MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Oh I understood from this thread that the government could supply as much money as they want to without raising taxes.
Okay it can spend as much money as it wants to, but - it may need to offset some spending with taxation to control inflation.
The taxation is not used for spending.
Further to this there has to be the resources available to soak up the money.
Local government though operates like a household and spends revenue
Central government doesn't.
Christ I feel for Starmer actually on all this.
Markets plummeting this morning etc and all this racist hooligan behaviour but the biggest issue is the right wing media now jumping in to attack Starmer having taken all these years of right-wing failure which have led here.
This is where Centrism fails - it will be attacked from the craziest as not siding with the working class. Centrism gets manipulated. People are also wrapping the winter fuel allowance into the mix for the discourse on the radio.
Be interesting to see if things level or get worse, but also see how Starmer even begins to sort stuff out.
The right are totally manipulating with what the working class "is" in this situation.
There also sense that we're going to get escalation in the middle-east. I think that's what the markets don't like.
Very difficult times ahead.
Am i reading this right, are you saying ‘centrism’ is the reason for all of these riots and discontent?
No you're being ridiculous. Looking to score points too aren't you?
I'm saying centrism gets attacked from both sides. The right are saying Starmer is too authoritarian - just spend time with all the usual sources. Or listen to callers on the radio. (Starkey and Hitchens with frankly absurd takes.)
Corbyn? That sort of response is frankly pathetic.
Centrism however will not solve many of our problems I am saying that
the right wing media now jumping in to attack Starmer having taken all these years of right-wing failure which have led here.
'RIGHT-WING failure.'
Honestly Argee that was a silly take and you didn't read my post.
So instead of governing towards the centrist mass, Starmer should appease either sides extremists?
So instead of governing towards the centrist mass, Starmer should appease either sides extremists
What on earth are you talking about?
I'm criticising the critics of Starmer in this particular context.
What the hell is a centrist mass?
Lost for words on this particular set up.
I'm saying centrism is ill-equipped to govern and deal with complex issues but I also feel bad that years of discourse created by the 'right' has led to this and this feel empathy for Starmer in such a situation.
You made a statement about the failures of centrism, on a government that have been in power for a month, against discontent that has been years in the making, not just one month, do you think this wouldn't have happened exactly the same as it has if the election was November rather than July?
You've also linked the markets falling, but fail to state that the initiator for this was the Japanese market tumbling due to the fear of a recession, the UK market just opened and felt that pain instantly.
I’m saying centrism gets attacked from both sides. The right are staying Starmer is too authoritarian – just spend time with all the usual sources. Or listen to callers on the radio.
Rone, just dipping in and not trying to get argumentative or anything!
It's certainly a truism that a centrist government can be attacked from both "extremes" but that doesn't invalidate a centrist government or centrist voters surely? Centrist voters, in large part, put this government in power.
To be honest, sorry, epic what's aboutery here, but if Corbyn (someone I voted for twice) was in government today, these riots would still be happening.
If Gandhi, Jesus, Mother Teresa and Lenin were in the cabinet over the last few days it would not have changed a thing imo.
Sorry for hyperbole but just trying to emphasise the point. 🙂
You made a statement about the failures of centrism, on a government that have been in power for a month, against discontent that has been years in the making, not just one month, do you think this wouldn’t have happened exactly the same as it has if the election was November rather than July?
That's a gross misrepresentation.
I said this where Centrism fails in response to all of this. Not what they've done in a month.
I didn't link the markets in any way shape or form other than pointing out it will be part of the landscape of criticism to deal with.
I'm just pointing out that as many of the things around the world start to fall apart many of them being driven by right wing ideology - that centrism is ill-equipped to deal with it and it's bad timing for Starmer.
(Markets started to fall on poor US job hiring figures. Markets across the world are linked you know.)
Rone, just dipping in and not trying to get argumentative or anything!
Interesting that contributors now feel the need to de-escalate before posting a perfectly reasonable point.
