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.

Nice post blue. Thank you.

Mel wrote: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"?

Hello Mel
yes your quite right we could take to the streets. but do you see this happening with the currant economic state most people are in Mel?

blueturando wrote:

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

A very fair point this Blue and one I share too. its time this all come too an end in my view.

blueturando wrote:Trevor......

I .... 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

Few such conflicts have an easy solution. Both Cambridge and Oxford have a satellite fringe of Research and Development companies, whose principle asset is often the brains of its members. It's in the nature of the beast that they can work for years without producing anything that might actually make money, but when they do - it's $$$£££ payback time. What's a "fair share" of the taxation for such people as opposed to those who "create" banking derivatives?

oftenwrong wrote:

blueturando wrote:Trevor......

I .... 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

Few such conflicts have an easy solution. Both Cambridge and Oxford have a satellite fringe of Research and Development companies, whose principle asset is often the brains of its members. It's in the nature of the beast that they can work for years without producing anything that might actually make money, but when they do - it's $$$£££ payback time. What's a "fair share" of the taxation for such people as opposed to those who "create" banking derivatives?

OW
i think most people have a good idea what is a fear tax to pay. its far to say that just about everyone hates to pay tax and believes they pay far to much tax. but we just cannot go on with companies who believe its quite right to not pay any real tax at all. as its now become a £49.9 billion tax loss each years now. that is some £250 billion ponds lost in the five years of this government alone. if only we had a government with the same will to cut this figure down by just £100 billion its would re-write our economy for all of us.

What can be done about foreign governments competing for tax business by settlling for a lower rate? Corporation Tax is significantly less in The Republic of Ireland, and UK-registered companies are not blind to that.

oftenwrong wrote:What can be done about foreign governments competing for tax business by settlling for a lower rate? Corporation Tax is significantly less in The Republic of Ireland, and UK-registered companies are not blind to that.

You know OW. I hear this argument about tax in the UK everyday in my company. But would you like one little interesting fact? well in all my years of working around the city of London I can only think of one company that left the City of London over business tax. and what makes this even more funny they returned in 2010 complaining about a foreign tax system that favoured home based companies. now based on currant economic data we are know where near the top in corporation tax or business tax in general. now even we was to collect £100 billion of the £250 billion of lost tax each year we would still be know were near the top in tax collection. now only one big city firm left sighting tax as there reason for leaving the UK that I can remember. Most go for other reason and tax is very low down the list OW.

The Highest Tax Rates
Belgium
Finland
Germany
Denmark
Italy
France

The Lowest Tax Rates in order of lows rates at the bottom. which is the UK
Switzerland
USA
Australia
Canada
Japan
United Kingdom

UK TAX

UK still qualifies as a relatively low-taxed nation, but only amidst the rest of highly-taxed Western Europe. With a GDP per capita of $36,358 (19th on the IMF’s ranking), Great Britain stands as the sixth largest economy in the world by this measure. The United Kingdom provides universal healthcare to its citizens, as do most industrialized nations in Europe, and Poverty.org reports that roughly 21% live below 40% of the country’s median income. The country is also a major financial hub in the world economy, with London housing various important stock exchanges and investment banks

GERMANY TAX

Clocking in just beneath Finland is Germany, with a 45% marginal tax rate on average income workers. Despite having the largest national economy in Europe (and the fourth largest in the world measured by nominal GDP), Germany has effectively traded off having a comprehensive social safety net against more robust economic growth. TheNewEditor.com reported that Germans were emigrating at their highest rate since the 1940′s, resulting in a “brain drain” on the nation’s brightest and most motivated people. As a result of “high taxes and bureaucracy, thousands of Germans have upped sticks for Austria and Switzerland, or emigrated to the United States” — 155,290 during the year in question

BELGIUM TAX

world’s highest tax rates can be found in western European nations. Belgium tops the list, with a marginal tax rate that goes as high as 54%. Despite such a high tax rate, Belgium ranks relatively highly on various economic measures. Belgium’s high tax rates stifle economic vitality to some extent, despite the social safety net it provides.

The title of this thread is a bit loaded, isn't it?

You're assuming that the welfare reforms ARE cruel which is highly dubious.

Will they save any money? Probably not; governments of all colours seem to find ingenious ways of wasting money.

Of course the welfare reforms are designed to take a lot of people off benefit which in principle is a good idea.

