Will the cruel Tory welfare reforms save any money?

First topic message reminder :

My personal opinion is that the current spate of tory reforms to the benefit system are cruel, regressive, and worst of all won't save money (the alleged intention).



In a supposedly modern civilised country one would think housing would be considered a human right.......rather than simply an investment / a chance to make a fast buck.

I note there is talk of a yacht for the biggest benefit claimee of them all. I note over £10billion has been spent on the olympics. I note £32billion is being spent on a high speed rail link (london-birmingham) - this will shave, a no doubt absolutely vita,l 32mins off the journey (essential??!!!) and be used by a miniscule % of the UK population.

How about investing this money in affordable social housing instead? Or do government no longer care to invest in those they view as peasants and serfs?

The tories efforts to turn the nation against those unfortunate enough to find themselves unemployed via vile smears, and an insidious propaganda campaign, are reminiscent of Nazi germany's propaganda campaign against the jews.

Iain Duncan Smith is a disgusting human being and has blood on his hands.

Instead of kicking the weakest targets that can't defend themselves....maybe the Bullingdon bullies should try picking on somebody their own size.....like the bankers, or benefit leeching corporations like Tescos.

They currently resemble a 20st thug stamping on a little girls head.

Welfare is essential and if we are to remain a civilised country we owe it to ourselves to provide for those less fortunate; unless we want to see people starving and homeless turning into savages.

The biggest burden on the UK in recent times has not been the unemployed.....welfare is not a burden - it is an essential expense in a civilised nation.

The biggest burden, and the cause of much unemployment, has been the rich greedy bankers who have cost this country, and us taxpayers, untold £billions in order to benefit a few. They have placed the real burden on the UK.

No, not actually, Landy. The Trade Union movement attempts to level the playing-field between wealthy Employers and wage-slaves.

oftenwrong wrote:Ian Duncan Smith is only just getting warmed-up. Presumably bored with sticking pins in benefits claimants, he is turning his attention to the Trade Union movement. No tax credits for people on strike. Most humans would be ashamed to have such mean-minded ambition.

It's fairly difficult to get a "Tax Credit" if you are not paying any tax (i.e on strike)

betty.noire wrote:

oftenwrong wrote:Ian Duncan Smith is only just getting warmed-up. Presumably bored with sticking pins in benefits claimants, he is turning his attention to the Trade Union movement. No tax credits for people on strike. Most humans would be ashamed to have such mean-minded ambition.

It's fairly difficult to get a "Tax Credit" if you are not paying any tax (i.e on strike)

That would indeed seem a logical conclusion, black betty, but when did logic ever apply to the machinations of Government departments? Tax credits are available to anyone with children, and are allocated even to people who do not work.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/TaxCredits/peoplewhohelpothers/Entitlementtablesfortaxcredits/DG_174821

From my latest blog post at skwalker1964.wordpress.com - lots of items are linked to references but the links don't copy across, so please see the original post for those:

Here are two true stories:

A friend of mine once picked up a hitch-hiker at a motorway service station. The bloke looked a bit down on his luck, so my friend asked what his story was. The guy said he’d been living in service stations, bathing in the shower facilities at lorry-driver stops, for several days as he tried to make his way from one end of the country to the other to where a hotel job was waiting for him if he could get there. He’d lost all his benefits and had no way to get the money to take a train or bus.

My friend gave this man all the money he had in his pocket, which was £60. The man seemed genuinely overwhelmed and grateful, seemingly unable to believe that someone would give him a fairly serious amount of money within minutes of meeting him, on the basis of the story he’d just related.

I asked my friend whether he thought the man had been genuine, or might he have been ripped off? His answer was that his gut instinct was that the man was for real – but that if he wasn’t, he’d rather be conned than be hard-hearted and risk ignoring someone in genuine need.