To be honest, sorry, epic what’s aboutery here, but if Corbyn (someone I voted for twice) was in government today, these riots would still be happening
Probably - because I'm saying it's years of extreme ideology that creates these problems.
Not the current government.
But I am saying the current government will probably struggle to solve much of the discourse because there's no push back.
I'm not saying the current situation is anything to do with Starmer I'm saying going forward because Labour have adopted many Tory economic ideas - that real solutions are not kicking around.
Austerity creates problems. Etc
Interesting that contributors now feel the need to de-escalate before posting a perfectly reasonable point.
It's just a conversation or debate. None of this will affect my day.
People can say or think what they want.
I'm totally happy reading and responding to whatever is put out there.
fenderextender
Free Member
Rone, just dipping in and not trying to get argumentative or anything!Interesting that contributors now feel the need to de-escalate before posting a perfectly reasonable point.
I'n fairness, Rones never had a pop at me. I just know that tensions are high in the political threads at the moment as, to a degree, it reflects where the UK is at the moment.
I still see all you dastardly lot (whatever you are on the political soectrum) as the good guys! 🙂
We all want better! That's for sure.
rone
Full Member
We all want better! That’s for sure.
Absolutely, 100%.
We might disagree about how to get there but "better" is what we all want.
Probably – because I’m saying it’s years of extreme ideology that creates these problems
I don't think that anything that any 'centrist' govt however described, can counter the effects of the propaganda that folks have been subject to for years now, and TBH I don't think they should try. The folks that are soaked in this stuff only believe/listen to the opinions they want to hear, and most of it is just horse shit that isn't based in reality anyway. The propaganda has no real aims based in normality or resolving real issues, , beyond other than to label political ideas that the far-right disagree with as "the work of your enemies" Its convenient currently to use immigration and refugees, if they weren't there, it'd be something else. I don't think that centrist govt are 'failing' at their attempts to resolve this issue, because if they enacted policies that are likely sensible or sustainable, however you tried to then explain that; the mob would merely be directed to something else.
Its a category error, you can't counter this sort of confected or spasmodic hatred with sensible or directed policies. It doesn't work.
Do you think this guy really wanted and needed Corbyn and a more socialist UK?
And the winner of the gold medal for strawman of the year goes to...
Argee I can see you're looking for a big argument, can I suggest in these polarised times of high tension that you climb down from your parapet and exercise some common sense? I could give a sensible response to your Corbyn hand grenade if you want but I'm not sure I can be arsed as it'll just escalate into more anti-lefty nonsense, probably culminating in funny Monty Python picture.
I don’t think that centrist govt are ‘failing’ at their attempts to resolve this issue, because if they enacted policies that are likely sensible or sustainable, however you tried to then explain that; the mob would merely be directed to something else.
Well there might be less of a reason to be in that particular mob?
My main counter to all of this is austerity creates all sorts of deep rooted problems.
That's not to say this current situation is currently is directly linked to austerity but I absolutely don't believe more of the same economic choices will lead to a better society.
Rotherham is just up the road from me - and the decline of the place has been staggering; economically.
Yes there will always be the mob causing havoc for all sorts of incoherent reasons.
Reasonable working class people who might not be on the riot spectrum from areas like mine get pulled into the mob because they feel the decline of successive governments.
Labour have tried to ride tightrope appeasing the boundaries of this culture with their flags and lack of EU enthusiasm - well that's not going to work either with the looks of things.
Brexit wasn't enough. It will never be enough.
well that’s not going to work either with the looks of things.
Yeah, I agree completely it won't work. I agree that improving the economic outlook for disadvantaged and left behind areas is a priority for any govt and recently (last couple of decades) govts of both stripes have failed in this area.
