The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
These changes will lead to major behavioural change.
For starters they will encourage couples on low to middle incomes to stay together - because they will know that if they split the huge subsidy for single parents with children will no longer be so generous.
That's an interesting point I hadn't considered before.
Might even also ease pressure on housing, although a lot the most egregious benefit fraud cases are those where a 'single' mother moves in with a man but doesn't declare this to the authorities.
@JoshMay_PH: Stop the War's Lindsay German gets a big cheers as she tells Labour MPs: "Agree with Jeremy or shut up" #Peoplespost #newpolitics
That simply cannot be right. I'm sure Nick Palmer told us that Jeremy was the collegiate sort of chap willing to have a debate and not impose his views. I didn't dream that, did I?
Why waste your time reading anything he posts? After the nonsense posted at the GE, and since, assume it's a fib, and move on to something more interesting.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
Nick - you have to be admired for desperately hanging on to the sinking ship that is or was the labour party
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
To be fair, there's probably a large number of people involved in peaceful protest, and that's only right in a democracy.
There is however a huge difference between waving placards and shouting slogans, and the egging, spitting, swearing and misogyny that we've seen in Manchester in the last couple of days.
The problem for Labour is that it was clear a week ago that the nutters would all turn up, and the Leader of the Opposition should really not want to associate himself with these idiots. That he does reflects badly on both him and his party, however he tries to spin it.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Actually you've got this completely backwards. Yes the Poverty Trap of tax + NI + loss of welfare exists. However under Gordon Brown tax kicked in from ~£5k pa and continued through to the loss of tax credits in potentially the high 20k pa. This meant that for a wide range of incomes it was not worth working extra hours or earning more, 16 hours wages per week was seen as a cap by many.
Under Osborne that trap has been dramatically tackled. On the lower end the elimination of Income Tax for low incomes has removed that disincentive while at the higher end the reforms to tax credits and increase to the Living Wage has lowered the upper rate end point at which this is no longer an issue.
It is better for people not to be on any tax credits at all as if they are not on tax credits then for every £1 extra they earn they keep 68% of it whereas if they're on tax credits then they only keep 20p per pound.
Tax credits are a burden on the poor that traps them into poverty.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
These changes will lead to major behavioural change.
For starters they will encourage couples on low to middle incomes to stay together - because they will know that if they split the huge subsidy for single parents with children will no longer be so generous.
That's an interesting point I hadn't considered before.
Might even also ease pressure on housing, although a lot the most egregious benefit fraud cases are those where a 'single' mother moves in with a man but doesn't declare this to the authorities.
I think no Conservative politician dare says this because it would be politically incorrect.
What it boils down to is that up to now people with children can happily split up knowing that there is a colossal subsidy for any single earner with children. In future that subsidy comes down - and down significantly.
Everyone on the TV goes on about tax credits subsidising low pay but they don't - anyone on just £15k without children doesn't get them anyway (before changes).
And if there are two parents together and they both work on £16,500 each then even with 2 children they get nothing (before the changes - that falls to £14,500 each post changes).
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
This year according to the calculator such a family would get £1617.85 so I do not see how that is possible. Next year they will be paying less tax and probably have higher wages.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
Yes this is the right thing to do as it will free people from the burden of tax credits putting them on an 80% tax rate. Why would you want people burdened with an 80% tax rate?
As for corporation tax, the sort of economist that understands basic principles such as the Laffer Curve, Investment and international competition is the sort that lowers tax rates to raise more growth and more revenue.
The sort of person that knows what they're doing in other words.
O/T Ominous reports if true. Russia offered base in Iraq. China to use carrier to attack Syria targets. Would give link but web site said to be risky if accessed.
I've seen that reported elsewhere as well.
The most interesting bit for me is the carrier: if the Chinese have managed to get both aircraft, crew and ship ready to perform high-tempo operations then it'll be a massively impressive and significant effort. They only did their first touch-and-go landing on the Lianoing two or three years ago.
It's hard to know what good the Lianoing would do in theatre without the capability to perform high-tempo operations.
You can call it a practice drill, to see how they can do in a real combat situation.
