The No Subject Thread
-
This isn't a rich vs poor argument, that's a lazy road to take as well
Working Tax Credits and Child Tax Credits didn't make the rich worse off, they made the poor worse off as people didn't understand how to claim, why it had changed, how often they needed to renew their claims, all that crap. Not sure about family credit, I do recall Child Benefit however, and most of my mates families got that, and it was a pretty much flat rate up until crazy income families, it was easy to claim, and it made people better off
So where before the people had the money, the Tax Credits system created a situation where people needed to reapply for stuff they were already getting and were happy with. All about the government thinking they are better placed to redistribute wealth. Only rather than treating it like a trickledown economy they were just taking from the bottom and giving some back to the bottom
Trying to turn it into a conversation about rich vs poor is lazy, destructive, and vulgar"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
Tax credits were introduced by the Tories in the 80s. They created a poverty trap where there was no incentive to earn more money as you got proportionally less and less money. It needed reforming. Labour have reformed it twice and now the Tories are trying again with universal credit, which they've tried to make work for about 7 years now without much luck.
-
To be fair I only knew about my working tax credits due to Ingeus, the group who helped me get into my job. If i'd found it a different route I'd have never claimed, so the help regarding getting it could be better. -
Wasn't aware of that, my exposure to it was as they launched Working Tax Credits and Child Tax Credit working at a call centre in Ashby helping people understand how to apply which happened to be in the early 2000s under New Labour. For this reason I assumed it to be a New Labour initiative, not that New Labour were particularly left wing
Universal Credit seems (in my experience, Bournemouth was a trial area for it so I was on it instead of JSA a few years ago) a pretty decent idea in that the end user gets the freedom to decide how to spend their money, also by being paid monthly it should help ease the transition to a working environment where they are likely to also get paid on a monthly basis. My hope is that it could end up leading to an abolition of Housing Benefit which would make buy to let less atrractive and stop rental prices from being artificially inflated by the local councils award level becoming what amounts to basically a minimum achievable rent yield
But hey I'm an idealist"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
The Tories are taking away what they can from the impoverished. Can't defend that.
[edit]
You're still on the road to making thousands (more likely millions) of people homeless with your proposed retraction of LHA, cocko. What would you replace it with for those suddenly destitute renters? -
Yes, and Working Tax Credits reduced the poverty trap significantly, and caused an increase in employment of lone parents. It's hardly been a roaring success, but it improved on what came before.
It's nothing to do withe the government thinking they were better placed to re-distribute wealth, it was about reforming a system that wasn't working very well. Suggesting it was is lazy destructive and vulgar. -
Everyone's been taking away from everyone else, it's not a party issue, it's a people issue
Mass university intakes have turned our seats of learning into grubby businesses only interested in placing our children into crippling debt, because they'll never be able to afford a house who else can we keep them in some form of financial servitude, it's across the board, and it will require a root and branch approach to changing the way people think and espousing different sets of values"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
If people aren't going to uni in the hope of finding decent jobs, how can a large portion of them afford to live and rent without benefits?
-
I can only tell you what the thousands of people that I spoke to when it was launched said, which was that it was difficult, pointless, and they felt it made them worse off
Created loads of jobs in the childcare industry though, and the education industry making sure that people earned the right bits of paper to call themselves childcarers, it also managed to establish a value on childcare, because much like I said earlier about housing benefit whatever the government were paying became the minimum expectation from any childcare service
This isn't an attack on a political party it's an attack on all political parties"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
How do they afford to live and rent whilst they are at Uni?"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B
-
By getting into incredible amounts of debt.cockbeard wrote:How do they afford to live and rent whilst they are at Uni? -
Or both, in order to afford some standard of living in their futures, aye.
Everything you say sounds like working in reverse, cocko, where you're starting at the finish line and picking up the fallen as you go. -
If it's about people ahead of politics, you need to prioritise the disadvantaged to ensure their security before moving on. Not just push 'em off the truck because it's failed its MOT.
-
Isn't that what you have to do though, starting at the finish line?