By contrast, the incredibly rich (some $287 billion in today’s money) industrialist Andrew Carnegie once famously said that it would be better for the world if a rich man threw his millions into the sea rather than give any to the ‘unworthy’. To be fair to Carnegie, he gave away a vast proportion of his wealth – but the rich and privileged have a long history of presuming that, from their pinnacle of wealth and comfort, they are able to decide who is ‘worthy’ and who isn’t. The concept of the ‘deserving poor‘, by denoting that some poor are by definition not deserving, has resulted in great suffering while allowing the wealthy to feel satisfied with their lack of concern or action.

The Tories are truly in line with their predecessors in this regard – except that they’re even worse. Even though they can’t possibly be ignorant of the consequences, they push this line in the most cynical way, with the aim of dividing the British public, fooling the undiscerning into allowing or even approving of policies aimed at stripping the vulnerable of crucial protections. And for the basest of reasons – for short-term political gain (persuading some people that the Tories are ‘at least doing something about something!’), and to release even more public funds that can be channelled into tax-cuts for the already-rich or even greater profits for private corporations.

With their limited moral imagination, the Tories really only know two tactics. Both are calculated to appeal to the baser instincts of the small-minded and thoughtless: fear and vilification. There may be different facets or manifestations – they might try to invoke suspicion, or envy, or to dehumanise or caricature one set of people to get another set to back their policies – but the roots are the same.

I’m working on a post about economic fear and the way that’s fostered by government spokespeople and tame media, but it’s proving to be quite a big project and I’m not going to be online much over the next few days, so it will be a little while in coming. But the other tactic – vilification or demonisation of the vulnerable or resistant – is so plain that this post almost writes itself. Whether explicitly or in the omission, the Tories are at it constantly.

Just in recent weeks, we’ve had:

Iain Duncan-Smith accusing Britons of not working hard enough, while bare-facedly distorting figures on fraudulent claims for disability benefit (claiming a 30% fraud rate when in fact it’s bare over one percent) to gain public support for his hateful Welfare Reform Act.
A smug Frances Maude announcing that the bottom 10% of civil servants has a year to improve or be fired – conveniently leaving out the fact that if everyone in the civil service was a workaholic genius, there would still be a bottom 10%. Being at the bottom doesn’t mean you’re incompetent or unproductive. He insists that this is not an ‘attack’ on the civil service, even though at the same time he’s making cuts of 25% in civil servant numbers and talking of removing any terms and conditions that are better than those of the private sector that the Tories and their pals have already robbed.
Andrew Lansley calling on doctors not to take industrial action and having his department and tame journalists conduct an orchestrated propaganda campaign to persuade the public that doctors are rich, privileged, selfish and uncaring of their patients (‘After all’, he might as well say, ‘we’ve robbed the rest of the public sector, why should doctors be any different?’) This in spite of the fact that the doctors’ pension scheme is not in shortfall and that the Health Secretary, having specifically abdicated his legal responsibility for healthcare provision in his new Health & Social Care Act, is really not entitled to comment one way or the other, let alone to impose new pension terms.
David Cameron underlining again that the Tories are on the side of ‘strivers’, thereby saying that they’re not on the side of anyone who can’t strive, or who simply wants to live a decent, balanced life.
Iain Duncan-Smith (again!) announcing plans to remove benefits from anyone who dares strike against the removal of pay, pensions, conditions and protection that is now the norm for the treatment of ordinary working people.
Claims by Communities Minister Eric Pickles, vocally supported by Housing Minister Grant Shapps and many others, and by the right-wing press, that the UK has 120,000 ‘problem families’ who cause 80% of societal problems, even though not one of the criteria used to decide who is a ‘problem family’ relates to criminality, but instead refer to poverty and physical or mental illness.
Endlessly repeated soundbites about ‘benefit scroungers’ to justify capping housing benefit, even though the vast majority of people receiving this benefit are working, but can’t afford outrageous rents.
Cameron and others vilifying transport workers for daring to plan industrial action during the Olympic Games money-making exercise, even though industrial action is really their only negotiating weapon and it’s perfectly sensible for them to aim it at the periods when it will be most effective. The Tories really do want a workforce that’s powerless to stand up for itself.
I could go on, but I want to keep this post to a readable length.