Of course the way it's being done is stupid and that's what seems to be the norm with any kind of change in Britain over the last thirty years or so.

The government tries to correct a problem but ends up creating an injustice on the other side.

And of course the REAL reason why they just tinker is because fundamental reform would lead any government that introduced it into the political wilderness for years.

So no politician has the guts to do anything meaningful.

NO THE WELFARE "REFORMS WILL NOT SAVE ANY MONEY!!

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=250572049


"G4S was initially contracted by Games organiser Locog in 2010 to provide 2,000 security staff for £86 million, but that figure has since risen to 10,400 personnel in a contract now worth £284 million. The Daily Mail reported that the people employed will include A-level students.

The documents seen by the Telegraph suggested that the firm's management fee rose over that time from £7.3 million to £60 million. Almost £34 million of the increase was for the G4S "programme management office" overseeing the security operation, compared to an increase of just £2.8 million in the firm's recruitment spending. There was no immediate response from G4S to a request for comment on the figures.

With more than £100 million wiped off the firm's market value and accusations that the company has let the country down, Home Secretary Theresa May told MPs that ministers were only told on Wednesday that G4S"

.....................................................................................................................................................................


Is G4S the new name for Group 4 security?
Was Group4 not the company that Norman Gummer got into so much bother for "Directing" whilst holding Government Front bench Office?

With the rising values shown here, it is nice to know that the Remploy redundant and those taken off bnefits are having THEIR money shifted to such a worthy cause!

Quote : "You're assuming that the welfare reforms ARE cruel which is highly dubious..."

I think that the problem many people will have is not simply what is being done , but the usual demonstrable relish with which the Tory Government is inflicting the pain upon those who are unable to make ends meet.

It never changes, and why the public never remember what Conservatives in power are like is beyond me. If they ever get a proper majority without their LibDem partners-in-crime, I shudder to think what they will visit upon the already-disadvantaged. Truly a despicable and hateful bunch who deserve to rot in hell...

Well said Phil.

Astra. IMO this G4S company I understand have not yet been paid their extortionate fees. Therefore, I hope the cost of putting our soldiers on the job that G4S has failed to do will be deducted from that £60million fee.

Bet your life it won't, especially if Gummer is involved.

http://news.uk.msn.com/failures-should-cost-says-cameron-2

"I'm absolutely clear that if companies don't deliver on their contract then they should be pursued for that money."

He added: "I think we should be raising our sights, and thinking of the incredible inspiration that these Games are going to bring. The facilities are built, the country is ready, we are in really good shape."

But Ian Swales, a member of the public accounts committee that has examined some G4S Olympic contracts, said the firm should have provided a "Rolls Royce service" after hiking up its charges by £198 million.

Mel, looks to me like the bas..... er - lovechildren HAVE recieved these moneys!

Who pays a service provider BEFORE the service has been em, provided?

DOH!

and

this Group 4 contract, now worth £284 million, if the idiots had just said we will use the services of the Armed Forces, including the T.A. think of the cash saved up to now, and the "games" not even started.

Here is a lot more money that is being wasted by this incompetent shower!

Fix this fiasco, and the games "security" and almost ALL of the cash they are trying to retrieve is gained.

But, keeping off of the backs of the unfortunate, the ill, and the elderly is not a Tory forte', is it!

Farming subsidy fines total £500m

Failures to pay subsidies to farmers correctly have cost taxpayers around half a billion pounds in EU fines in the last few years, the National Audit Office said.

http://news.uk.msn.com/farming-subsidy-fines-total-%c2%a3500m-1

"Jobs for the boys" originally referred to closed-shop employment terms operating in shipyards and other heavy industry.

Inflation means that "the boys" now are the already-wealthy ensuring fat contracts for each other.

The Athens Games eight years ago were not a financial success:
News that the final cost of the Athens Olympic Games was nearly double the amount originally budgeted for, as revealed by Finance Minister George Alogoskoufis during a briefing of the cabinet, drew sharp criticism from the opposition parties, especially main opposition PASOK.

PASOK spokesman Nikos Athanassakis launched a bitter attack against the government, pouring scorn on the figures produced by Alogoskoufis and accused him of "political fraud" in order to deceive the Greek public and divert attention away from foreign policy issues and the upcoming debate on the government's tax bill in Parliament.