Don't you need a destination before you start moving. In an agile environment it's very easy to get caught up with bug fixing and lose sight of the main road map, which leads to things not being delivered. Maybe it's just a case of getting old, and maybe if I was older I'd have seen just how shit it was before but the world now seems a much shittier place than it looked in 1995, especially for kids"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
Who's pushing anyone off the truck, I said that I'd like a smaller government, I'd like to pay less tax, I didn't say that we should abolish the benefits system, nor that only the rich should pay less tax
I think being taxed on what you own rather than what you earn would be a much fairer system, as it would encourage spending. Much like high corporation tax encourages a company to reinvest rather than pay dividends
edit:obviously it would end up being a combination of both, but it makes more sense to me, as a way of discouraging the hoarding of wealth"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
The Tories are hounding people off of ESA, withdrawing PIP from those who formerly qualified for DLA (many with lifetime awards), and it's only LHA that's keeping millions* of renters afloat right now. I don't personally believe in its contribution to the buy-to-let boom, as so many landlords refuse to let to those in receipt (some providers and insurers ban it, also).
It's well and good saying that we shouldn't need a benefits culture (and we probably all broadly agree), but the alternative's a culture of cruel abandonment until the rich are forced to help.
*I haven't checked, but it has to be hundreds of thousands at the minimum. -
Escape wrote:The Tories are taking away what they can from the impoverished. Can't defend that. [edit] You're still on the road to making thousands (more likely millions) of people homeless with your proposed retraction of LHA, cocko. What would you replace it with for those suddenly destitute renters?
How are we making people homeless? Why will they be destitute, I'm talking about hurting the landlords not the renters, but we could never do that because an Englishman's home is his castle and we are a nation of homeowners (and those who aren't aspire to be) so losing their votes would be political suicide"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
what have i done sorry guys
-
I'm not sure it's been a contributory factor in the BTL boom, that's mostly because there is no social housing anymore, so someone had to fill the gap
However I think it quite clearly artificially inflates the market by setting a minimum rent value"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
haha, don't be silly DS, mummy and daddy aren't actually fighting"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B
-
cockbeard wrote:How are we making people homeless? Why will they be destitute, I'm talking about hurting the landlords not the renters
You've identified that landlords are taking advantage of the market with inflated rents, and say that by removing LHA, fewer will be able to afford those rents and thus they'll fall? In the meantime, what happens to those who relied on their LHA to rent homes? -
I mean, the maximum LHA for my region is about £430 per month. The average around here is a grand or so, and good luck getting one of those unless you lie about being in receipt.
-
No tax credits for you.Dark Soldier wrote:what have i done sorry guys
-
Plus they've capped housing benefit in London, I'm yet to see rental prices fall. -
Escape wrote:
You've identified that landlords are taking advantage of the market with inflated rents, and say that by removing LHA, fewer will be able to afford those rents and thus they'll fall? In the meantime, what happens to those who relied on their LHA to rent homes?cockbeard wrote:How are we making people homeless? Why will they be destitute, I'm talking about hurting the landlords not the renters
Isn't that the desired end point of Universal Credit? The end user to get one payment and then manage their own rental payments, council tax, bills etc. The money spent on LHA still exists it just isn't explicitly laid out that in such and such postcode area if you have two rooms you will get £700 a month or whatever, that allows the market to act like a market. WE also have the very real problem where people don't seem to get long term lets anymore, the agents like to churn as it's more money for them, and an excuse for landlords to increase rents more often"I spent years thinking Yorke was legit Downs-ish disabled and could only achieve lucidity through song" - Mr B -
I PAID £28 FOR MY CURTAINS FROM A WAREHOUSE DEAL
We're not all Dunelm men. -
Escape wrote:I PAID £28 FOR MY CURTAINS FROM A WAREHOUSE DEAL We're not all Dunelm men.
can get cheaper at dunelm get rekt dikhed lolol -
Mate, these were Moon-patterned specials. Proper floor-length living room jobs.
cockbeard wrote:Isn't that the desired end point of Universal Credit? The end user to get one payment and then manage their own rental payments, council tax, bills etc.
Ooh, I'm always suss of that line. LHA itself used to be paid directly to landlords, but was then changed to go to claimants by default, with the old option as an opt-in by request. Even fewer landlords will now rent to those on LHA as a result. -
bet someone did a shit on em and they just wiped it off with kleenex, hence so cheap
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions2,715
- Games1,879
- Off topic836