£12 billion in welfare cuts
Comments
-
On pensions vs welfare cuts - David Willetts(former senior Tory): http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/24/conservatives-young-people-david-cameron-pensioners"“We are reshaping the state and storing problems for the future by creating a country for older generations. The social contract is a contract between the generations and in Britain it is being broken.”"“What does this mean for households? Well, a pensioner couple with an income of around £15,000 can expect it to rise by roughly £300 as a result of the triple lock. This contrasts with Resolution Foundation estimates of a loss from tax credit cuts of around £1,500 for a family with one child in which a single-earner brings in that same £15,000 (and that’s even after accounting for the welcome rise in the minimum wage promised by the chancellor).”0
-
I am a nobody in the scheme of things and my opinion means nowt.
Please explain what you mean by the foundations analogy? Going back to my point above about 'good' and 'bad' growth. Feel free to use financial or economic terminolgy.
Not quite.That also puts us into a bit of a no-win situation as if it doesn't happen you'll then be gleefully pointig out the failure of this country to grow enough... :roll:
An analogy. Some are applauding building a skyscraper on a foundation of sand. I would prefer it to be a bungalow on solid foundations.
I am well aware of that.
There may well be evidence to prove my theories but I simply cannot be arsed to look.
I know that we are heading in the same direction that we went at the turn of the century and we all know how well that turned out.
Enjoy playing the fiddle whilst London burns.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Not...out.That also puts us into a bit of a no-win situation as if it doesn't happen you'll then be gleefully pointig out the failure of this country to grow enough... :roll:
Enjoy playing the fiddle whilst London burns.
:shock:
Don't say that, it might singe his Labradoodle.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Please explain what you mean by the foundations analogy? Going back to my point above about 'good' and 'bad' growth. Feel free to use financial or economic terminolgy.
Not quite.That also puts us into a bit of a no-win situation as if it doesn't happen you'll then be gleefully pointig out the failure of this country to grow enough... :roll:
An analogy. Some are applauding building a skyscraper on a foundation of sand. I would prefer it to be a bungalow on solid foundations.
Bad growth = based largely on unsustainable debts, in which people don't develop financial security and are in a precarious situation. 2001-2008, for example.
Good growth = based on increasing productivity, financial security, leaves a lasting legacy for future generations.0 -
Having watched a program about people in Manchester paying £600 rent for a house with broken windows and wallpaper peeling off due to damp, it is high time we capped rent charges based on the condition of the property. Land lords cannot get away with constant rent rises.
I have not followed this topic but I noticed this bit. I do not know which TV program it refers to.
I live in Greater Manchester. I am a landlord . I currently live in a property I do not own i.e. I am a tenant, so I have a bit of knowledge. Rents in this area are only marginally higher than they were 10 years ago. House prices have yet to reach their pre- crash levels. A decent tenant who can provide the correct references can find a perfectly adequate property in good condition for £600 a month. In fact most Londoners will not believe what £600 a month gets you up here. My son lives in Hanwell so again I have a bit of knowledge.
The tenants who pay this money for a sh1t property are those that most landlords will not touch with a proverbial barge pole. If the landlord maintained the property in a good state there is an odds on chance it would be trashed when he got the tenant out. That is why they are paying over the odds. These are low life landlords catering for low life tenants. Both will always exist but they are not the norm.0 -
Don't talk crap, it's a Cockerpoo.
Not...out.That also puts us into a bit of a no-win situation as if it doesn't happen you'll then be gleefully pointig out the failure of this country to grow enough... :roll:
Enjoy playing the fiddle whilst London burns.
:shock:
Don't say that, it might singe his Labradoodle."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Don't talk crap, it's a Cockerpoo.
Not...out.That also puts us into a bit of a no-win situation as if it doesn't happen you'll then be gleefully pointig out the failure of this country to grow enough... :roll:
Enjoy playing the fiddle whilst London burns.
:shock:
Don't say that, it might singe his Labradoodle.
If you crossed that with a poodle you'd get a cockerpoodlepoo.0 -
I will agree with you on this Rick - the ageing population issue and the relate pension and care costs are the 'elephant in the room'. You posted elsewhere that state pensions are on a fixed upward trajectory and this needs addressing, although Bally rightly makes the point that this will not be easy.Pensions are a genuine looming crisis and much bigger numbers are involved than benefits.
Realistically a pension for every person is unsustainable in its current form. If people want lower taxes as they are now they should expect to rely on their own private pension. You would be mad to be in your 20s, 30s, even 40s and count on a state pension. It just literally isn't sustainable and will get worse when immigration is curbed.
FYI I am doing my own financial planning based on being financially independent without pension income."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Don't talk crap, it's a Cockerpoo.
Not...out.That also puts us into a bit of a no-win situation as if it doesn't happen you'll then be gleefully pointig out the failure of this country to grow enough... :roll:
Enjoy playing the fiddle whilst London burns.
