasoning.

I think there is a real issue with politicians (MPs) are those in receipt of secondary incomes not living in the real world who cannot differentiate between those who are doing ok, looking after their families and worked damm hard to get where they are. Only earning a few bob more in real terms than some of those getting benefits, and the real high earners.

IDS is getting hammered for wanting to limit the maximum benefit payed to about £26,000/annum tax free. Assuming a personal allowance of £8100, and any taxable earnings above £34,500. Means a salary above £42,600 is taxable at the higher rate.

To put this into perspective A higher rate tax payer earning £43,000 actually takes home £31,720 or about £100/week more than the maximum the government wants to give in welfare benefit.

So those just in the higher tax rates are hardly rich.

Alternatively those on maximum benefits would be loaded.

I earn less than that and consider myself well off.

I haven't read the whole thread but I will stick my nose in any way with this little story.

4 years ago I was made redundant first time since leaving school I was out of work the company put us on what they called garden leave.This meant 6 weeks off over xmas that was paid if in that time I started work then this would have meant I had left there employment so no redundancy pay.

Anyway I went done the job center and enquired about signing on (for the first time) this is what I was asked to the best of my memory.

Q=Will you get redundancy pay
A=I should chuffing hope after 14 years.
Q=how much.
A-don't now waiting for a letter.
Q=well you cant sign on until you know and we know as you will have to live on that before you get any money,but you can come in every 2 weeks sign on but you will not receive anything until we know how much money you will get and how much your wife earns.
A= F*** that and what my wife earns is her F****** business and not yours.
So I don't think getting benefits is as easy as we all may think so getting people of it is going to be harder.

How can anybody on benifits get 26k after tax ffs, i work my ass off, if i take time off i get ssp and earn 27k before tax, so i am on just about the average wage.

[Biker Biggles]

Most of the higher benefit"earners" are getting shed loads of housing benefit.Its actually a nice little earner for landlords who charge huge rents and get it paid by the State.Also most of these recipients are working and getting benefit as top ups,so removing it would mean they couldnt live where they currently do,or the landlords would have to charge much lower rents.IDS is now up against a powerful landlord lobby who wont be taking his medicine lying down.It will be interesting to see who blinks first in that stand off.

agree BB, it was these nice people who helped contribute more than there fair share to the mess we find ourselves in now.

[Bibio]

well i have looked into something recently which will make peoples blood boil

if i get a part time job working less than 16hrs a week and getting paid £100 or less then i can still keep claiming all the benefits i get at the moment plus the gov will top me up another £4k a year.

so i get carers allowance for looking after the wife 24/7 but i'm still allowed to work, best bit is that i can be self employed and claiming allowances for bills, clothing, vat etc.etc.

[21QUEST]

Originally Posted by Bluefish

How can anybody on benifits get 26k after tax ffs, i work my ass off, if i take time off i get ssp and earn 27k before tax, so i am on just about the average wage.

Ok, I know it does seems 'plain as' but is this really the case....so we actually have some folks claiming a lot more than this at the moment?

How is this even remotely a right? How did we even arrive at this quite crazy situation?

[yorkie_chris]

I suggest the maximum possible benefit should be the same as what you would earn from minimum wage 40 hours a week.

If these don't match up then either benefits are too generous or minimum wage not adequate.