Forum menu
What they really said was "we're thinking about blocking it, but we'll give you a chance to come up with a better plan yourselves first".
It's enlightening to see what the Labour Party think of what happened in the Lords (and it's worth bearing in mind that Labour abstained on the motion that would have killed the bill):
[img] 
[/img]
- "new claimants are not covered" - so new tax credits claimants will suffer the cuts.
- the cuts will still happen, just to universal credit not tax credits.
- the Labour plan will result in cuts which "probably exceed the very cuts the government demands".
[i]Who started the Tax Credit system? it's been around as long as I can remember, used to be advertised on buses when I was a kid! although it wasn't originally called Tax Credits was it? [/i]
http://www.revenuebenefits.org.uk/tax-credits/policy/research/where-it-all-started/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_tax_credit
Worlds most complicated system, and works on a simple principle that you'll earn the same each week...
Bencooper, so it depends on the differences between universal credit and tax credits as to who gets what cut?
In the meantime, Osborne has to rework ( to try and not make this his 'poll tax miment') it anyway so it won't go through in this manner at all
So I supply labour for which I receive a wage and I have no innate right to that - what kind of world it that?
You don't have an innate right to keep all of it. You have to give back some to maintain the environment in which you "earned" and spend that money. Alternative systems have been tried - Somalia is the example usually quoted.
well that's progress...
@ br - Like the dole it has gone through name changes with successive governments! It's been around a lot longer than the 2002/03 name change. The adverts I remember where in the 80's no where near 2002, like I said it had a different title then but was effectively the same, a government subsidy to low paid working families who earn't under an income threshold.
Not sure it was as "radically different" as the link article suggests, possibly less widespread though.
So I supply labour for which I receive a wage and I have no innate right to that - what kind of world it that?
Your labour earns you some money and the government some money.
I thought you were an economist?
So I supply labour for which I receive a wage and I have no innate right to that - what kind of world it that?
A very fair one. You are only able to supply your labour taking advantage of all the institutions and facilities which provide the framework you rely upon, eg Education, roads, police, a legal system which you might end up using to enforce a contract.
Whilst you live in the UK you are bound by UK laws and taxes to pay for all the facilities used.
To think otherwise is just being childish....
I am mol - two separate things though. Not a great idea to confuse.
Google - "circular flow of income"
To what end?
Circular flow doesn't have an end
😀
The Tories are distraught that their PM has been held to account lying multiple times to the electorate about protecting tax credits
...and today Osborne (in Peston interview on r4) is still peddling the excuse that the electorate know the direction he is heading in so what do they expect. (And the answer is still that most people vote for their own financial interests, and the hard working families that voted conservative last time were fed a lie on tax credits which they took and voted on in good faith).
He also repeated himself a lot in that interview just as he did last night with the 'unelected upper house' sentence. Really, for such a clever man he should realise how coached and two-dimensional he (along with a few others eg Milliband) sounds when he is briefed by someone else just before an interview and all he can do is drop a coupe of t's and aitches and repeat the key points verbatim over and over.
Osborne's obviously flustered, he will look bad whichever way it plays out
He seems to still be pressing ahead with cuts to the lowest paid workers , while keeping tax cuts for inheritance and corporations, even the poor dupes they mugged at the election are twigging that he's out to only look after his own atnthe expense of the plebs
Add to that, Tory rumblings over reforming the HOL, (despite blowing their chance last term) and threats to flood the lords with Tory peers, all of a sudden Borris is piping up as a champion of the poor and his own leadership hopes all of sudden waxing as Gideon's wane
I thought David Davis spoke well on the subject on R4 this morning. Speaking against proposal to stuff the HoL with Tory peers, and also attacking the unfairness of the tax credit cuts.
So Austerity George drops the whole idea!
More borrowing instead...
Cue, some unhappy teachers - good job education isn't important, eh? 😯
£22Bn in efficiency savings for NHS. Good luck with that.
My colleague is rather happy his Tax Credits aren't to be cut.
He really needs them with his family being on the poverty line - it's bloody hard managing with a new car, new house, couple of holidays a year, every games console going, etc., etc.,
His wife works part time, and has a side-line job which I'm sure she declares to HMRC. 😉
not a bad budget overall:
- a lot more cash for the NHS
- additional £1/2 Bn ringfenced for mental health
- more hammering of buy to lets to reduce foreign buyers
- no cuts to the police budget
- on housing, more help to buy (demand side) and help for builders with release of public land and working capital (supply side)
- and we still have the living wage and now no changes to tax credit so no-one's worse off
The look on Andy Burnham's face was priceless when no cut to the police budget was announced - he'd said he would be "comfortable" with a cut up to 10%!
- and we still have the living wage and now no changes to tax credit so no-one's worse off
Why is the "National Living Wage" significantly lower than the living wage?
So Austerity George drops the whole idea!
More borrowing instead...
Isn't it being paid for with Apprenticeship Levy and increased forecast revenue?
- on housing, more help to buy (demand side) and help for builders with release of public land and working capital (supply side)
Yes - more affordable houses for poor people and first time buyers.
Oh ...
Hang on a mo ...
Osbornes gone all Corbynomical !