I agree that improving the economic outlook for disadvantaged and left behind areas is a priority for any govt
This is why I keep banging on about the austerity narrative. All the messaging coming from govt (both labout and tory) is about not being able to spend money, about not having any money, and about not being able to 'raise' money. Labour have inherited a shitshow no doubt, but the tone of their response is all wrong and is targeted at the wrong people - mostly the middle and 'affluent' working class. The result is that in places like Rotheram et al people have no hope that anything is going to get any better so they turn to extremists and need very little encouragement to take to the streets.
It'll get worse too, because in places where there are riots, people will see the lack of an effective response from the police and start organising to defend themselves like they did in Bolton. When that happens we then have the spectre of full-on race riots and estates/communities going to war with each other.
All above for sure.
What worries me is the fringe of all this. People I know - teachers, builders, shop staff etc moderates - all getting drawn into the bile of the racists.
They don't punch up.
It starts with one comment about a polish person killing a swan or nicking a job. Then they link migrants with ruining the economy or NHS instead of looking at the real reasons we're in the mess we're in. (I've heard all these things from people that should know better.)
Unless we fix certain things those people will not link the correct issues.
It's Brexit fuel on steroids. The next level.
It's not really controversial to say that those places that have been involved in all this are pretty deprived. It's never going to help with that backdrop.
On a completely different level these things to seem to kick off when it's summer and hot. Always a bit of a fuse.
And the winner of the gold medal for strawman of the year goes to…
Argee I can see you’re looking for a big argument.....
Okey dokey, i shall just agree with you guys, since this centrist, or centre right labour party has come into power, the country has fallen apart, we have riots on the street because of centrism, and the financial markets are falling due to centrist policies, not the Japanese concern that they may enter a recession.
I shall also not use Saint Jeremy's name in vain again, the best prime minister we never had.
since this centrist, or centre right labour party has come into power, the country has fallen apart, we have riots on the street because of centrism, and the financial markets are falling due to centrist policies, not the Japanese concern that they may enter a recession.
No one has said any of this.
Consider this though on the riots. Had Corbyn won in 2019 we would have seen a much more humanist and compassionate approach towards immigration and asylum rather than the 'it's a necessary evil' narrative we get from everyone else. He would have taken on the racists directly rather than ceding ground to them and would have made the positive case for the contribution immigrants make to this country. Whether that would have prevented all this is debatable, but I reckon it would have at least marginalised Farage and others on the extreme tory right. You'd also have seen a much more engaged and energetic approach to reducing deprivation and social decay in many of these areas which would have starved the EDL of supporters.
Totally agree, but apart from that we all know Corbyn was awful don't we. It is about what is coming out of government and the last 5 years have not been great have they. As you say difficult to prove but having a vocal anti racist and more compassionate person as head would have a better chance than having Johnson, Truss and Sunak.
Had Corbyn won in 2019
Oh goody, in the absence of any actual arguments we're left with misty eyed counter-factualism. That's the blitz spirit right there. Honestly if I was Revves and was being asked why money isn't being spent in Rotherham (poor old Rotherham, I wonder why it's being picked on, its really rather nice) I'd be telling them "You know when you voted in 2016 to leave? Well, it wasn't consequence free."
Consider this though on the riots. Had Corbyn won in 2019 we would have seen a much more humanist and compassionate approach towards immigration and asylum rather than the ‘it’s a necessary evil’ narrative we get from everyone else. He would have taken on the racists directly rather than ceding ground to them and would have made the positive case for the contribution immigrants make to this country. Whether that would have prevented all this is debatable, but I reckon it would have at least marginalised Farage and others on the extreme tory right. You’d also have seen a much more engaged and energetic approach to reducing deprivation and social decay in many of these areas which would have starved the EDL of supporters.