We might imagine that our Government's excuses for a similar experience are already being prepared.

Phil Hornby wrote:Quote : "You're assuming that the welfare reforms ARE cruel which is highly dubious..."

I think that the problem many people will have is not simply what is being done , but the usual demonstrable relish with which the Tory Government is inflicting the pain upon those who are unable to make ends meet.

It never changes, and why the public never remember what Conservatives in power are like is beyond me. If they ever get a proper majority without their LibDem partners-in-crime, I shudder to think what they will visit upon the already-disadvantaged. Truly a despicable and hateful bunch who deserve to rot in hell...

I think there's a lot of truth in what you say but then unfortunately that's how the Tories always like to pretend to be - a cross between Scrooge and Count Dracula when in reality most of the time they're incompetent buffoons who could barely change a lightbulb if they had to.

So to disguise the fact that the welfare changes will actually make next to NO difference they are coming out like King Lear in the storm announcing 'I shall do such things - what they are I know not - but they shall be the terror of the world.

I'm not affiliated to ANY political party; I'm also a perennial floating voter who's voted four different ways in the four general elections I've been able to vote in.

I don't believe Labour has either any idea HOW to reform welfare or the political will to do if they got in.

The Tories are a party I've only voted for once and I had to hold my nose when I did it. As a working class girl they are NOT my sort of people and I voted for them with extreme reluctance. I haven't done it since.

The Lib Dems strike me as an entirely different case. They are full of well-meaning idealistic people - rather like many Labour Party friends I know - but they are hideously unversed in realpolitik and their naivete is showing like mad almost every time they say or do anything.

My take on the coalition is that it's currently the lesser of two evils.. I despise Dodgy Dave, don't have much respect for Nasty Nick and find Eddie the Eagle a flipping embarrassment, to be honest. His brother would have been a MUCH better bloke to lead Labour; Alan Johnson would have been better still.

At least the Lib Dems have stopped the Tories from trying to do anything too extremely right-wing.

A majority for Cameron would have been a disaster and at least we haven't got that.

Mandelson has a lot to answer for because he went into the talks with Clegg with no real desire of concluding an agreement.

I'd have much preferred a Lib-Lab agreement myself but we didn't get it.

And Labour need to think long and hard about welfare because if they win next time the problem will land in their lap and they owe it to the people of Britain to do something constructive about it.

But of course they won't any more than they did when Blair and Brown had a huge majority.

QUOTE ".... unfortunately that's how the Tories always like to pretend to be - a cross between Scrooge and Count Dracula when in reality most of the time they're incompetent buffoons who could barely change a lightbulb if they had to."

Pretence it is indeed, the buffoon-role is of course epitomised in Boris, but he is typical of the Tory affectation that nothing really matters, just do as you're told and everything will be hunky-dory. (While they relieve you of your wallet.)

At least they're predictable - we know that a Tory administration is going to screw the taxpayer, but just why the taxpayer lies down to enjoy being screwed is not yet clear.

But Labour has not done all that much to secure Public trust since 1997. Blair was so patently a wannabe Tory, and has now become one. Brown became so busy being unpleasant to everyone that he lost sight of his Socialist origins.

All things being equal, the next General Election will fall into the lap of David Miliband without the need for either he or his colleagues to do very much, but a repeat of 1997 > 2010 won't go very far. The Labour Party could do worse than revisit the doings of Clement Attlee's 1945 government which gave us the NHS, the Welfare State and redistribution of Wealth, which the Tories have been resisting ever since.

"I'm also a perennial floating voter who's voted four different ways in the four general elections I've been able to vote in."

Yes biglin and it was these "floating" voters who voted Lib Dem and put us all in this mess with a Tory dominated so called government.

In my opinion someone who votes for one party all their life...just because, does not really have the interests of the country at heart, but only their own selfish desires and gang mentality to fall back on.
If we didn't have floating voters then we would have the same party in power for generations and we all know that any party who stays in power too long gets complacent, sleazy and out of touch with the general public

It is the "floating voters" who do not really have the interests of the country at heart, but only their own selfish desires. Hence the majority are now suffering for their greed and stupidity.

Here is ANOTHER £2 Billion to add to my £1 Billion outrage yesterday!

