Cyclone Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 It shouldn't be a choice. Benefits are supposed to be a safety net. The fact that "plenty of people choose" to abuse the generosity of their fellow citizens is precisely why the welfare bill has grown too big and needs cutting back. Credit to the OP for not taking this route and I sincerely hope he/she, and millions like them, will be duly rewarded by forthcoming increases to the minimum wage. Very few people make such a choice. And the welfare bill is one of the smallest items of government expenditure. If it disappeared entirely it would make practically no difference to the budget. The fact that so many people erroneously believe that it's a large expense is down to the excellent PR and spin of the government. ---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 08:12 ---------- That may be true, but can employers afford the extra pay? I tax now, but probably get more back in benefits; next year I will get less in benefits and pay more in tax. Its a big gamble by the Government, all this extra cost for the employers will force up inflation, but maybe that is what they want. If the government pay out less in tax credits then they could of course reduce the tax rate for business. They'd like to do that after all, it's what conservatives do! Tax credits never made any sense though, they should simply have not taken the money in tax in the first place. What an inefficient waste of bureaucracy they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Very few people make such a choice. And the welfare bill is one of the smallest items of government expenditure. If it disappeared entirely it would make practically no difference to the budget. The fact that so many people erroneously believe that it's a large expense is down to the excellent PR and spin of the government. Garbage. Tax credits alone cost the taxpayer £35bn a year. The budget deficit is currently around £89bn a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted August 5, 2015 Author Share Posted August 5, 2015 Tax credits never made any sense though, they should simply have not taken the money in tax in the first place. What an inefficient waste of bureaucracy they are. But if you go back to the first post "£6.72 better off in work"; and now Osborne is cutting my tax credits next year. Anyone that starts working next year will be getting less money, wait and see what happens to the new minimum wage to increase workers pay after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 It says I am -20.19 worse off working And that doesn't take into account travel costs ! But then again, it says I could get over £312 per week on benefits, I can't see that being right either. Quite demoralizing ! If that's the case perhaps there are some in-work benefits you aren't claiming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Tax credits never made any sense though, they should simply have not taken the money in tax in the first place. A lot of people pay income tax but receive more back in tax credits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 They could have a negative tax contribution, calculated through an appropriate tax code. It would have still be simpler than tax credits. ---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 08:59 ---------- But if you go back to the first post "£6.72 better off in work"; and now Osborne is cutting my tax credits next year. Anyone that starts working next year will be getting less money, wait and see what happens to the new minimum wage to increase workers pay after that. Less next year than this. But better off working next year, than not working. Two different things. ---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 09:00 ---------- Garbage. Tax credits alone cost the taxpayer £35bn a year. The budget deficit is currently around £89bn a year. Tax credits are an in work benefit. You were talking about people choosing to live off benefits, not working and getting their pay topped up. Nice try though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 They could have a negative tax contribution, calculated through an appropriate tax code. It would have still be simpler than tax credits. ---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 08:59 ---------- Less next year than this. But better off working next year, than not working. Two different things. ---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 09:00 ---------- Tax credits are an in work benefit. You were talking about people choosing to live off benefits, not working and getting their pay topped up. Nice try though. I was actually responding to someone else's post about "choosing" to live off benefits. Tax credits can still be a choice, eg. work part time and get topped up to near enough full time wages. The entire welfare bill is over 10% of GDP. All components cost billions per year and were ratcheted up to unsustainable levels under Labour, particularly tax credits, which were a bribe to voters. Irrespective of the huge cost, any £1 spent on someone choosing to live off benefits is £1 too many. Benefits should only be a safety net for those genuinely between and seeking jobs, and those unable to work due to genuine disability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted August 5, 2015 Author Share Posted August 5, 2015 All components cost billions per year and were ratcheted up to unsustainable levels under Labour, particularly tax credits, which were a bribe to voters. The Conservatives did the same when they gained power in 2010, they carried on increasing them for 2 more years. And then when the economy when tits up, they started to cut them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 I was actually responding to someone else's post about "choosing" to live off benefits. Tax credits can still be a choice, eg. work part time and get topped up to near enough full time wages. The entire welfare bill is over 10% of GDP. All components cost billions per year and were ratcheted up to unsustainable levels under Labour, particularly tax credits, which were a bribe to voters. Irrespective of the huge cost, any £1 spent on someone choosing to live off benefits is £1 too many. Benefits should only be a safety net for those genuinely between and seeking jobs, and those unable to work due to genuine disability. Removing tax credits aren't they? Still better off working than not working Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 The Conservatives did the same when they gained power in 2010, they carried on increasing them for 2 more years. And then when the economy when tits up, they started to cut them. You're rewriting history. The economy went "tits up" in the 2nd half of 2008, under Labour. The coalition came into power in 2010 and started a programme of cuts, which the Conservative government are now continuing. ---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 14:45 ---------- Removing tax credits aren't they? Still better off working than not working Yes, which was my whole point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now