The first half of that paragraph contradicts the second, how exactly would Corbyn being nicer to immigrants and asylum seekers have caused the likes of Farage to be marginalised, are we forgetting that the right wingers we have seen in the news lately exist, and there are more like that around the country, there's millions of them, and it's been a powderkeg for decades, waiting for an excuse, unless Corbyn had some greater plan to remove them, i'm not sure how it would all be rosier now if he'd got in at the 2019 election.
how exactly would Corbyn being nicer to immigrants and asylum seekers have caused the likes of Farage to be marginalised
When the govt demonises immigrants the electorate see it as a bad thing and this cedes ground to the extremists and provides fuel for their hate. That's what has happened over the last 5 years with the tories in power. Farage will always have the support of racists and bigots, but the stuff that's happening now is propped up by a general acceptance in the population that immigration and the expansion of muslim communities is a problem. If we fail to make the positive case for immigration and acknowledge the benefits of it then we allow the bigots to drive the wider narrative and public perception.
What psycho dramas and scandals from the government have I missed then?
I was referring more to the comment about everything being normal and us being able to get on with our lives without having to watch politics 😉
Anyway it was only a joke. No criticism of the govt on this one - apart from maybe a few operational things - they've been left a shitshow and have been very unlucky. Funny though that only a few weeks ago we were celebrating a new era of peace and stability under a 'boring' govt and now look where are. That quote from Harold Macmillan about events has never been more relevant!
Two-child benefit cap is cementing regional poverty, Starmer told
Regarded by experts as the UK’s biggest single driver of child poverty, affecting about 1.6 million children
Will the claim that the cap cementing "regional" poverty be enough to make Starmer/Reeves decide that it is too important for it to wait until March next year before scrapping it?
Or will 1.6 million children still have to wait almost a year after the defeat of a right-wing Tory government before Labour scraps the biggest single driver of child poverty?
More likely it will be announced in the budget in the autumn
the biggest single driver of child poverty?
Surely, the causes are either lack of work, inability to work, or working for poverty pay? All paired with rising costs of living? The benefits system is a fix of sorts for the real drivers of child poverty, and would work better if larger families were offered more help. But “driver”…?
Personally, I’d like to see the government think bigger, and increase child benefit for all children (perhaps keeping an improved version of the system where the highest earners don’t receive it for their kids). Much of this would then go to child care for many anyway.
Also, while the breakfasts at primary schools is a good start, more direct provision and care for children provided by the state is needed… to ensure all children benefit. While it’s true that when in or close to poverty most people will but their children first, those kids in families that don’t work that way need direct help… and providing that help for all means kids are less likely to be missed, or stigmatized. I think Khan is right about school meals.
https://freeschoolmealsforall.org.uk/london
But “driver”…?
That's what the Guardian reckons experts are claiming, biggest single driver in fact. Who am I to argue?
They should have said cause rather than driver but I'd rather be doing anything that goes towards fixing it and it very easy to do was done quickly that discussing what words were used to describe it.
I'd very much like to know where the middle ground gets its optimism from with the idea that Labour are going to to do all this great stuff.
Rachel Reeves has pretty much set the direction she wants to go in.
Reeves said growth first yeah? (Looking grim by the way.)
She's doing what she said she would.
So the idea they they will sort the cap at the budget - great - but where's that coming from?
You guys seem to know things Reeves' has not alluded to.
As for causes and drivers of poverty and inequality - well of course but this is an easy fix which they could have done from day one. Zero excuses.
Bare minimum stuff.
They should have said cause rather than driver but I’d rather be doing anything that goes towards fixing it and it very easy to do was done quickly that discussing what words were used to describe it.
Well exactly - while centrists were trying to be all analytical about what causes what and slipstream around poverty - clearly just reversing this would put state money back into the pockets of a group that needs money and would spend money. Also sends out the correct political signals.
I was told on here that poverty comes from all sorts of places and reasons - apart from the effects of this cap of course. Hmmm. Aged well.
It's about doing something and not dwelling on this ridiculous black-hole garbage.
https://twitter.com/JoMicheII/status/1819371881146781697?t=AprZ5cTwgpGZY8psoJ7QSg&s=19
Osborne described Reeves as a 'mini-me'.