Government has awarded research grant of £2 Billion to see if Uk windfarms are causing drought conditions in Africa

cna someone chase this up please? Can't finfd it! (may be a pi55 take!)

blueturando wrote:In my opinion someone who votes for one party all their life...just because, does not really have the interests of the country at heart, but only their own selfish desires and gang mentality to fall back on.
If we didn't have floating voters then we would have the same party in power for generations and we all know that any party who stays in power too long gets complacent, sleazy and out of touch with the general public

Excellent post, blue.....though it's a pity we have nothing worth voting for - they are all controlled/instructed by the money - banks, corporations, and old money establishment. We are a nation of ....from top, through the middle, to the bottom.

Well, sickchip, it's impossible to disagree with such a candid self-assessment, but what makes you entitled to speak on behalf of everyone?

...observation, ow - though I admit I've made a slightly sweeping generalisation; but the fact that the person on the street has allowed themselves to become slowly deprived of rights and powers to the point of having no influence, does point to a willingness from the top to use, abuse, and corrupt.....and a reciprocation of this arrangement from the majority (to willingly be used/abused/corrupted) indicates we are maybe not so far from my admittedly crass generalisation.

I have been reduced like many others to nothing but posting ineffectual comments on political forums that provide nothing but personal means of exorcising the various political frustrations of a small minority who are bothered to be concerned by politics.

A small number of people I know personally have been pleasantly surprised at the effect of a letter to their MP. Where there is a genuine cause for complaint, things have been made to happen.

Obviously expressions of general dis-satisfaction are not so easily addressed.

I tried that OW. I wrote to the Tory MP in my part of the country, as down in my part of the Sowf East their aint no Labour MP's.

My letter was sent on the 16th April 12 with no reply by the end of May. I followed up with an e-mail at the end of May, still awaiting the courtesy of a reply.
Unless one is licking their ar5es, they really don't want to know.

Taking of ar5es, these so called "floating voters" know not whether they are on their political heads or their
ar5es. People who are naturally indecisive create problems for others who decisively know what they are about.

The Gospel according to MSN survey is perfectly clear:

Who or what is most responsible for the UK recession getting worse?

43 % responded "The current coalition government" 15,108 votes

32 % blamed "The previous Labour government" 11,553 votes

22 % thought "The eurozone crisis" 7,902 voters without a time sense

Other factors such as the weather & bank holidays 1 %

Low growth in the US economy 2 %

Low growth in the Far East 0 %

Total Responses: 35,643
Not scientifically valid. Results are updated every minute.

"43 % responded "The current coalition government" 15,108 votes"

The rest 57% I expect are made up of hard core Tory voters, some fence sitters and the gullible.

One is never surprised as to how much damage has to be levied upon some folk before they wake up to reality and to who is creating the damage.

Seems to me many of the British will put up with sooooo much, until it is all too late to do anything about what is being or has been dished out to them by an uncaring and ruthless load of tyrant toffs.

Ahh Mel, Its a shame when so many people are not swayed by the Labour BS that get spewed out on every possible occasion. People are not as stupid as you want them to be, they've heard all that BS for years under New Labour.

Let's hear you or Balls come up with some radical ideas on how to get the country back on track.....You know, not pie in the sky... will never work leftie ideas, but proper workable and affordable proposals.

Moaning is one thing, but having a solution would be much better

Seems to me many of the British will put up with sooooo much, until it is all too late to do anything about what is being or has been dished out to them by an uncaring and ruthless load of tyrant toffs.

The problem you have with this is that many people see the current Labour crop in exactly the same way...Tory toffs or Labour toffs...they're still toffs

Very likely, blue. Six of ONE, and half-a-dozen of THE OTHER.

The distinction being that a Tory administration will always take the bigger half.

Still somehow trying to justify the unjustifiables by slating off NL? I could if you wish reel off the many achievements that were made in favour of the less well off, the sick, the elderly, NHS, working folk, the unemployed and yes, the small business sector and the large.
All gained and prospered along with low inflation good growth and low interest rates.
Your beloved Tories achievements all favour the rich at the expense of the majority. Since the barstewards came to power, even in a recession that is getting worse by the day thanks to their lack of interest in nothing else but assisting the rich and privatisation, they have already assisted the rich to have become 45% richer and agreed to cut the top rate of tax, with pie in the sky excuses for doing so.
Now tell me both parties are the same.
Those that have not yet been "swayed" because they listen to the crap coming out of Gideon and Cameron's trap, echoed by the Tory press against everything that fails in front of their eyes.
As I said previously, the British will put up with anything until it's too late to do anything about it.
Keep trying blue, what you say simply helps people see the folly of sucked in Tory supporters.

