New research by the New Policy Institute shows how many working families are in receipt of benefits....................................Deafened by the interminable call for reforms to ‘make work pay’, it’s easy to forget that plenty of families receiving state benefits are already working
The hypocrisy of a government that creates 'jobs' that require benefit top ups, yet allows tax 'avoidance' on a massive scale is astounding.
More in work more on benefits ?
More in work more on benefits ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
More in work more on benefits ?
It's a smoke screen of figures.
The Tory Formula:
Claiming Benefits = Unemployed
Not Claiming Benefits = Employed
Sanctioned = Not Claiming Benefits (Therefore Employed)
Tory Success = More People Employed Than Ever
More Jobs Created (Working At Food Banks)
Also, think of it logically - By forcing someone to take a job, albeit below the living wage & claiming that in so doing they would be better off than being on benefits says something about those who are supposed to be "Living In Luxury" on Benefits. If working for less than a Living Wage is better off than being on Benefits, what is the Living Income for those on Benefits? Some 'Luxury'.
Then there is the claim that when they are working, even on Minimum Wage they are putting something back into the country in the way of Tax. The point is that on that level of income they fall below the Tax Threshold in the first place, and still have to rely on Food Banks.
In the meantime, they subsidise massive Corporate Companies who make maximum use of the loopholes made available to them to avoid paying tax, while making generous donations to the Tory Party to encourage them to keep it that way. The Tories then claim that these are the companies that keep people in employment. The point is that these companies aren't paying people to work for them as a charity. They're in it for the money, and if the companies aren't paying tax, and their employees are below the tax threshold, then where does the money come from? No surprise, money becomes short in supply. Solution - make more cutbacks. Tax the Welfare System & Sell Off the NHS for Privatisation. Result - Less money going out. More money coming in. Economic recovery.
Smoke & Mirrors.
The Tory Formula:
Claiming Benefits = Unemployed
Not Claiming Benefits = Employed
Sanctioned = Not Claiming Benefits (Therefore Employed)
Tory Success = More People Employed Than Ever
More Jobs Created (Working At Food Banks)
Also, think of it logically - By forcing someone to take a job, albeit below the living wage & claiming that in so doing they would be better off than being on benefits says something about those who are supposed to be "Living In Luxury" on Benefits. If working for less than a Living Wage is better off than being on Benefits, what is the Living Income for those on Benefits? Some 'Luxury'.
Then there is the claim that when they are working, even on Minimum Wage they are putting something back into the country in the way of Tax. The point is that on that level of income they fall below the Tax Threshold in the first place, and still have to rely on Food Banks.
In the meantime, they subsidise massive Corporate Companies who make maximum use of the loopholes made available to them to avoid paying tax, while making generous donations to the Tory Party to encourage them to keep it that way. The Tories then claim that these are the companies that keep people in employment. The point is that these companies aren't paying people to work for them as a charity. They're in it for the money, and if the companies aren't paying tax, and their employees are below the tax threshold, then where does the money come from? No surprise, money becomes short in supply. Solution - make more cutbacks. Tax the Welfare System & Sell Off the NHS for Privatisation. Result - Less money going out. More money coming in. Economic recovery.
Smoke & Mirrors.
More in work more on benefits ?
FourPart;1479272 wrote: It's a smoke screen of figures.
The Tory Formula:
Claiming Benefits = Unemployed
Not Claiming Benefits = Employed
Sanctioned = Not Claiming Benefits (Therefore Employed)
Tory Success = More People Employed Than Ever
More Jobs Created (Working At Food Banks)
Also, think of it logically - By forcing someone to take a job, albeit below the living wage & claiming that in so doing they would be better off than being on benefits says something about those who are supposed to be "Living In Luxury" on Benefits. If working for less than a Living Wage is better off than being on Benefits, what is the Living Income for those on Benefits? Some 'Luxury'.
Then there is the claim that when they are working, even on Minimum Wage they are putting something back into the country in the way of Tax. The point is that on that level of income they fall below the Tax Threshold in the first place, and still have to rely on Food Banks.
In the meantime, they subsidise massive Corporate Companies who make maximum use of the loopholes made available to them to avoid paying tax, while making generous donations to the Tory Party to encourage them to keep it that way. The Tories then claim that these are the companies that keep people in employment. The point is that these companies aren't paying people to work for them as a charity. They're in it for the money, and if the companies aren't paying tax, and their employees are below the tax threshold, then where does the money come from? No surprise, money becomes short in supply. Solution - make more cutbacks. Tax the Welfare System & Sell Off the NHS for Privatisation. Result - Less money going out. More money coming in. Economic recovery.
Smoke & Mirrors.
Yes it sucks, FourPart. Lovely little cosy arrangement, if you're an industrialist, or big employer. Loads of cheap labour from Europe, too. Keeps wages down nicely. Just think, we've got a "government" that takes at least £2 per hour off every single working person in this country by suppressing the hourly rate for so many years..... and yet this country owes MORE now than when the tories took office!
Incompetence?
Corruption?
Outside influence?
Waste?
You decide.