(snip)
I might be wrong, but I'm sceptical about it being there for several reasons:
*) I doubt China are up to speed with operations (although they might have been keeping a great deal secret) *) Using it in operations would allow other nations to learn a great deal about their capabilities (although they might want to send the message they have those capabilities). *) It's risky. *) Why do China want to get involved militarily in Syria?
They may have sent it as a sign of strength (fly the flag), deliver supplies and manpower, and perhaps fly a few planes off to little effect. If it's actually there.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
In the last 5 years they've been a grand better off due to the personal allowance increase, and the minimum wage has also increased beyond inflation. Why have you chosen £16,380 as an example? I suspect that's a specific number where the effect of the changes is maximised rather than a typical example of a single parent working. If they are earning that much they are probably working full time, in which case the child day care increases are not factored in either.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
These changes will lead to major behavioural change.
For starters they will encourage couples on low to middle incomes to stay together - because they will know that if they split the huge subsidy for single parents with children will no longer be so generous.
That's an interesting point I hadn't considered before.
Might even also ease pressure on housing, although a lot the most egregious benefit fraud cases are those where a 'single' mother moves in with a man but doesn't declare this to the authorities.
I think no Conservative politician dare says this because it would be politically incorrect.
What it boils down to is that up to now people with children can happily split up knowing that there is a colossal subsidy for any single earner with children. In future that subsidy comes down - and down significantly.
Everyone on the TV goes on about tax credits subsidising low pay but they don't - anyone on just £15k without children doesn't get them anyway (before changes).
And if there are two parents together and they both work on £16,500 each then even with 2 children they get nothing (before the changes - that falls to £14,500 each post changes).
Tax credits were introduced by Brown as a means of targeting money to poor households in an effort to improve the life chances of children...and yes, they have become a trap and yes, they need to be reformed. But to slash them like this will do a great deal of harm to a lot of families...Tory ministers accept that it is politically damaging which is why they lied about the cuts before the election.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
Evidence of the past five years has shown that cutting corporation tax increases the take - Arthur Laffer's theory in action. The more it's cut, the more companies will base themselves in the UK and pay tax here, and the less tax avoidance they will engage in.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
These changes will lead to major behavioural change.
For starters they will encourage couples on low to middle incomes to stay together - because they will know that if they split the huge subsidy for single parents with children will no longer be so generous.
That's an interesting point I hadn't considered before.
Might even also ease pressure on housing, although a lot the most egregious benefit fraud cases are those where a 'single' mother moves in with a man but doesn't declare this to the authorities.
I think no Conservative politician dare says this because it would be politically incorrect.
What it boils down to is that up to now people with children can happily split up knowing that there is a colossal subsidy for any single earner with children. In future that subsidy comes down - and down significantly.
Everyone on the TV goes on about tax credits subsidising low pay but they don't - anyone on just £15k without children doesn't get them anyway (before changes).
And if there are two parents together and they both work on £16,500 each then even with 2 children they get nothing (before the changes - that falls to £14,500 each post changes).
Tax credits were introduced by Brown as a means of targeting money to poor households in an effort to improve the life chances of children...and yes, they have become a trap and yes, they need to be reformed. But to slash them like this will do a great deal of harm to a lot of families...Tory ministers accept that it is politically damaging which is why they lied about the cuts before the election.
Not as much harm as trapping people on an 80% tax rate. You may think that is "generous" I do not.
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
Nick, have you been in Manchester this week? It's a really horrible atmosphere. Chief Superintendent John O'Hare is being disingenuous. There've been conferences here every year since 2007, I think - TUC, Labour and Conservative - and the atmosphere has in the past always been good. You always get protesters of various sorts, but they're normally focused on a single issue and simply taking the opportunity to raise the profile of their chosen cause. All very laudable and adds to the atmosphere. But this year the area outside the conference is dominated by really horrible people yelling unspeakable abuse and threatening and in some cases carrying out actual violence. There may, technically be a majority who are not carrying out actual crimes, but the air is thick with menace. A man dressed as a crusty from the 1990s pushed in front of me in the lunchtime queue in Sainsbury's at lunchtime today, holding a bottle of wine*. After suspiciously and belligerently checking I wasn't here for the conference, he proudly told me he'd been in the cells until 4 this morning for "tw*tting a Tory - I just couldn't help myself - the police arrested me but they were laughing about it". I didn't really want to get into a political conversation with someone who was clearly violent and intending on drunkenness even if he hadn't yet achieved it, so just sort of stared through him until it was time to buy my sandwich. But heading up Peter Street there were many more like him.