Just to be clear this is NOT right-wing Tory politicians talking about a previous Labour government, although the rhetoric would be presumably identical :
But Reeves warned that she would “look closely at our welfare system, because if someone can work, they should work”.
She said that “welfare spending ballooned” under the last government, while “inactivity has risen sharply in recent years”.
She told MPs: “We will ensure that the welfare system is focused on supporting people into employment, and we will assess the unacceptable levels of fraud and error in our welfare system and take forward action to bring that down.”
Her comments mirrored those by work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall, who suggested last week that she wanted to increase pressure on disabled people to move off benefits and into work, while disregarding risks to their health, and that she wanted the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to move from being “a department for welfare” to becoming “a genuine department for work”.
Presumably this is the change all those Starmer fans were looking forward to.
If you genuinely want to help people to work who cannot work you are going to need to force companies to give the hours and flexible arrangements to enable that. Anything else is just the same old tory shit.
Liz Kendall is reprehensible in her logic.
This sort of talk will come back to hurt Labour for sure.
I cannot for the life of me figure out - now they're elected they feel the need to operate like this.
1) it's failed Tory policy / economic ideas.
2) it's cruel.
3) it's not necessary.
What does concern me if a recession takes hold (and yes recessions are always being called.) but fiscal flows in a America have slowed (the difference between money going into the non-governmental sector and out ) in the USA and data is looking shaky - and the UK follows; will Labour spend or cut their way out?
Million and one scenarios but there is nothing good economically on the horizon that I can see.
Interest rate cuts will drive a bit of growth as the markets get excited but downturns follow big interest rate cycles too as there is less money by way of interest income to buy assets with.
The entire article posted just uses words like suggest, or appears, there is no factual information in there, just Linda Burnip saying the same thing she's said in each government.
Not sure how it would be cruel, or not necessary to do a review on something like this, i would hazard almost everyone on here knows someone on disability who lives an active life, it's making sure that whatever review occurs, does not put pressure on those who are valid cases, like the previous Atos nightmare.
The entire article posted just uses words like suggest, or appears, there is no factual information in there
No it doesn't just do that, read it again. It very clearly quotes extremely senior Labour government ministers, THAT is "factual information"
i would hazard almost everyone on here knows someone on disability who lives an active life
And maybe send those examples to the Daily Mail so that they can demonise the disabled? Workshy ****ers
Not sure how it would be cruel, or not necessary to do a review on something like this, i would hazard almost everyone on here knows someone on disability who lives an active life
You explain to us why it's necessary?
Are even beginning to suggest that the government can save money?
There is no different between this line of logic and the early days of Cameron's government.
I can't believe the defence some folk put up here. Is it beyond the average Labour supporter to know a regressive policy choice when they see one?
No good comes from this.
THAT is “factual information”
It's all the rehashed stuff about the £22 billion and so on, nothing definitive about disability benefits being changed.
And maybe send those examples to the Daily Mail so that they can demonise the disabled? Workshy ****ers
And that's the issue, you don't see any improvements to a system that could have savings that could be moved to benefit those most affected, the uncentered left will just bleat on about binning trident, taxing the rich until the squeak and so on.
And that’s the issue, you don’t see any improvements to a system that could have savings that could be moved to benefit those most affected, the uncentered left will just bleat on about binning trident, taxing the rich until the squeak and so on
Government doesn't save. Fact.
You are ascribing house-budgets to government spending.
If you believe that you tell me how it saves? Because I know of no savings account in the BoE/government interface.
So all that can be left is you are making nonsense regressive political choices to align oneself with conservative policy?
You are ascribing house-budgets to government spending.
No, they aren’t. They are saying spending less on A enables more spending on B without increases in C or D. All this balancing still goes on in government even with the MMT blinkers on. Choosing where to spend more/less doesn’t go away… these choices still need to be made, you can’t address every choice with “just fund everything, to whatever level is required”.