I don't think any intelligent and honest person will deny that Labour contributed to the present difficulties. On the other hand I think any intelligent and honest person will equally agree that the coalition has had two years to put things right and that things are not getting any better.

On the specific question of the austerity programme - it's not genuine and never has been. Yes, people have lost jobs; yes, there are some areas where things have got more difficult.

Overall, though, people are spending loads of money; when I go into shops and supermarkets it's always the ones on benefits who spend like there was no tomorrow and the ones working on low-paid jobs who have to get the reduced or special offer stuff.

Welfare reform is a genuine need but NO party has the guts to tackle it in the only sensible way which is root and branch overhaul of the whole corrupt system.

It's really irritating how often other people seem to have the cash to buy the things we'd like to have but can't afford.

Germans were hardly affected by the Credit Crunch, because they conventionally save up for the things they want. Would that work here?

Apart from the possible exception of a house or car, if people need to rely upon credit for a purchase, they probably can't really afford it. The problem we have is that we have convinced ourselves that it's ok to have a credit card balance of hundreds ( maybe thousands ) of pounds - and just to send off the minimum payment each month.

Too little financial discipline - too much resultant misery....

biglin wrote: Overall, though, people are spending loads of money; when I go into shops and supermarkets it's always the ones on benefits who spend like there was no tomorrow and the ones working on low-paid jobs who have to get the reduced or special offer stuff.

Hello Lin? I am a tad confused. When I go down to the supermarket, which I must add is rarely, I most certainly cant tell who is and who isn’t employed, perhaps you have a system worked out to differentiate l between the workers and the unemployed. Also how can such a generality be made when I would have thought many of the unemployed are at home wishing they could afford to go out shopping.

Another point is, The unemployed get their benefits periodically every couple of weeks I believe, so when they do go out for their shopping, they would I would have thought have to do a fortnights shop, thereby giving the impression they are as you put it "spend like there was no tommorow", what you probably wont see is that same person out the following week with such a full trolly. You really should not make such generalitie.

There is a science to Supermarket shopping. The Stores employ qualified professionals to advise them not only on nutrition, but also how to persuade customers into that store rather than a competitor, and once inside to spend more money than they had intended.

Unemployed people have time to write a shopping list and stick to it. This is made easier by the websites provided for cash-rich-time-poor customers who will pay to have stuff delivered. Anyone else can also look at the website before going shopping for themselves, and make calm sensible decisions what to buy before you get there. Ignore the bogoff temptation unless you are absolutely certain that you not only want that item but will use two of them within a reasonable time.

If you have one of the German discount stores nearby, they will invariably be cheaper to shop at, because they don't sell Branded Goods (so you're not paying for advertising), they don't give away carrier bags and they don't take Credit Cards - so cutting out another middle-man expense.

biglin wrote:I don't think any intelligent and honest person will deny that Labour contributed to the present difficulties. On the other hand I think any intelligent and honest person will equally agree that the coalition has had two years to put things right and that things are not getting any better.

On the specific question of the austerity programme - it's not genuine and never has been. Yes, people have lost jobs; yes, there are some areas where things have got more difficult.

Overall, though, people are spending loads of money; when I go into shops and supermarkets it's always the ones on benefits who spend like there was no tomorrow and the ones working on low-paid jobs who have to get the reduced or special offer stuff.

Welfare reform is a genuine need but NO party has the guts to tackle it in the only sensible way which is root and branch overhaul of the whole corrupt system.

I think our government/s in recent history aren't really too bothered about much of Britain aside from London - playing the media game, and bending over for it's financial centre.

[/quote]

I think our government/s in recent history aren't really too bothered about much of Britain aside from London - playing the media game, and bending over for it's financial centre.[/quote]


Well, yeah! We can all see what's wrong, but so far nobody seems to have a solution apart from civil disobedience.

"when I go into shops and supermarkets it's always the ones on benefits who spend like there was no tomorrow"

I wonder how you come to that conclusion biglin. Do those on benefits have it tattood on their foreheads?