JSA, Income Support, ESA and Child benefit all to be CUT

[Anna B]

When the government quotes the 'enormous bill for welfare, or benefits they include everything from child allowance, Old age pensions, tax credits etc. but everyone assumes (as they are meant to) that this 'unsustainable, huge' amount is only dole for the 'unemployed scroungers.' It's far from it. As I said before, JSA is just 3% of the figure.

 

More government manipulation and demonisation of people who need help and support, (as do the low paid.) More divide and conquer. More Lies, damn lies, and statistics...

[Cyclone]

It makes little sense to have such a large welfare bill when in reality a large portion of it is just giving back tax that has been taken.

 

It should be cut, but at the same time tax should be cut as well (to the same people), so that bureaucracy is reduced and less money is wasted in pointless paper shuffling.

[poppet2]

When the government quotes the 'enormous bill for welfare, or benefits they include everything from child allowance, Old age pensions, tax credits etc. but everyone assumes (as they are meant to) that this 'unsustainable, huge' amount is only dole for the 'unemployed scroungers.' It's far from it. As I said before, JSA is just 3% of the figure.

 

More government manipulation and demonisation of people who need help and support, (as do the low paid.) More divide and conquer. More Lies, damn lies, and statistics...

 

... Of which the majority is made up of the state pension.

 

http://speye.wordpress.com/2012/10/11/welfare-benefits-its-young-peoples-fault-that-over-55-goes-to-pensioners/

 

I wonder what the coalition will do about the pensioners?

[sheff1johnny]

i'd like to apoligise on behalf of the old people for living too long

the disabled people for daring to need money

and on behalf of all the children who only want a meal

and as for starbucks, amazon, vodafone and google, I'd like to thank for never paying your way in the UK.

of course sarcasm is cheap, but with the torie posh boys it comes easily

[sheffsal]

Well of course JSA and other benefits need to be cut so that the money can be given to private companies who do such excellent work finding long term employment for people.

 

 

 

 

Thats it have a pop at the providers who are engaged to find the unemployed jobs . . . . In a recession witb people who have been unemployed xxxxx years . . . . And havent found their own job whether looking, not looking or otherwise . . . Why do the smug know it alls in society think that these providers are going to suceed in the short space of time they have the unemployed on their books????? Those that want to work . . . Will and will engage with providers and thank them for their help. Those that are not wanting to work are the ones that will end up stil unemployed. And possible without benefits as the new sanction process kicks in. And of course the providers will be responsible for that hapoen too. When really as adults we all make choices and then suffer the consequences .

[evildrneil]

The problem that no-one seems to mention in the "fair" 1% increase in JSA et al is that these are people already on the breadline and often below it. They don't have any slack money and can't tighten their belts. The full rate of JSA is £65 per week (or £3,400 per year - just over 13% of average UK income) All a below inflation increase does is push those forced to live on benefits further into debt and desperation.

 

But you may say what about all that benefit fraud going on? Well the government figures give estimates of 2.1% of the benefit payout is attributable to fraud and error. However it also states that it underpays claimants by what should be another 0.8% due to fraud and error. It's unreasonable to think that fraudsters under claim so what we are really talking about here is 0.8% error. Assuming a constant level of error then actual fraud would would be about 1.3% of the total benefit payout.

 

If we want to save money on the benefit bill surely we should be looking at tax credits (in 2009 tax credit spend was 23.7 billion vs. 7.5 bn for JSA - over three times as much) which, at least in the case of working tax credits, are really just subsidising businesses to pay workers a pittance. When you look at it in the round the big winners of the benefit system are subsidised businesses not the poor sods living pretty much hand to mouth on next to nothing.

[maxmaximus]

The problem that no-one seems to mention in the "fair" 1% increase in JSA et al is that these are people already on the breadline and often below it. They don't have any slack money and can't tighten their belts. The full rate of JSA is £65 per week (or £3,400 per year - just over 13% of average UK income) All a below inflation increase does is push those forced to live on benefits further into debt and desperation.

 

But you may say what about all that benefit fraud going on? Well the government figures give estimates of 2.1% of the benefit payout is attributable to fraud and error. However it also states that it underpays claimants by what should be another 0.8% due to fraud and error. It's unreasonable to think that fraudsters under claim so what we are really talking about here is 0.8% error. Assuming a constant level of error then actual fraud would would be about 1.3% of the total benefit payout.

 

If we want to save money on the benefit bill surely we should be looking at tax credits (in 2009 tax credit spend was 23.7 billion vs. 7.5 bn for JSA - over three times as much) which, at least in the case of working tax credits, are really just subsidising businesses to pay workers a pittance. When you look at it in the round the big winners of the benefit system are subsidised businesses not the poor sods living pretty much hand to mouth on next to nothing.

 

Tax credits help to keep business costs low, if tax credits are stopped businesses will either

Move to a country in which they can pay low wages. Unemployment will rise here

Or

It will increase its end price to make up for the extra cost. Everyone pays more for the service or product they provide.

Or

If it just absorbs the extra cost and pay less tax. Whichever way it deals with these extra costs the consumer, that's you and I, will lose out.

[evildrneil]

Tax credits help to keep business costs low, if tax credits are stopped businesses will either

Move to a country in which they can pay low wages. Unemployment will rise here

Or

It will increase its end price to make up for the extra cost. Everyone pays more for the service or product they provide.

Or

If it just absorbs the extra cost and pay less tax. Whichever way it deals with these extra costs the consumer, that's you and I, will lose out.

 

Not really as a large number of the low paid jobs that rely on tax credits are in the service and retail sector (waiters, bar staff, kitchen staff, shelf stackers et al) which aren't jobs that can be out sourced. And how many of these are in large chains the likes of Starbucks and Nero's who pay little or no tax currently and simply use the tax credit systems as a way to employ labour at what should be below market rate and hence increase their somewhat obscene profits?

[maxmaximus]

Not really as a large number of the low paid jobs that rely on tax credits are in the service and retail sector (waiters, bar staff, kitchen staff, shelf stackers et al) which aren't jobs that can be out sourced. And how many of these are in large chains the likes of Starbucks and Nero's who pay little or no tax currently and simply use the tax credit systems as a way to employ labour at what should be below market rate and hence increase their somewhat obscene profits?

 

The problem being an equally large number of jobs can be out sourced, prices can go up and tax can go down. How would we benefit if all McDonalds staff where paid £10 per hour? We would either pay more for the food or stop buying McDonalds, McDonalds could absorb the increase in costs and make less profit and pay less tax, or a combination of the three.

[Cyclone]

Which minimum wage jobs can be outsourced over seas? The only one I can think of is call centre operation, which in a lot of cases has been outsourced, and in quite a few has been brought back as well since customers don't like it.