£6.72 better off working

[El Cid]

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.

 

There was a dip in around 2008, but when the Conservatives came into power in 2010 things were much improved, and then the UK economy stalled in 2011 and went into a double dip recession.

[WiseOwl182]

There was a dip in around 2008, but when the Conservatives came into power in 2010 things were much improved, and then the UK economy stalled in 2011 and went into a double dip recession.

 

2008 a dip? Did you take economics with Ed Balls?

 

There was no double dip recession. It almost happened but we didn't see 2 consecutive quarters of contraction. 2008 was a huge recession. Suggest you check your facts first:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10613201

[Cyclone]

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.

 

That 'entire' welfare bill is mainly made up of the state pension, it was lumped in with the rest by the current government to make it sound like benefits claimants cost a lot. They won't touch the pension though, because pensioners all vote, unlike the young.

[El Cid]

It almost happened but we didn't see 2 consecutive quarters of contraction.

 

I am sure that we can agree that there was almost a double dip, you failed to mention that in your initial post.

[Happ Hazzard]

Just increase the personal allowance to the equivalent of 40 hours at minimum wage for the year. Abolish all tax credits.

[WiseOwl182]

I am sure that we can agree that there was almost a double dip, you failed to mention that in your initial post.

 

There wasn't one, you can't rewrite history like you tried in your post. The economy bounced along near zero in the early recovery. If you look at the graph I gave you as your homework, you'd also see how 2008/9 was far from a blip.

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 21:05 ----------

 

That 'entire' welfare bill is mainly made up of the state pension, it was lumped in with the rest by the current government to make it sound like benefits claimants cost a lot. They won't touch the pension though, because pensioners all vote, unlike the young.

 

Instead of smoke and mirrors let's just lay out some facts on welfare spending, excluding pensions:

 

- £26bn housing benefit

- £11bn child benefit

- £30bn tax credit

- £2.4bn unemployment benefit

- £37bn disability benefit

 

Reducing some or all of these would not be 'insignificant" in the context of a £89bn budget deficit, hence the action by the government.

 

So your statements of:

 

"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."

 

are in fact nonsense.

Edited August 5, 2015 by WiseOwl182

[El Cid]

It almost happened

 

Isnt that what I said in post at 15.26

[WiseOwl182]

Isnt that what I said in post at 15.26

 

You placed too much significance on it. There were a couple of quarters, separated by growth, that showed a small dip. Had it happened it would only have been a technical recession by strict definition, rather than the real recession of 2008/09.

 

And your earlier post:

"There was a dip in around 2008, but when the Conservatives came into power in 2010 things were much improved, and then the UK economy stalled in 2011 and went into a double dip recession."

 

was complete garbage.

[Cyclone]

There wasn't one, you can't rewrite history like you tried in your post. The economy bounced along near zero in the early recovery. If you look at the graph I gave you as your homework, you'd also see how 2008/9 was far from a blip.

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 21:05 ----------

 

 

Instead of smoke and mirrors let's just lay out some facts on welfare spending, excluding pensions:

 

- £26bn housing benefit

- £11bn child benefit

- £30bn tax credit

- £2.4bn unemployment benefit

- £37bn disability benefit

 

Reducing some or all of these would not be 'insignificant" in the context of a £89bn budget deficit, hence the action by the government.

 

So your statements of:

 

"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."

 

are in fact nonsense.

 

Given that you were talking about a life style of benefits claiming instead of work, can you see the key number there?

 

£2.4billion. The smallest number by a factor of 10 almost, is the one which applies to the out of work. The rest go largely to people who ARE working.

 

So the welfare bill portion that you thought it was important to target, the welfare bill spent on the deliberately unemployed, is a tiny fraction, of the smallest part of the welfare bill.

Now you see why I think it's completely irrelevant.

 

The government have sold you a line about the lazy unemployed on benefit street, and you've swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

[TJC1]

 

Yes, which was my whole point.

 

My point too. Stating the bleedin obv.

 

---------- Post added 06-08-2015 at 08:34 ----------

 

99.9% want to work. It doesnt always pay to work.