It's a really horrible atmosphere. It makes me very angry, not only because the intimidation is so bloody anti-democratic but also because I like the party conferences, and having them is good for the economy of the city. And these ignorant fuckers are trying to drive them away.
They may be a minority. But they are not a tiny one, and the trouble they are causing is real and unprecedented.
*I didn't look at his choice too closely, and I may be wrong about it being wine; still, this particularly detail is slightly incongruous.
O/T Ominous reports if true. Russia offered base in Iraq. China to use carrier to attack Syria targets. Would give link but web site said to be risky if accessed.
I've seen that reported elsewhere as well.
The most interesting bit for me is the carrier: if the Chinese have managed to get both aircraft, crew and ship ready to perform high-tempo operations then it'll be a massively impressive and significant effort. They only did their first touch-and-go landing on the Lianoing two or three years ago.
It's hard to know what good the Lianoing would do in theatre without the capability to perform high-tempo operations.
You can call it a practice drill, to see how they can do in a real combat situation.
(snip)
I might be wrong, but I'm sceptical about it being there for several reasons:
*) I doubt China are up to speed with operations (although they might have been keeping a great deal secret) *) Using it in operations would allow other nations to learn a great deal about their capabilities (although they might want to send the message they have those capabilities). *) It's risky. *) Why do China want to get involved militarily in Syria?
They may have sent it as a sign of strength (fly the flag), deliver supplies and manpower, and perhaps fly a few planes off to little effect. If it's actually there.
I think it's more of a fly the flag type of thing, since all the other great powers are involved in Syria why not China?
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
To be fair, there's probably a large number of people involved in peaceful protest, and that's only right in a democracy.
There is however a huge difference between waving placards and shouting slogans, and the egging, spitting, swearing and misogyny that we've seen in Manchester in the last couple of days.
The problem for Labour is that it was clear a week ago that the nutters would all turn up, and the Leader of the Opposition should really not want to associate himself with these idiots. That he does reflects badly on both him and his party, however he tries to spin it.
The police standing off is one thing, but where are the protest stewards when the throwing and spitting is taking place?
I suspect that there are plenty of photos and then a few early morning raids.
O/T Ominous reports if true. Russia offered base in Iraq. China to use carrier to attack Syria targets. Would give link but web site said to be risky if accessed.
I've seen that reported elsewhere as well.
The most interesting bit for me is the carrier: if the Chinese have managed to get both aircraft, crew and ship ready to perform high-tempo operations then it'll be a massively impressive and significant effort. They only did their first touch-and-go landing on the Lianoing two or three years ago.
It's hard to know what good the Lianoing would do in theatre without the capability to perform high-tempo operations.
You can call it a practice drill, to see how they can do in a real combat situation.
(snip)
I might be wrong, but I'm sceptical about it being there for several reasons:
*) I doubt China are up to speed with operations (although they might have been keeping a great deal secret) *) Using it in operations would allow other nations to learn a great deal about their capabilities (although they might want to send the message they have those capabilities). *) It's risky. *) Why do China want to get involved militarily in Syria?
They may have sent it as a sign of strength (fly the flag), deliver supplies and manpower, and perhaps fly a few planes off to little effect. If it's actually there.
I think it's more of a fly the flag type of thing, since all the other great powers are involved in Syria why not China?
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
Evidence of the past five years has shown that cutting corporation tax increases the take - Arthur Laffer's theory in action. The more it's cut, the more companies will base themselves in the UK and pay tax here, and the less tax avoidance they will engage in.
Haha...and you believe that? So you think Vodaphone and Boots and Starbucks will grow a social conscence and start paying UK tax. How do you explain the £140,000 inheritance cuts
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Yes, incentive to work more.
If I thought you actually believed that then I would think you were pretty sad...
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
O/T Ominous reports if true. Russia offered base in Iraq. China to use carrier to attack Syria targets. Would give link but web site said to be risky if accessed.
I've seen that reported elsewhere as well.