The aim of all these policies and pronouncements is very clear: persuading whichever sections of the public that are not affected by a particular measure that those who are affected are not worthy of support, and definitely not worthy of help.

The consequences of these and other Tory measures are not hard to imagine – and they’re already being played out. Disabled, ill or mentally ill people spend their days in fear at the prospect of having their benefits stopped because they’re ludicrously assessed as fit for work, while some even attempt or commit suicide. People are forced to accept part-time ‘work’ that offers few (or even zero!) hours while the government crows that it has reduced unemployment; jobless people are forced to work for free and sleep under bridges by companies who ruthlessly exploit them to maximise profit. And so on.

In this context, it’s patently clear that the Tories’ policies, attitudes, sleaze, self-enrichment and their unholy alliance with powerful corporate and media interests show that they are not fit to judge a vegetable show, let alone judge whether a vulnerable person is ‘worthy’ of help.

Fortunately, we get to choose whether we believe them. To choose whether we agree with the kind of approach to life that says that, while no system is perfect, it’s much better to err on the side of goodness than of suspicion and selfishness, that it’s better to set up or protect systems that protect the genuine many than one which might prevent a very few ‘playing the system’ but that also strands people in genuine need in a situation of despair. We have the privilege of deciding what kind of society we want to be.

From everything I’ve written, you’ll probably have guessed that I absolutely agree with my friend, rather than with Carnegie, about which side it’s better to err on. But Mr Carnegie did say something that I agree with very much:

‘A man who dies rich dies disgraced’

In our current government, and in the people who support and fund them, we have a lot of walking ‘disgraces in the making’. Let’s think for ourselves, see them for what they are, and not make it easy for them to become even bigger disgraces than they already are.

oftenwrong wrote:

betty.noire wrote:

oftenwrong wrote:Ian Duncan Smith is only just getting warmed-up. Presumably bored with sticking pins in benefits claimants, he is turning his attention to the Trade Union movement. No tax credits for people on strike. Most humans would be ashamed to have such mean-minded ambition.

It's fairly difficult to get a "Tax Credit" if you are not paying any tax (i.e on strike)

That would indeed seem a logical conclusion, black betty, but when did logic ever apply to the machinations of Government departments? Tax credits are available to anyone with children, and are allocated even to people who do not work.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/TaxCredits/peoplewhohelpothers/Entitlementtablesfortaxcredits/DG_174821

It's not had much comment in the media so far, but the introduction of the Universal Credit is going to radically reshape the benefit system

Universal Credit - link to DWP website

I'm pleased to see that you are pleased about that.

"radically reshape the benefit system"

In who's favour betty???

I'm not really sure, I know that all the individual benifits will be scrapped and replaced with one payment.

The really interesting thing that there is a huge change to the way that PAYE and NI are reported. At the moment , employers complete Year end returns at the end of the Tax Year , producing a document called a P14, which shows your earinings and the Tax and NI you have paid.

This is all changing later this year, so the employer has provide this information every time you get paid and this is all being driven by the BACS system, so the govement will know how much is going into your bank account.

There is also an expansion of the amount of personal data the employer has to provide which is nothing to do with Tax and NI, for example Passport number, email address , who your partner is. All very scary big brother stuff

How far away are we from having an identity chip implanted at birth?

FAR too expensive OW!!

It will be a tattoo behind the left ear!

You don't need to keep a tag on the masses with 'identity chips' - just give 'em enough oven chips....that'll keep 'em docile and placid enough.

Cameron's latest wheeze: withdrawing housing benefits for under 25's - forcing them to live with their parents. Can the prat be any more out of touch with reality, or sink any lower?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163773/Cameron-axe-housing-benefits-feckless-25s-declares-war-welfare-culture.html

He obviously thinks life is not difficult enough for young people these days. He clearly thinks they need less help and more challenges/obstacles placed in their paths which they must overcome. If you start saving now kiddies you might have enough for your first mortgage by the time you're 50yrs old - then you can think about starting a family. What planet do these Tory twats - the spawn of bastard royal offspring that is Cameron, his bullingdon sidekick Gideon, and the Marquis de Iain Duncan Hitler-Smith live on.