On the opinion piece at the top of the page… for me it all comes down to the difference between genuine help back into work, or just trying to use sanctions to force people into the wrong work. We need more of the former (has costs but also large potential benefits) and less of the later.
for me it all comes down to the difference between genuine help back into work, or just trying to use sanctions to force people into the wrong work.
So you still live in hope that Labour will spend more to help people back to work rather than cut benefits hoping that employers will magically employ people who are more challenging for them to employ (flexibility, accommodations etc,.) than other choices they may have?
for me it all comes down to the difference between genuine help back into work, or just trying to use sanctions to force people into the wrong work. We need more of the former (has costs but also large potential benefits) and less of the later.
This. As someone with a working disabled partner.
So you still live in hope that Labour will spend more to help people back to work rather than cut benefits hoping that employers will magically employ people who are more challenging for them to employ (flexibility, accommodations etc,.) than other choices they may have?
Must be hard living in such a state of constant distrust and pessimism
nothing definitive about disability benefits being changed.
This very much suggests a change. It is claiming that under the previous there were "unacceptable levels of fraud", although they define what an acceptable is.
“We will ensure that the welfare system is focused on supporting people into employment, and we will assess the unacceptable levels of fraud and error in our welfare system and take forward action to bring that down.”
The comment could have come straight out of a Tory politician's mouth. It will have the effect of marginalising, intimidating, and demonising, those who are claiming benefits.
Have you seen the film "I Daniel Blake" ? It focuses on how the Tory government did exactly that. Now it's the turn of a Labour government
"The comment could have come straight out of a Tory politician’s mouth. It will have the effect of marginalising, intimidating, and demonising, those who are claiming benefits."
So because the pepperoni pizza I ordered from Dominos* was shit, I'm not interested in trying the one from Pizza Hut because I refuse to believe they might get it right.
*other suppliers of disappointing pizza are available.
Must be hard living in such a state of constant distrust and pessimism
Nope, I have an incredibly easy life thanks. But that's the point, I don't see why a government with so much shit to sort out would even mention looking at disability benefits, typically those people who haven't had the best start in life/best events happen to them during life.
They seem to be playing at tory hard man to me but guess that is what anyone that voted for them wanted.
So because the pepperoni pizza I ordered from Dominos* was shit, I’m not interested in trying the one from Pizza Hut because I refuse to believe they might get it right.
It depends.
Are Pizza Hut selling the same shit?
Are Pizza Hut selling the same shit?
Have to give them a chance to find out.
I don't think you are listening to what they are telling you. A senior Labour politician is talking about unacceptable levels of benefit fraud, it is straight out of the "How to be a Right-wing Arsehole" manuel.
Only this time instead of it coming very predictably from an incoming Tory government it is coming much less predictably from an incoming Labour government.
They are suggesting that the previous Tory government was too soft on benefit fraud.
That sort of rhetoric is hateful and contributes to the growing hostility which on benefits and with disabilities face.
What is there to wait for before condemning it?
fraud and error
Being overpaid, and then having that overpayment clawed back, has put a lot of people into difficulty. As often caused by administrative cock up as by people over stating their claims.
I don’t think you are listening to what they are telling you. A senior Labour politician is talking about unacceptable levels of benefit fraud, it is straight out of the “How to be a Right-wing Arsehole” manuel.
I can't see where she mentioned benefits fraud, just if people could work, they should be in work, is this another senior labour politician you're on about?
if people could work, they should be in work,
Pretty radical concept.
The problem with this rather terrible argument - is that we are moving the problems of the economy created by successive governments on to the shoulders of people that don't deserve it
And it's clear the Centrists have moved from 'Labour will move left when in power' to accepting every bullshit economic myth that Labour have taken from the Tories.
You wouldn't tolerate this if it came out of a Tory MP's mouth so why Labour?
Astonishing hypocrisy.
This is not change. This is continuation.
