Benefits capped but benefit bill set to rise over next three years!

[maxmaximus]

Making more people financially worse off working will only add to the benefits bill and raise nothing in income tax. Nobody wins.

 

That’s not the plan though; it’s to make people working better off than those on benefits.

[chem1st]

That’s not the plan though; it’s to make people working better off than those on benefits.

 

Do you really believe that?

 

If they wanted to do that, they should have set the WITHDRAWAL RATE of Universal Credit @ 45%. That's all they needed to do.

[maxmaximus]

Why?

 

It will just mean I have to take more from the state and go further out of my way to avoid putting in so that I can have some form of 'retirement'.

 

The state used to supply cradle to grave care, it provided security in old age.

 

Young people today won't get cradle to grave care, there will be no security in old age for them either. Why should they be expected to pay for it, for the previous generation? And of top of that, take on the debt too?

 

This country needs to default upon its debt, for the sake of the next generation.

 

No we just need to work longer before we retire so the young don't have such a huge burden to bear.

 

---------- Post added 08-01-2013 at 21:36 ----------

 

Do you really believe that?

 

If they wanted to do that, they should have set the WITHDRAWAL RATE of Universal Credit @ 45%. That's all they needed to do.

 

Set at 65% and workers will be better off than non workers.

[chem1st]

No we just need to work longer before we retire so the young don't have such a huge burden to bear.

 

Surely we should be cutting current pensioner benefits then, for those who haven't had to work longer?

 

Set at 65% and workers will be better off than non workers.

 

That's true. But if a 52% effective income tax is too high for the wealthiest and would be a disincentive to work, then surely 65% effective income tax is FAR FAR too high for the poorest too.

[maxmaximus]

Surely we should be cutting current pensioner benefits then, for those who haven't had to work longer?

 

 

Today’s pensioners aren’t predicted to live longer than future pensioners though are they.

That's true. But if a 52% effective income tax is too high for the wealthiest and would be a disincentive to work, then surely 65% effective income tax is FAR FAR too high for the poorest too.

 

Yes it would be if such a tax existed, but it doesn't.

[chem1st]

Yes it would be if such a tax existed, but it doesn't.

 

Such an effective tax will exist in the future - in a couple of months even. Currently it begins at 100% before falling to 65%. It's known as the benefit trap/poverty tra/being better off on benefits.

[convert]

How do you think we should tackle housing benefit?

 

I'd reduce it, by a large amount.

[maxmaximus]

Such an effective tax will exist in the future - in a couple of months even. Currently it begins at 100% before falling to 65%. It's known as the benefit trap/poverty tra/being better off on benefits.

 

That’s just weird interpretation of how benefits should work, people on benefits are not being taxed when they lose some of those benefits.

[chem1st]

That’s just weird interpretation of how benefits should work, people on benefits are not being taxed when they lose some of those benefits.

 

They might not be being 'taxed', but withdrawal of benefits works in the same way as a tax.

 

If I give you £1000 a month, and then say for each £1 you earn, I will take £1 back. How would that affect your incentive to work?

 

If you earned say £900 a month after tax?

 

At the end of the day, we need to have fair taxes, a citizens income (to reduce poverty), and low effective taxes to stimulate work.

[Joanl]

I don't get £140 per week. I don't get pension credit because my partner is younger than me and is still in full time employment. Until I retired, I have worked since I was 15, apart from a couple of years raising my children and an overseas posting.

 

One thing I would like to see, is more of an effort made to get maintenance paid by absent fathers, married or not. That could cut single parent parent payments even more.