:shock:
Don't say that, it might singe his Labradoodle.
If you crossed that with a poodle you'd get a cockerpoodlepoo.
...and if you crossed that ^ with a Chihuahua and a Peekapoo, you'd have a chickerpoodlepeekapoopoo.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Less of this nonsense or I'll set the dog on you both
Don't talk crap, it's a Cockerpoo.
Not...out.That also puts us into a bit of a no-win situation as if it doesn't happen you'll then be gleefully pointig out the failure of this country to grow enough... :roll:
Enjoy playing the fiddle whilst London burns.
:shock:
Don't say that, it might singe his Labradoodle.
If you crossed that with a poodle you'd get a cockerpoodlepoo.
...and if you crossed that ^ with a Chihuahua and a Peekapoo, you'd have a chickerpoodlepeekapoopoo.
...when he's finished savaging small soft toys and twigs."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
That's one daft looking mutt. They say that dog's often look like their owners.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
In Osbournes UK, there are nt many victories, but tonights decision by the house of lords is one of them.0
-
I got poo pooed for suggesting that a gradual uprising was an inevitable outcome of current economic trajectory. I'd assumed it was still a few years off and would start with the masses but it's already here and it began in the lords. Ah well, can't be right about everything.
And no, I'm not a militant leftie (and neither are the lib Dems) I actually agree that tackling welfare is hugely important. But it's all stick, where's the carrot. Minimum wage rises are a couple of years off balancing this out. You can't just take a dump on the working poor.0 -
On the pension vs workers issue:
The average income of a pensioner is higher than the average income for someone at working age.0 -
Simply not true. Specify working age? At 17, yes. At average age, no.On the pension vs workers issue:
The average income of a pensioner is higher than the average income for someone at working age.
Average pension income - £17k. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/11343842/Pensioner-incomes-will-rise-to-post-crisis-peak-of-17000-a-year-in-2015.html
Average salary income - £21k - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_Kingdom
No time to look for better references. Over to you.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I read it in the FT editorial here: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/28b24f1a-78ca-11e5-933d-efcdc3c11c89.html#axzz3pMnMgEgN
Figured they did better research than most.
Anyway average salary isn't the same as average income for working age (since lots of people working age don't work - housewives & househusbands, the unemployed, students etc)0 -
Can't read it so can't comment on that editorial.I read it in the FT editorial here: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/28b24f1a-78ca-11e5-933d-efcdc3c11c89.html#axzz3pMnMgEgN
Figured they did better research than most.
Anyway average salary isn't the same as average income for working age (since lots of people working age don't work - housewives & househusbands, the unemployed, students etc)
Most pensioners I know don't even come close to the average.
There are jobs out there. Their choice. Maybe not a nice one in some cases but still....
Most students I know have, or had, part time jobs.
What about cash in hand income? That doesn't get reported.
Remember that you too will be a pensioner one day. Look at the big picture and don't hit them too hard.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
No but it's not a good state for an economy.
As for the stat - it's reported here too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/11944141/Pensioners-are-9-a-week-better-off-than-those-in-work.html0 -
I call bullsh!t statistics.
"The comparisons between working age and pensioner incomes were made after tax, housing costs and benefits such as the state pension." Selecting inputs to get the desired result.
4/10 is not average.
Getting an extra pound or two on the State pension is not "generous".
Sure, there are those on massive linked pensions but they are the minority who skew the figures.
There are plenty living on State pension alone and they are struggling to get by.
As said in the report, this is a short term bubble in which only some are benefitting. That bubble will be burst soon.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Bobbinogs wrote:The strange thing about UK politics is that 4 million people voted for UKIP and got 1 MP and more than 30% of the turnout voted Labour and got a shedload of MPs who are now trying to work out what it exactly is that they want to do...although as the opposition they won't actually do anything for at least 5 years! There is much talk about all the men and women who died preserving the vote* but having a vote in itself doesn't seem to achieve much.
This is as coherent an argument against proportional representation as you could wish for. The first-past-the-post system has saved us from 60 - 80 of the sort of nutters who'd fit right in at a cross burning.
Yep. UKIP are very very dangerous. Their rise is worrying, as are the revolting views of those who vote for them. We could solve all the problems in the UK by sending everyone who votes UKIP somewhere else on a one-way ticket.0 -
You need to use your sarcasm carefully, there are plenty of people who would read this and believe you are being serious...Bobbinogs wrote:The strange thing about UK politics is that 4 million people voted for UKIP and got 1 MP and more than 30% of the turnout voted Labour and got a shedload of MPs who are now trying to work out what it exactly is that they want to do...although as the opposition they won't actually do anything for at least 5 years! There is much talk about all the men and women who died preserving the vote* but having a vote in itself doesn't seem to achieve much.