I agree with you entierly Chip. What a bastard eh? Poor bloody kids leave home probably miles away to find work for wages under the min wage level. They have to live in some over charged bed sit where they are entitled to help with housing costs, quite rightly at present.
Because there are a minority of dossers who flout the system, it seems the majority will suffer. The media/press have highlighted these minority cases a thousand times over, leving the working public angry that they are subsidising these "dossers" and Cameron is latching on to this anger for political and Tory ideology reasons.

Two TV reports and one from the Sunday Mail seem to differ as to when these curbs are to be put in place. The TV News reveals that these measures will not take place until after the next election. Well in that case it won't happen, because Cameron and Co will be out on their nasty arses.

Mel

Poor bloody kids leave home probably miles away to find work for wages under the min wage level. They have to live in some over charged bed sit where they are entitled to help with housing costs, quite rightly at present.
Because there are a minority of dossers who flout the system, it seems the majority will suffer. The media/press have highlighted these minority cases a thousand times over, leving the working public angry that they are subsidising these "dossers" and Cameron is latching on to this anger for political and Tory ideology reasons.

Spot on, Mel. This is nothing to do with saving money, and certainly won't help young people trying to find their way. It is, as you suggest, simply indicative of an arrogant, and cruel, tory mindset and ideology.


Contrast this with Cameron's laizzez faire approach to his rich tax dodging cronies, and the inaction so far as closing loopholes and offshore tax havens, and you'll realise who and what the tories support.

"Contrast this with Cameron's laizzez faire approach to his rich tax dodging cronies, and the inaction so far as closing loopholes and offshore tax havens, and you'll realise who and what the tories support."

Indeed Chip, see my post on Cameron hypocrite thread confirms what you say.

Mel wrote:I agree with you entierly Chip.....
.... The TV News reveals that these measures will not take place until after the next election. Well in that case it won't happen, because Cameron and Co will be out on their nasty arses.

That seems to be the way that the Tories are now planning to disseminate Party Policy. "After the next election we're going to do this, that and the other." A perfectly safe formula in which to spout all sorts of nonsense without fear of contradiction. Sometimes described as "flying a kite".

Next week I may give all my money to Charity.

Next week I may give all my money to Charity.

...and none to the taxman.

Same thing, innit?

oftenwrong wrote:Same thing, innit?

Yeah! I like donating to the Society of Motorway Builders and Maintainers (a worthy cause - please do give what you can), and a group of us are doing a charity run to raise funds to buy an Ambulance and a Fire Engine for our local area........of couse we'll be seeking volunteer drivers and crew once we get the vehicles!

"Next week I may give all my money to Charity."

A better idea OW, give it to me, I could use a few million.

Give me a reminder next week, Mel. I'm absolutely sure my numbers are going to come up in the Lottery.

sickchip wrote:

oftenwrong wrote:Same thing, innit?

Yeah! I like donating to the Society of Motorway Builders and Maintainers (a worthy cause - please do give what you can), and a group of us are doing a charity run to raise funds to buy an Ambulance and a Fire Engine for our local area........of couse we'll be seeking volunteer drivers and crew once we get the vehicles!

Wish your Group all the best of luck in raising the funds Sickchip

He's at it again and again with no fear, no thought and no compassion as usual.


David Cameron sparked the North/South divide this week after his plan to cut benefits for residents of areas like Merseyside and Greater Manchester.

The idea is that benefits should be means-tested depending on where you live. So if you live in an overpriced, overpopulated dump like London, you’ll get more as the cost of living is higher than for someone living in some depressingly down-at-heel northern town.

Obviously the plan has gone down like a lead balloon with those on the dole and has led to him silently dropping the so-called ‘explosive’ blueprints. Why? The plan won’t exactly hurt his vote, with most his supporters and honourable friends safe and secure in the wealthy south – everybody knows Scousers don’t vote Tory.