The most interesting bit for me is the carrier: if the Chinese have managed to get both aircraft, crew and ship ready to perform high-tempo operations then it'll be a massively impressive and significant effort. They only did their first touch-and-go landing on the Lianoing two or three years ago.
It's hard to know what good the Lianoing would do in theatre without the capability to perform high-tempo operations.
You can call it a practice drill, to see how they can do in a real combat situation.
(snip)
I might be wrong, but I'm sceptical about it being there for several reasons:
*) I doubt China are up to speed with operations (although they might have been keeping a great deal secret) *) Using it in operations would allow other nations to learn a great deal about their capabilities (although they might want to send the message they have those capabilities). *) It's risky. *) Why do China want to get involved militarily in Syria?
They may have sent it as a sign of strength (fly the flag), deliver supplies and manpower, and perhaps fly a few planes off to little effect. If it's actually there.
I think it's more of a fly the flag type of thing, since all the other great powers are involved in Syria why not China?
Like the Belgians in Africa I suppose.
More of a matter of prestige that about actual impact, and to see if they can do it. The chinese are busy building their bases in Djibouti at the moment to control the sea lanes off the Red Sea, Syria is far from any major trade routes so China has no specific commercial interest apart from the stability in the wider region.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
Evidence of the past five years has shown that cutting corporation tax increases the take - Arthur Laffer's theory in action. The more it's cut, the more companies will base themselves in the UK and pay tax here, and the less tax avoidance they will engage in.
Haha...and you believe that? So you think Vodaphone and Boots and Starbucks will grow a social conscence and start paying UK tax. How do you explain the £140,000 inheritance cuts
The OECD have ruled on this today - re inheritance - its aspirational - something labour doesn't comprehend but people do
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
Evidence of the past five years has shown that cutting corporation tax increases the take - Arthur Laffer's theory in action. The more it's cut, the more companies will base themselves in the UK and pay tax here, and the less tax avoidance they will engage in.
Haha...and you believe that? So you think Vodaphone and Boots and Starbucks will grow a social conscence and start paying UK tax. How do you explain the £140,000 inheritance cuts
Yes, these companies pay all the taxes they need to here, including employer NI and income tax on their staff. If you think the EU Single Market regulations should be reformed so that they're based in the UK rather than Luxembourg or Ireland - or that the UK should leave the EU altogether - then please feel free to do so and I will support you 100%. This is why the Corp Tax cuts are yielding extra revenue.
Since you raise it, IHT is the single most egregious tax that there is - do you not want to leave what you have worked hard your whole life for, to your children?
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
Haha...and you believe that? So you think Vodaphone and Boots and Starbucks will grow a social conscence and start paying UK tax. How do you explain the £140,000 inheritance cuts
If you can explain very, very carefully in what sense Vodafone, Boots and Starbucks are not paying UK tax, I would be very, very interested. But you'd have to explain very, very carefully. (Show your working, or cite your sources. "They're dodgy and everyone knows it" doesn't count.)
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
To be fair, there's probably a large number of people involved in peaceful protest, and that's only right in a democracy.
There is however a huge difference between waving placards and shouting slogans, and the egging, spitting, swearing and misogyny that we've seen in Manchester in the last couple of days.
The problem for Labour is that it was clear a week ago that the nutters would all turn up, and the Leader of the Opposition should really not want to associate himself with these idiots. That he does reflects badly on both him and his party, however he tries to spin it.
The police standing off is one thing, but where are the protest stewards when the throwing and spitting is taking place?
I suspect that there are plenty of photos and then a few early morning raids.
I wouldn't expect too much. GMP are loving it. Loads of overtime and they get to have a good laugh.
