Anyone?

Can anyone tell me why the cuts to disability benefits are justified but the proposed Labour tax increase is not?

Not just disability benefits btw, Rochdale Community Mental Health team have been told that they have to cut staff.
I know two senior members of staff have left already because they’re now working for the company I work for.
More cuts to come, apparantly.

Anyone?

Been here before…
The Beatles were taxed till the pips squeaked, and yet the surviving members are still multimillionaires.

When I was young immature and stupid, I agreed with the face value of that song.

“…and yet somehow insisting we are spending less these last 7 years seems to have increased our national debt by just over 50%. uncomfortable truth here Has money just got more expensive these days?”

Simple, the deficit is shrinking, but it’s not yet zero, so the debt continues to increase but at a reducing rate.

Nothing wrong with taxing the rich a bit more, but as others have said it’s more about symbolism than actual tax take, and the risk as always is that if you overdo it then behavioural effects kick in and your tax take goes down, meaning less money for the needy.

The Beatles were taxed till the pips squeaked, and yet the surviving members are still multimillionaires.

Because they pissed off abroad

“Been here before…
The Beatles were taxed till the pips squeaked, and yet the surviving members are still multimillionaires.”

Were they “tax efficient “? Would they have paid more at a lower rate? Don’t know btw, speculating!

Going with the £1,000 per person. Assume ~1.6 million people. That’s 1.6 Billion. You just can’t generate significant cash by taxing the ‘rich’.

Yep. But by cutting nurse’s training bursaries you generate all kinds of cash, right?

Overpaid, over privileged, self indulgent musicians complaining about the taxman. FFS! 🙄

I’m quite happy for that ridiculous business model, that we all fed, to be blown away.

It’s funny that a lot on here slag footballers wages but then complain about people downloading music.

**** them is what I say!

I dont slag footballer wages, I slag the arsehole paying on the gate, the arsehole Sky sports subscriber who fuels those wages…

“Nothing wrong with taxing the rich a bit more, but as others have said it’s more about symbolism than actual tax take, and the risk as always is that if you overdo it then behavioural effects kick in and your tax take goes down, meaning less money for the needy.”

Yup, the bulk of the cash is coming from elsewhere. The FT even tells us where.

It’s about a lot more than income tax.

The fact is that the upper echelons of this stupid corrupt system, the 1% if you like, have made a packet over the past 10 years while everyone else has suffered. It’s not an extreme view to suggest that they should give something back. Even after they do, they’ll still be rich.

Would anyone like to answer the question?

“Would anyone like to answer the question?”

The FT article posted above definitively answered the question. The cash is mainly coming from the predicted increase in 2019/2020 revenue.

Even after they do, they’ll still be rich

Just like those Scousers warbling on about “The Taxman” on the other page…

The FT definitively answered the question.

I haven’t asked the FT anything.

I asked you and the other people contributing to this thread

“…. why the cuts to disability benefits are justified but the proposed Labour tax increase is not?”

Are you prepared to answer this question or not?

I answered you. It wasn’t. The disabled should have been protected. Nothing wrong with the principle of assessing fitness to work but it’s a complex issue and the implementation has obviously been dreadful. Happy?

I believe I thanked you for your prompt response at the time.

You were the only one with the manners to do so.

I take it those who didn’t answer are happy with the cuts?

Read this blog. Hit “Older posts” button. Rinse, repeat.

http://www.gillwatson.co.uk

Do you know the worst thing? Even though this kid is visibility losing weight from his already skinny frame, he tried saying he was ok and didn’t need anything. This is what this society is doing to people – it’s making starving kids pretend they’re not so they don’t suffer the humiliation of other people knowing.

[video]https://youtu.be/MGb-mF9RVFU[/video]

“a complex issue and the implementation has obviously been dreadful.”

Ring fencing the biggest budgets was always gonna make things insanely painful elsewhere. The SNP wisely didn’t ringfence Budgets and it significantly reduced the pain.

Ring fencing the biggest budgets was always gonna make things insanely painful elsewhere.

Not really answering the question as usual.

ulysse – Member
I dont slag footballer wages, I slag the arsehole paying on the gate, the arsehole Sky sports subscriber who fuels those wages…

POSTED 50 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

Well that’s a nice caring attitude and not in anyway judgmental.