Extracted from-- wait for it----The Daily Mail?? Have they had a fall out or something?

Well, if you're seeking re-election at the next GE, there's no point in wasting your time being nice to the buggers who are NEVER going to vote for you.

I dont think the Tories expect to win the next GE, with or without Cleggs Tory B team to bolster them up.

What I am wondering though, after all of the cutting and privatising that will be pushed through between now and May 2015, what spitefull shot will Herr Cameron fire accross our bows as a parting shot, to teach us the error of our ways for not re-electing the master class in perpetuity.

bobby wrote:I dont think the Tories expect to win the next GE, with or without Cleggs Tory B team to bolster them up.

What I am wondering though, after all of the cutting and privatising that will be pushed through between now and May 2015, what spitefull shot will Herr Cameron fire accross our bows as a parting shot, to teach us the error of our ways for not re-electing the master class in perpetuity.

hello Bobby
Well I have yet too see any Tory leader who has not become bitter at there defeat. But I think the real problem will come from a economy that has had no economic management or real growth policy for 5 whole years. But I have a feeling that the incoming government will have a plan to deal with this. as lets face they should have... as what's left of the Tory economic plan is well noted by now. what is worrying is there borrowing is out of control, as these last set of public sector borrowing figures after the bank bail out money was a real shock to them. it was such a shock they dropped the August 3p on petrol which is a lost of half a billion in tax they was hopping for Bobby. so right now they are almost in blind economic panic, but funny as it seems this cut in petrol should help in the short term.

but you right they do not really believe they can win the next GE. Cameron and Gideon do but many within the Tory party do not. its really a question on where they go from here. its what happens in the next 18 months that matter the most now. but all we can do is sit and watch and plan. nothing more than that.

Hello Stox, "but all we can do is sit and watch and plan. nothing more than that."

We could all take to the streets in protest, could we not Stox? When I say ALL I mean the masses. Who is the man to lead and encourage such a demonstration, old "two jags"?

Will the cruel Tory welfare reforms save any money?

Cameron thinks he could save £2billion every year by not paying housing-benefit to adolescents.

By an odd coincidence, £2billion is what UK shoppers spend on Pet Food every year.*

Good to know we have our priorities in the right order.



* http://www.pfma.org.uk/faqs/pet-statstics/

I know it gets boring after a while, but why should my taxes go to pay for the poor, £1 in every £3 goes on the welfare state, why?

Now before anybody jumps down my throat let me expand - Welfare should be for those temporarily down on their luck, not a lifestyle choice. That I support!
If the problem is lack of jobs that pay a fair days money for a fair days work, then limiting immigration (9 out of 10 jobs went to immigrants last year) will force the wage up.
If expectation outweighs skill levels, lets concentrate on raising skills and education.
If regulations and laws are broken, take people to court, and bring back hard labour making prison a place people don't want to go to.

I could fill my computer with basic common sense, yet I know somebody will mention Thatcher in reply yet forget what Blair and Brown did, were going to go in circles until the population work out that society isn't fair and never has been. Bring back aspiration to all.

The Rich get rich and the Poor get pregnant. One of the advantages of having a Tax System (perhaps the ONLY advantage!) is that it can do something to minimise inequalities. In a wealthy Country like the UK there is no reason why some people should have more money than they could reasonably spend during a lifetime, while others languish in cramped insanitary housing, without making some contribution.

Clearly, in the middle-income range some people may feel that they are being unfairly penalised for having done well for themselves, but that can be remedied by adjustments to the tax banding. Gideon's rejection of the top 50p band was a knee-jerk reflex reaction of a True Blue Tory.

I have always found it strange that while the Tories often look back to bygone years with fondness we never see the real Philanthropy that existed back when companies like Roundtree's and Caburys' were prepared to build homes for their workers or the Peabody Trust which also provided homes.
Instead we have the Super-rich who just go round buying football teams or indulging themselves in hair-brained schemes such as building space ships for their fellow idle rich to have the opportunity to spend a few hours above the earth.
Some will ask 'what about the entrepreneurs who are involved in setting up the new free schools' well the fact that these schools receive their funding from the Government means they, the entrepreneur's have only really put their name to them and are not really putting any real money in......