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
Nick, have you been in Manchester this week? It's a really horrible atmosphere. Chief Superintendent John O'Hare is being disingenuous. There've been conferences here every year since 2007, I think - TUC, Labour and Conservative - and the atmosphere has in the past always been good. You always get protesters of various sorts, but they're normally focused on a single issue and simply taking the opportunity to raise the profile of their chosen cause. All very laudable and adds to the atmosphere. But this year the area outside the conference is dominated by really horrible people yelling unspeakable abuse and threatening and in some cases carrying out actual violence. There may, technically be a majority who are not carrying out actual crimes, but the air is thick with menace. A man dressed as a crusty from the 1990s pushed in front of me in the lunchtime queue in Sainsbury's at lunchtime today, holding a bottle of wine*. After suspiciously and belligerently checking I wasn't here for the conference, he proudly told me he'd been in the cells until 4 this morning for "tw*tting a Tory - I just couldn't help myself - the police arrested me but they were laughing about it". I didn't really want to get into a political conversation with someone who was clearly violent and intending on drunkenness even if he hadn't yet achieved it, so just sort of stared through him until it was time to buy my sandwich. But heading up Peter Street there were many more like him.
It's a really horrible atmosphere. It makes me very angry, not only because the intimidation is so bloody anti-democratic but also because I like the party conferences, and having them is good for the economy of the city. And these ignorant fuckers are trying to drive them away.
They may be a minority. But they are not a tiny one, and the trouble they are causing is real and unprecedented.
*I didn't look at his choice too closely, and I may be wrong about it being wine; still, this particularly detail is slightly incongruous.
There are two four-letter words that will make aggressive protestors recoil.
There will be an initial rush of support for him like all candidates who enter the race, but the first democratic party debate is next Tuesday (that's why there is so much talk of him announcing this weekend) , if he performs badly he won't have the chance to have an initial rush.
Anyway he has until Nov.27th which is the filing deadline for N.H. , realistically the last day, since most states have filling deadlines before the end of this year. If he doesn't file for N.H. then he might be willing to wait until after the primary there but it would be to late to file in many states by then. The ship would have sailed.
Nick, have you been in Manchester this week? It's a really horrible atmosphere. Chief Superintendent John O'Hare is being disingenuous. There've been conferences here every year since 2007, I think - TUC, Labour and Conservative - and the atmosphere has in the past always been good. You always get protesters of various sorts, but they're normally focused on a single issue and simply taking the opportunity to raise the profile of their chosen cause. All very laudable and adds to the atmosphere. But this year the area outside the conference is dominated by really horrible people yelling unspeakable abuse and threatening and in some cases carrying out actual violence. There may, technically be a majority who are not carrying out actual crimes, but the air is thick with menace. A man dressed as a crusty from the 1990s pushed in front of me in the lunchtime queue in Sainsbury's at lunchtime today, holding a bottle of wine*. After suspiciously and belligerently checking I wasn't here for the conference, he proudly told me he'd been in the cells until 4 this morning for "tw*tting a Tory - I just couldn't help myself - the police arrested me but they were laughing about it". I didn't really want to get into a political conversation with someone who was clearly violent and intending on drunkenness even if he hadn't yet achieved it, so just sort of stared through him until it was time to buy my sandwich. But heading up Peter Street there were many more like him.
It's a really horrible atmosphere. It makes me very angry, not only because the intimidation is so bloody anti-democratic but also because I like the party conferences, and having them is good for the economy of the city. And these ignorant fuckers are trying to drive them away.
They may be a minority. But they are not a tiny one, and the trouble they are causing is real and unprecedented.
*I didn't look at his choice too closely, and I may be wrong about it being wine; still, this particularly detail is slightly incongruous.
There are two four-letter words that will make aggressive protestors recoil.
One is Soap. The other is Work.
If they're messing around in Manchester, they're not available for work.
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
It's a really horrible atmosphere. It makes me very angry, not only because the intimidation is so bloody anti-democratic but also because I like the party conferences, and having them is good for the economy of the city. And these ignorant fuckers are trying to drive them away.
They may be a minority. But they are not a tiny one, and the trouble they are causing is real and unprecedented.
*I didn't look at his choice too closely, and I may be wrong about it being wine; still, this particularly detail is slightly incongruous.
There are two four-letter words that will make aggressive protestors recoil.
One is Soap. The other is Work.
When did this Soap and Work thing catch on as a reaction against any protesters?
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
It will go under 4m soon.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
Evidence of the past five years has shown that cutting corporation tax increases the take - Arthur Laffer's theory in action. The more it's cut, the more companies will base themselves in the UK and pay tax here, and the less tax avoidance they will engage in.