(But then we kind of knew it didn't we?)
he problem with this rather terrible argument – is that we are moving the problems of the economy created by successive governments on to the shoulders of people that don’t deserve it
So people who don't work, but could work don't deserve to be treated like this?
You wouldn’t tolerate this if it came out of a Tory MP’s mouth so why Labour?
Why not, i think the entire planet has changed over the last 4 years, we're less chained to desks and more mobile as a workforce, surely this is a huge benefit to a lot of those who couldn't previously work in jobs due to pressures on work timings and locations, as stated earlier, i wouldn't like to see another Atos style attack on the disability benefits, but this one just sounds like common sense.
I can’t see where she mentioned benefits fraud
I know that I probably shouldn't engage but I am fascinated in knowing what you think she meant by "and we will assess the unacceptable levels of fraud and error in our welfare system" ?
So "fraud in our welfare system" isn't benefits fraud?
You wouldn’t tolerate this if it came out of a Tory MP’s mouth so why Labour?
As someone who works in tackling fraud for the government, guess what?
Though what I would do is make sure I checked the exact words and the full context of what was said, and then wait until the actual policy is delivered before passing judgement, rather than going for a kneejerk instant opinion.
Much the same way I check and double check the facts when trying to work out whether the case I'm working is fraud, or error, and whether a penalty is justified.
So people who don’t work, but could work don’t deserve to be treated like this?
benefit fraud is an avsolute pittance compared to the amount that is avoided by complicated tax accounting, but messing with tax issues is far harder than shouting “benefit fraud”, and benief fraud is a very catch tagline for the papers.
tax the ****ers with masses of assets and offshore money
Why not do both, within the abilities of the UK, or is it ok to commit fraud if it's just benefits fraud?
Why not, i think the entire planet has changed over the last 4 years, we’re less chained to desks and more mobile as a workforce, surely this is a huge benefit to a lot of those who couldn’t previously work in jobs due to pressures on work timings and locations, as stated earlier, i wouldn’t like to see another Atos style attack on the disability benefits, but this one just sounds like common sense.
Full throated tory messaging there...
Why not do both, within the abilities of the UK, or is it ok to commit fraud if it’s just benefits fraud?
Because one is rich people doing anything they can to keep the money they don't really need and the other is poor people who can hardly afford to live trying to get an extra few quid.
Both are wrong but where your focus your efforts is very telling.
Why not do both, within the abilities of the UK, or is it ok to commit fraud if it’s just benefits fraud?
Benefit fraud is being dealt with pretty effectively, even draconianly. Tax evasion isn't, so it is a rather strange attempt to deflect from from the lax treatment of tax offenders to say "yeah but look benefits fraud"
Full throated tory messaging there…
So if people can find work that they can do instead of claiming benefits, that would be a tory style idea, and trying to cut down fraud either side is not good, as it should only be aimed at the 'rich' tax evaders, with that type of attitude i'm thankful i'm a fanatical centrist!
The intention to go after wealthy tax evaders and/or avoidance is to claw back the fact they have too much money and take too many resources. There is a real world reason there.
The problem with the benefits cheat argument is apart from it being an old fashioned Tory special is it puts a disproportionate amount of attention on a much maligned group of people. The class the Daily Mail hates.
If any of this is to make savings then it's bogus.
For me it would be easier to say governments - especially the sort that Labour ought to be is to create progressive redistribution from years of inequality.
This would be far better than punishing benefit cheats.
That can only really be done with fiscal policy and not when your ridiculous central bank is pushing policy designed to harm people without capital.
So how about we address the real problems instead of Labour running scared from what is entirely in their remit?
They can organise the economy if they want to and they've absolutely no need to use second-hand Tory mechanisms.
I've no idea how anyone can rage at the Tory landscape disaster era and then simultaneously support Labour's version of it.
It's incredible.