Some of what tlttf says is right but to believe that stopping immigration will put up wages is just wishful thinking on his part...

I agree Astradt
Even if there were full unemployment and two people out of work for every person in work, this lot would STILL see that wages were kept at an absolute minimum. This to "persuade" workers NOT to do anything to upset their employment prospects! "You gorra job be thankful" I think would be the mantra.
What present Governments avidly try to avoid is the situation in the 60's, when, if you had an argument with your boss and told him to "stuff it" in the morning, you could walk into another job with another employer that same afternoon.

I know it gets boring after a while, but why should my taxes go to pay for the poor, £1 in every £3 goes on the welfare state, why?

Many have lost sight of what the welfare system was set up to do and unfortunately some see it as a career choice rather than contribute to society....Another form of tax evasion really

As usual the working and middle classes get conned while those at the top and bottom rape the country for what they can get

The min wage is pathetic. If it were brought up to a sensible level then
those who rely on benefits could afford to work. The problem is there isn't any available, especially in deprived areas.

Those working on the min wage and especially the young on £250 per hour
are generally not paying Council tax and are being helped with housing benefits. All this is doing is subsidising the employers wage expenses, we then learn that Tesco and other big firms have made massive profits at the expense of the poorest and the taxpayer.
Who is it all geared up to assist? the rich yet once more, like everything else the Tories have in mind as usual.

blueturando wrote:

I know it gets boring after a while, but why should my taxes go to pay for the poor, £1 in every £3 goes on the welfare state, why?

Many have lost sight of what the welfare system was set up to do and unfortunately some see it as a career choice rather than contribute to society....Another form of tax evasion really

As usual the working and middle classes get conned while those at the top and bottom rape the country for what they can get

You've certainly been conned by the Tory Press if you imagine that savings made by slashing welfare benefits will find their way back into YOUR pockets.

Blue quote

As usual the working and middle classes get conned while those at the top and bottom rape the country for what they can get.

Grrrrrr. I get really mad at such comments. We all know there are people who play the system. We all know there are people who are just lazy ........s, and they should be penalised.

BUT

There are a majority of people out there who have, in the past, worked hard. Many who would love to work hard. Many who have looked hard for work. Many who work part time to just to get some money to survive. Many families whose parents juggle 2 jobs to make ends meet due to the main earner losing their job.

A few years ago my local paper had 2-3 pages of jobs. The number those jobs in the last three weeks have been 3, 5, 9.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Never mind. I have just heard that the youngest of my sons, by a late relationship, has just passed his degree at Oxford. This despite studying at home for 12 months due to illness. He now returns for his 4th year project.

Oooops. Sorry about that, but I am sooooo happy for him.

Trevor......I totally understand that and congrats to your Son.

I am not slating the Welfare system...I am proud that we have a system in place to help people who are in difficult situations and I would not want to change that for anything. I was very careful to say that some people see it as a career choice rather than contributing to society....I know they are not the majority, so I am not bringing a downer on people who genuinely need help and financial support.

I also believe that a lot more needs to be done to make big business pay their fair share in taxes......and someone should name and shame these companies, so we as a nation can put pressure on them to do this or we could boycott their services if they don't stump up the cash

Blue. Understood. agrrred. oops Agreed

APublic Geoffrey OOPS Boycott (this is catching, Trevor) of companys wot don't pay tax!

Lets go for it and see how many companies strangle before they catch on.



Of Course, once they pay the proper amount of taxes to the exchequer, this will be an excuse to put prices up!

"Of Course, once they pay the proper amount of taxes to the exchequer, this will be an excuse to put prices up!"

Prices up FURTHER, don't forget the FURTHER/FATHER OOPS!!!

Nice post blue. Thank you.