Haha...and you believe that? So you think Vodaphone and Boots and Starbucks will grow a social conscence and start paying UK tax. How do you explain the £140,000 inheritance cuts
Yes, these companies pay all the taxes they need to here, including employer NI and income tax on their staff. If you think the EU Single Market regulations should be reformed so that they're based in the UK rather than Luxembourg or Ireland - or that the UK should leave the EU altogether - then please feel free to do so and I will support you 100%. This is why the Corp Tax cuts are yielding extra revenue.
Since you raise it, IHT is the single most egregious tax that there is - do you not want to leave what you have worked hard your whole life for, to your children?
The problem with Inheritance Tax is precisely the opposite...the value of the family home has almost certainly not been achieved through hard work, instead it is the result of the parents being the beneficiaries of an extraordinary boom in property prices. Nothing to do with hard work because a feckless individual who spent their entire life living off the state in a home purchased by their family and who saved not a single penny, would have benefited financially by EXACTLY the same as those who had "worked hard".
There will be an initial rush of support for him like all candidates who enter the race, but the first democratic party debate is next Tuesday (that's why there is so much talk of him announcing this weekend) , if he performs badly he won't have the chance to have an initial rush.
Anyway he has until Nov.27th which is the filing deadline for N.H. , realistically the last day, since most states have filling deadlines before the end of this year. If he doesn't file for N.H. then he might be willing to wait until after the primary there but it would be to late to file in many states by then. The ship would have sailed.
By NH, Trump could have won Iowa and NH and Hillary won Iowa but lost NH to Sanders, that would be an ideal scenario for a Biden candidacy, although as you say he would have missed the filing date for some primaries. We shall see. Hillary is a tough cookie though and she would fancy her chances against Trump and is ruthless enough to dispatch both Biden and Sanders
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
T
Since you raise it, IHT is the single most egregious tax that there is - do you not want to leave what you have worked hard your whole life for, to your children?
The problem with Inheritance Tax is precisely the opposite...the value of the family home has almost certainly not been achieved through hard work, instead it is the result of the parents being the beneficiaries of an extraordinary boom in property prices. Nothing to do with hard work because a feckless individual who spent their entire life living off the state in a home purchased by their family would have benefited financially by EXACTLY the same as those who "worked hard".
The problem with Inheritance Tax is precisely the opposite...the value of the family home has almost certainly not been achieved through hard work, instead it is the result of the parents being the beneficiaries of an extraordinary boom in property prices. Nothing to do with hard work because a feckless individual who spent their entire life living off the state in a home purchased by their family would have benefited financially by EXACTLY the same as those who "worked hard".
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
?
.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
That is bollocks. It is assuming the entitlement this year is £3211. That is nonsense. Unless they are assuming disability or something weird. Check the HMRC calculator yourself. And be more cautious in claiming others don't know what they are talking about.
There will be an initial rush of support for him like all candidates who enter the race, but the first democratic party debate is next Tuesday (that's why there is so much talk of him announcing this weekend) , if he performs badly he won't have the chance to have an initial rush.
Anyway he has until Nov.27th which is the filing deadline for N.H. , realistically the last day, since most states have filling deadlines before the end of this year. If he doesn't file for N.H. then he might be willing to wait until after the primary there but it would be to late to file in many states by then. The ship would have sailed.
By NH, Trump could have won Iowa and NH and Hillary won Iowa but lost NH to Sanders, that would be an ideal scenario for a Biden candidacy, although as you say he would have missed the filing date for some primaries. We shall see. Hillary is a tough cookie though and she would fancy her chances against Trump and is ruthless enough to dispatch both Biden and Sanders
Not some primaries, most of them. He would not have the chance to get near enough delegates even if he won every primary that had filling deadlines after the N.H. primary had finished. Realistically it's either till Nov.27th or bust for Biden.
The problems for Biden is that: 1. He will be seen as a continuity candidate for a president that is not so popular 2. He has done some shady dealings, like having his son hired on the board of an ukrainian state energy company just after his visit to Ukraine.
@hopisen: So well done people being nasty at Tory conf. You're creating sympathy for Tories _and_ you're worse people than red trouser hunting wankers
This is the classic example of someone on the moderate left trying to separate themselves from the extremists, but at the same time indulging the class hatred that caused them to prosper.