This is as coherent an argument against proportional representation as you could wish for. The first-past-the-post system has saved us from 60 - 80 of the sort of nutters who'd fit right in at a cross burning.
Yep. UKIP are very very dangerous. Their rise is worrying, as are the revolting views of those who vote for them. We could solve all the problems in the UK by sending everyone who votes UKIP somewhere else on a one-way ticket.0 -
Bobbinogs wrote:The strange thing about UK politics is that 4 million people voted for UKIP and got 1 MP and more than 30% of the turnout voted Labour and got a shedload of MPs who are now trying to work out what it exactly is that they want to do...although as the opposition they won't actually do anything for at least 5 years! There is much talk about all the men and women who died preserving the vote* but having a vote in itself doesn't seem to achieve much.
This is as coherent an argument against proportional representation as you could wish for. The first-past-the-post system has saved us from 60 - 80 of the sort of nutters who'd fit right in at a cross burning.
Yep. UKIP are very very dangerous. Their rise is worrying, as are the revolting views of those who vote for them. We could solve all the problems in the UK by sending everyone who votes UKIP somewhere else on a one-way ticket.
why are they dangerous? in a democracy, its about confronting the argument and persauding people that so called extreme views are wrong etc.
Once you go down the route of ignoring people who you dont approve off, your on a one way ticket to a Putin style of democracy.
every person i know who voted UKIP did so because they dont want uncontrolled immigration, which is hardly a revolting view, it is mainstream parties that have failed to persuad us of the benefits of uncontrolled immigration that are the real danger.
btw i voted Green
so, doubtless you d have me dragged out side and beheaded in front of my children?
Have i walked into a sarcasm bear trap ?
0 -
I am a pensioner. When I left school you had a choice of jobs,you picked what you wanted to do. During my working life there was generally full employment. If you did not like your job you could find another.For a brief period when you had a young family and a mortgage life was a bit tough.Double figure inflation and wage rises soon made your mortgage manageable. If you did not have a company pension ( I did not) you had many years between your kids being independent and retirement to make your own provision. You knew the score. Wife working so two wages and a tiny mortgage, if any. Plenty of income and your choice to invest , go on another cruise or maybe a new car again. I am part of a very fortunate generation.
There will be some who through no fault of their own were not as lucky as me but the majority of pensioners crying poverty now are those relying on state aid . They failed to take advantage of being part of my generation and are now taking the consequences.
If the nation has to live within its means the first things to stop are winter fuel payments, free bus passes and triple lock state pensions. The majority do not need them.0 -
So what we are saying is that the problem is the house price bubble.
I propose a house price crash.
Who will vote for me and negative equity for the good of the nation?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
So what we are saying is that the problem is the house price bubble.
I propose a house price crash.
Who will vote for me and negative equity for the good of the nation?
Are you suggesting that the great Thatcherite idea of everybody owning their own home has flaws?seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
I call bullsh!t statistics.
"The comparisons between working age and pensioner incomes were made after tax, housing costs and benefits such as the state pension." Selecting inputs to get the desired result.
4/10 is not average.
Getting an extra pound or two on the State pension is not "generous".
Sure, there are those on massive linked pensions but they are the minority who skew the figures.
There are plenty living on State pension alone and they are struggling to get by.
As said in the report, this is a short term bubble in which only some are benefitting. That bubble will be burst soon.
Statistically speaking, the average person has one breast and one bollock.0 -
Evidence would say so.So what we are saying is that the problem is the house price bubble.
I propose a house price crash.
Who will vote for me and negative equity for the good of the nation?
Are you suggesting that the great Thatcherite idea of everybody owning their own home has flaws?
Actually, it is not house owning that is the problem.
Treating it as an investment instead of a home is.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I call bullsh!t statistics.
"The comparisons between working age and pensioner incomes were made after tax, housing costs and benefits such as the state pension." Selecting inputs to get the desired result.
4/10 is not average.
Getting an extra pound or two on the State pension is not "generous".
Sure, there are those on massive linked pensions but they are the minority who skew the figures.
There are plenty living on State pension alone and they are struggling to get by.
As said in the report, this is a short term bubble in which only some are benefitting. That bubble will be burst soon.
Statistically speaking, the average person has one breast and one bollock. :x :x :x :x :x :x The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Taken at face value, if everyone owns their own home there would be no homelessness and no rent to pay, so as an idea its not too badSo what we are saying is that the problem is the house price bubble.
I propose a house price crash.
Who will vote for me and negative equity for the good of the nation?
Are you suggesting that the great Thatcherite idea of everybody owning their own home has flaws?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Taken at face value, if everyone owns their own home there would be no homelessness and no rent to pay, so as an idea its not too badSo what we are saying is that the problem is the house price bubble.
I propose a house price crash.
Who will vote for me and negative equity for the good of the nation?
Are you suggesting that the great Thatcherite idea of everybody owning their own home has flaws?
I suspect deep flaws in that theory.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