Ring fencing the biggest budgets was always gonna make things insanely painful elsewhere.

This tells me nothing of your views on the subject and doesn’t really answer the question.

Well that’s a nice caring attitude and not in anyway judgmental.

Focussing on the important stuff…

Nothing wrong with the principle of assessing fitness to work but it’s a complex issue and the implementation has obviously been dreadful.

I agree.
However, people with disabilities are constantly assessed already.
By the local authority, by care services, by medical services.

In all honesty, in over 10 years of working with those with disabilities, I have encountered one person who could possibly have been accused of attempting to defraud the system.

We want to help those who need it, it’s in everybody’s interest to ensure this happens.

However this is a targetted attack on some of the most vulnerable.
Not a tax rise on those most able to bear it.

“Not really answering the question as usual”

You haven’t answered it either!

I thought it rather illustrated ulysse hipocracy, the poster has become very vocal about people they don’t agree with and then goes and posts unwarranted bile like that.

Of course I’m judgemental… Where have I implied otherwise

Because I’m a Green party member and support socialism, i’m supposed to be a yoghurt knitting handwringer?

I’ve more in common with Ian Bone…

“Because I’m a Green party member and support socialism,”

Just out of interest why Green and not Labour?

And hypocrisy? I promise you, no footballers or football club has ever knowingly made a brass bawbee from me. A nice side benefit of boycotting or stealing Murdoch media products. So I don’t complain about their salaries.

If you want to splurge your disposable income up the wall following football, that’s your prerogative, but don’t complain about the salaries if you do

Why not Labour? Is that a serious question after my views aired through out this thread.
Do keep up!

Google:
Frank Field
David Freud
Rachel Reeves
Liam Byrne

They are the engineers in the first instance of benefits deaths and the second 2 are the cheerleaders assisting Tory enabling of benefits deaths.
I am however intending voting against the party of which I’m a member for David Crausby , as however toxic the Progress element of Labour, I cant sit back and allow this Tory genocide of our most vulnerable

Because I’m a Green party member and support socialism

Glad I’m not the only one trying to float this boat in a sea of capatalist neo-liberalism. 😀

“Frank Field
David Freud
Rachel Reeves
Liam Byrne
They are the engineers in the first instance of benefits deaths and the second 2 are the cheerleaders assisting Tory enabling of benefits deaths.”

Ta.

There are more Progress Labour elements to be added to the above, but those are the ones that spring to mind for the purpose of the direction at present of this discussion

The disabled should have been protected. Nothing wrong with the principle of assessing fitness to work but it’s a complex issue and the implementation has obviously been dreadful.

Agreed.

Genocide, though? Hyperbole ahoy. Still, fits the narrative that everyone else is like literally Hitler, maaaan.

It’s not been handled in a way that is acceptable, but it’s not genocide.

Like unemployment statistics where it’s politically expedient, the benefits deaths are fudged. The DWP say 61 related, less as a direct result of dwp policy. Callums list conceded 8000, disability services put it above 18000

You say tomato…
I say murdering scum, enabled and voted in by the complicit

Cfh, out of interest, Google,: Mike Sivier , Vox Political, vexatious Foi request…

However you spin it, withdrawal of a benefit is not murder or genocide. By that rationale, all governments pre-welfare state were genocidal. If I get sacked and top myself, my employer did not murder me. Colossal cock-up with grave consequences yes, but I don’t think hyperbole helps your argument.

Colossal cock-up with grave consequences yes,

?

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVltOSC0JMQ[/video]

Airtragic, let’s take the Clapson case. A diabetic on insulin.
What do you think happens when an insulin dependent is sanctioned of entitlement, forced in to starvation, electricity meters can’t be fed, meaning the fridge holding the insulin can no longer, yer know, refrigerate?

Found dead through ketoacidosis with a stack of Cv’s by his body and £3 in the bank he couldn’t withdraw.

That my friend once aid was withdrawn, was inevitable.

Does anyone think we would be discussing this subject if it wasn’t for ulysse’s ‘hyperbole’?

No, it would have been ignored.
Again.