Jump to content

Government Ministers laugh as they make the poor poorer


Recommended Posts

Facts are always useful at times like this

 

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/december-2012/index.html

 

The employment rate for those aged from 16 to 64 for August to October 2012 was 71.2 per cent, up 0.1 from May to July 2012. There were 29.60 million people in employment aged 16 and over, up 40,000 from May to July 2012.

 

The unemployment rate for August to October 2012 was 7.8 per cent of the economically active population, down 0.2 from May to July 2012. There were 2.51 million unemployed people, down 82,000 from May to July 2012.

 

The inactivity rate for those aged from 16 to 64 for August to October 2012 was 22.6 per cent, up 0.1 from May to July 2012. There were 9.07 million economically inactive people aged from 16 to 64, up 60,000 from May to July 2012.

 

Between August to October 2011 and August to October 2012, total pay (including bonuses) rose by 1.8 per cent and regular pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 1.7 per cent.

 

 

Yeah true facts are useful...especially when a once in a lifetime sporting event fudges the figures:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/14/rise-unemployment-benefit-claimants-olympics-effect

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2013 at 14:46 ----------

 

Ah, so now we can discuss the facts and their nuances rather than the headlines and hyperbole. Excellent :)

 

What rises have benefits claimants enjoyed in the last couple of years? Something like 5% wasn't it? That's more than double the current rate of inflation.

 

Some more facts for you here Tony, from that tory rag funnily enough:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2221111/Working-families-housing-benefit-soar-Number-applications-rising-10-000-month.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do many on this thread actually understand what was voted through yesterday. Here's a hyperbole-free explanation from the BBC of what actually happened:

 

Working-age benefits including jobseeker's allowance, employment and support allowance and income support: 1% rise in each of the next three years.

 

Child benefit: Frozen until April 2014. Will rise by 1% in each of the next two years.

 

Maternity, paternity and adoption pay: Rise by 1% in each of the next three years.

 

Carer's allowance and disability benefits: Will rise in line with inflation, by 2.2% in April

 

Child tax credits and working tax credits: To rise by 1% in each of the next three years, although some will be frozen in 2012-13

 

Local housing allowance: Capped at a 1% rise for each of the two years from April 2014

Basic state pension: 2.5% in April.

 

Additional state pension: Up 2.2% in April, in line with inflation.

 

 

In short, all benefits are going up.

 

But any rise less than inflation is actually a cut. Surely that's plain to see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah true facts are useful...especially when a once in a lifetime sporting event fudges the figures:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/14/rise-unemployment-benefit-claimants-olympics-effect

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2013 at 14:46 ----------

 

 

Some more facts for you here Tony, from that tory rag funnily enough:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2221111/Working-families-housing-benefit-soar-Number-applications-rising-10-000-month.html

 

What you just did there was to engage in a spot of conflation, unless you or the journalist also have a number for "Olympic jobs" to dazzle us with.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2013 at 15:03 ----------

 

But any rise less than inflation is actually a cut. Surely that's plain to see?

 

That depends on the timeframe. if you include last years 5% rise*, it doesn't look like a cut, more of an adjustment.

 

In any case, where's the money coming from to pay for more benefits spending?

 

 

*from memory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you just did there was to engage in a spot of conflation, unless you or the journalist also have a number for "Olympic jobs" to dazzle us with.

 

The article shows the real state of the economy. The numbers you quoted were from just after the olympics. Both from ONS by the way.

 

The real state is the number of benefits claimants are rising, all because of this governments cuts.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2013 at 17:25 ----------

 

The tories are awesome at fudging figures, launching schemes to seem like people aren't claiming and working in proper jobs. It's the mean income per/ household which is the important stat - that's going down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do many on this thread actually understand what was voted through yesterday. Here's a hyperbole-free explanation from the BBC of what actually happened:

 

Working-age benefits including jobseeker's allowance, employment and support allowance and income support: 1% rise in each of the next three years.

 

Child benefit: Frozen until April 2014. Will rise by 1% in each of the next two years.

 

Maternity, paternity and adoption pay: Rise by 1% in each of the next three years.

 

Carer's allowance and disability benefits: Will rise in line with inflation, by 2.2% in April

 

Child tax credits and working tax credits: To rise by 1% in each of the next three years, although some will be frozen in 2012-13

 

Local housing allowance: Capped at a 1% rise for each of the two years from April 2014

Basic state pension: 2.5% in April.

 

Additional state pension: Up 2.2% in April, in line with inflation.

 

 

In short, all benefits are going up.

 

i think you'll find there's a different thread to discuss that so I'll avoid responding.

 

This thread is about the Government laughing as they make the poor poorer, do you have a thought on whether or not this is acceptable behaviour?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh sorry, OK, but first let's see it in context because all we have is your OP referring to a foamy mouthed article with a photograph of unknown provenance from an unknown parliamentary sitting.

 

So, please point us at the point in a debate where this is supposed to have happened.

 

You'll find it in the link below, just give us the session link and the time, and then you can have your answer. We can also decide if the hyperbole in the article referred to in your OP is even remotely true.

 

Here you go; http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Home.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.