The Tory Formula:
Claiming Benefits = Unemployed
Not Claiming Benefits = Employed
Sanctioned = Not Claiming Benefits (Therefore Employed)
Tory Success = More People Employed Than Ever
More Jobs Created (Working At Food Banks)
Also, think of it logically - By forcing someone to take a job, albeit below the living wage & claiming that in so doing they would be better off than being on benefits says something about those who are supposed to be "Living In Luxury" on Benefits. If working for less than a Living Wage is better off than being on Benefits, what is the Living Income for those on Benefits? Some 'Luxury'.
Then there is the claim that when they are working, even on Minimum Wage they are putting something back into the country in the way of Tax. The point is that on that level of income they fall below the Tax Threshold in the first place, and still have to rely on Food Banks.
In the meantime, they subsidise massive Corporate Companies who make maximum use of the loopholes made available to them to avoid paying tax, while making generous donations to the Tory Party to encourage them to keep it that way. The Tories then claim that these are the companies that keep people in employment. The point is that these companies aren't paying people to work for them as a charity. They're in it for the money, and if the companies aren't paying tax, and their employees are below the tax threshold, then where does the money come from? No surprise, money becomes short in supply. Solution - make more cutbacks. Tax the Welfare System & Sell Off the NHS for Privatisation. Result - Less money going out. More money coming in. Economic recovery.
Smoke & Mirrors.
Yes it sucks, FourPart. Lovely little cosy arrangement, if you're an industrialist, or big employer. Loads of cheap labour from Europe, too. Keeps wages down nicely. Just think, we've got a "government" that takes at least £2 per hour off every single working person in this country by suppressing the hourly rate for so many years..... and yet this country owes MORE now than when the tories took office!
Incompetence?
Corruption?
Outside influence?
Waste?
You decide.
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
More in work more on benefits ?
I suppose, with us losing so much money we could always print some more... Good old QE....that should "inflate" things a bit ("quantitive easing"; I HATE that euphemism).
Let's not forget "that prudent chancellor" Gordon Brown, he who sold about half our gold reserve to Europe at "mates rates", thus de-valuing our currency in line (roughly) with the Euro. Brown was stopped by the Bank of England from selling any more...
I think this country is slowly bleeding to death.
Let's not forget "that prudent chancellor" Gordon Brown, he who sold about half our gold reserve to Europe at "mates rates", thus de-valuing our currency in line (roughly) with the Euro. Brown was stopped by the Bank of England from selling any more...
I think this country is slowly bleeding to death.
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
More in work more on benefits ?
The main reason the snp wiped the floor with labour in scotland was the anti-austerity policies they are puitting forward and that's why the tories banged on about the threat of another independence referendum when it came to discussing the policies it was a useful distraction from the real issues.
Ready for the next big sell off - the housing association properties
Housing associations say they'll sue if the Tories force them to sell off homes under right-to-buy - General Election 2015 - UK Politics - The Independent
If they just came out and said they want tio end social housing on idealogical grounds it would have the virtue of being honest.
Ready for the next big sell off - the housing association properties
Housing associations say they'll sue if the Tories force them to sell off homes under right-to-buy - General Election 2015 - UK Politics - The Independent
If they just came out and said they want tio end social housing on idealogical grounds it would have the virtue of being honest.
More in work more on benefits ?
As far as I understand Housing Associations are usually charities or non profit making organisations providing affordable housing.
That is exactly what the councils used to do, selling off the houses was a major contributory factor for the shortage now.
All those ex council properties now in private hands are being let out to ex council tenants and the owners are asking the tax payer to pay the extortionate rents.......because ironically there is a house shortage.......and why ?
Roll on the revolution.
That is exactly what the councils used to do, selling off the houses was a major contributory factor for the shortage now.
All those ex council properties now in private hands are being let out to ex council tenants and the owners are asking the tax payer to pay the extortionate rents.......because ironically there is a house shortage.......and why ?
Roll on the revolution.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
More in work more on benefits ?
Housing Associations are private businesses who frequently take on 'Charitable' status, usually to get the benefits afforded by not paying tax (for example, did you know that Eton is a Registerred Charity?). Rents charged by them tend to be higher than Council rates, but usually lower than the totally private ones as they are usually subsidised by the local Councils.
The way I see it, the whole thing about Right To Buy is ill conceived & morally wrong, regardless of whether it be Council Properties or Housing Associations. The whole point of Social Housing is to provide homes to those who can't afford to buy them. To sell them off at a fraction of their market value is wrong, and is clearly intended to benefit those of the higher income bracket (aka Tory Capitalists), so it's not really surprising that the whole concept was introduced by the most Evil of Capitalists, Maggie Thatcher. Now the we have Ca-moron he clearly intends not only to follow in her (cloven) footsteps, but to surpass them.
The way I see it, the whole thing about Right To Buy is ill conceived & morally wrong, regardless of whether it be Council Properties or Housing Associations. The whole point of Social Housing is to provide homes to those who can't afford to buy them. To sell them off at a fraction of their market value is wrong, and is clearly intended to benefit those of the higher income bracket (aka Tory Capitalists), so it's not really surprising that the whole concept was introduced by the most Evil of Capitalists, Maggie Thatcher. Now the we have Ca-moron he clearly intends not only to follow in her (cloven) footsteps, but to surpass them.
More in work more on benefits ?
Economics 101 would help some to understand market functions.
Wow.
Wow.
My Journal of a New Endeavor