As you are well aware, no one is arguing to "allow" benefit fraud, just that it is currently already being dealt with, often in a way that punishes the poor and vulnerable for cock up in the system. Which is very different to the soft touch pretence of a fight against tax evasion, and that it is a frankly pathetic excuse to keep shouting "benefit fraud" to excuse tax evasion.
i’m thankful i’m a fanatical centrist!
LOL
Why on earth is the failure that is Jonathan Ashworth being given so much airtime?
The man's a noisy class A tool and riding a wave of publicity for nothing. His lack of self-awareness is staggering.
He was up for sending people back during the election. He and Ed Balls make for the most cringe ex-Labour gobshites currently on telly.
How on earth do people manage to wangle the system to claim fraudulent benefits? The number of checks is unreal (and rightly so). DLA you literally have a 30 odd page form to fill out and need proof to support the claim from healthcare professionals.
Universal credit too, the range of checks is wide spreading with follow up appointments to keep the entitlement. Having recently been through this whole process (DLA,UC and carers allowance) for the first time for my wife you wonder how many people are actually fraudulently claiming DLA at least. It is not made anywhere near as easy as presented in the press.
After 14 years of tory rule theres little to nobody left who could be identified as a 'benefit scrounger' The tories hate and i mean hate social security. In their tenure they have implemented policy after policy taking people off benefits.
Exactly. What are the types of fraud, who is getting away with it and how. And how much money is being lost to it.
Why on earth is the failure that is Jonathan Ashworth being given so much airtime?
“Think tanks”, and the media’s reliance on them. Still a problem that needs addressing. Reversing cuts in the number of journalists and researchers (BBC and elsewhere) probably the only answer.
Exactly. What are the types of fraud, who is getting away with it and how. And how much money is being lost to it.
HMRC estimates that it collects 95% of all the tax owed in the UK, but the remaining 5% accounted for about £36bn in lost revenue in 2021-22.
And figures HMRC disclosed to Tax Policy Associates in 2021 revealed that UK taxpayers held £850bn in foreign accounts in 2019, of which £570bn was in tax havens.
The cost of benefit fraud
It is estimated in 2020, £65.2 million of public money was lost through benefit fraud. This figure is made up of:
£18 million – Employment and Support Allowance
£2 million – Jobseeker’s Allowance
£7 million – State Pension Credit
£2 million – Carer’s Allowance
£15 million – Universal Credit
£18 million – Housing Benefit
https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/articles/benefit-fraud-cost-and-results
kerley
Free Member
Exactly. What are the types of fraud, who is getting away with it and how. And how much money is being lost to it.
Statistically it's tiny.
Then compare it to the absolutely industrial sized fraud carried out during Covid that the Tories basically just wrote off.
and the other is poor people who can hardly afford to live trying to get an extra few quid
There is a substantial amount of benefit/tax fraud that is effectively organised crime, lots of low level abuse of the system that amounts to millions/billions. It can also be used as a cover for other more serious illegal activity. It's awful for those genuinely in need who get caught out when we are looking for the bigger fish, and how they are dealt with needs to be more sympathetic.
You've no idea from the outside how hard we try and catch the big tax avoiders. We are genuinely hampered by poorly drafted and stupidly complex legislation creating loopholes for highly paid slippery agents to sneak through, and that needs to stop, maybe the new government will focus on that in the budget.
After 14 years of tory rule theres little to nobody left who could be identified as a ‘benefit scrounger’ The tories hate and i mean hate social security. In their tenure they have implemented policy after policy taking people off benefits.
The Tories love social security when the BoE pays interest income to people with wealth.
We just need to push back against benefit fraud discussion, it's another example of Tory narrative controlling the debate.
Move the discussion to what Rachel Reeves should be doing and what is within her control, that would allow for fiscal expansion. And push back against black-holes. It's all smoke and mirrors
That will totally negate any nominal effects of benefit fraud.
Go after the resource and wealth hoarders for sure.
According to the Telegraph there's a forecast over 9500 millionaires planning to leave over Labour's imaginary tax raid.
Don't know where to start with that.