There will be an initial rush of support for him like all candidates who enter the race, but the first democratic party debate is next Tuesday (that's why there is so much talk of him announcing this weekend) , if he performs badly he won't have the chance to have an initial rush.
Anyway he has until Nov.27th which is the filing deadline for N.H. , realistically the last day, since most states have filling deadlines before the end of this year. If he doesn't file for N.H. then he might be willing to wait until after the primary there but it would be to late to file in many states by then. The ship would have sailed.
By NH, Trump could have won Iowa and NH and Hillary won Iowa but lost NH to Sanders, that would be an ideal scenario for a Biden candidacy, although as you say he would have missed the filing date for some primaries. We shall see. Hillary is a tough cookie though and she would fancy her chances against Trump and is ruthless enough to dispatch both Biden and Sanders
Not some primaries, most of them. He would not have the chance to get near enough delegates even if he won every primary that had filling deadlines after the N.H. primary had finished. Realistically it's either till Nov.27th or bust for Biden.
The problems for Biden is that: 1. He will be seen as a continuity candidate for a president that is not so popular 2. He has some done shady dealings, like having his son hired on the board of an ukranian state energy company just after his visit to Ukraine.
That depends if Sanders' delegates switched to Biden at the convention. Your points are sound, but at the moment Biden does better than Sanders and Hillary against the GOP. We will see and this is only a recent development, before Hillary did best and she is also a tougher campaigner
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
Not sure where your numbers come from - a single parent earning £16,380 gets far, far, far more than £1,617 of tax credits.
The Telegraph calculator says they get £4,021 (before changes). Plus of course £1,076 child benefit as well.
The size of tax credits is truly eye watering - which is of course the problem.
The problem with Inheritance Tax is precisely the opposite...the value of the family home has almost certainly not been achieved through hard work, instead it is the result of the parents being the beneficiaries of an extraordinary boom in property prices. Nothing to do with hard work because a feckless individual who spent their entire life living off the state in a home purchased by their family would have benefited financially by EXACTLY the same as those who "worked hard".
How much of the money I earn do you think it appropriate that I be allowed to keep?
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
That is bollocks. It is assuming the entitlement this year is £3211. That is nonsense. Unless they are assuming disability or something weird. Check the HMRC calculator yourself. And be more cautious in claiming others don't know what they are talking about.
You're wrong.. Maximum Tax credits in both years are £8,105; Excess income is £9960 in 15/16 and £12,530 in 16/17. Reduction due to income is £4084 in 15/16 (9960 x 41%) and £6014 in 16/17 (£12530 x 48%) Final award in 16/17 is £4021 and in 16/17 £2091
"That is bollocks. It is assuming the entitlement this year is £3211. That is nonsense. Unless they are assuming disability or something weird. Check the HMRC calculator yourself. And be more cautious in claiming others don't know what they are talking about."
You're wrong ..Maximum Tax credits in both years are £8,105; Excess income is £9960 in 15/16 and £12,530 in 16/17. Reduction due to income is £4084 in 15/16 (9960 x 41%) and £6014 in 16/17 (£12530 x 48%) Final award in 16/17 is £4021 and in 16/17 £2091
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
Nick, have you been in Manchester this week?
What you say sounds vile. I'm up there on a non-partisan visit tomorrow and will get an impression directly.
The problem with Inheritance Tax is precisely the opposite...the value of the family home has almost certainly not been achieved through hard work, instead it is the result of the parents being the beneficiaries of an extraordinary boom in property prices. Nothing to do with hard work because a feckless individual who spent their entire life living off the state in a home purchased by their family would have benefited financially by EXACTLY the same as those who "worked hard".
How much of the money I earn do you think it appropriate that I be allowed to keep?
Would we not first have to establish if it is possible for anyone to 'earn' more than a certain amount, regardless of whether they are remunerated beyond that? I believe that is part of how the thinking goes.
@bbclaurak: Ouch! Boris will attack govt plans to cut tax credits tmrw saying poorest and hardest working must be protected
Someone's spoiling the mood. Naughty Boris.
A desperate throw of the dice from someone who's realised his chances of leading are becoming ever more remote. Still, playing silly beggars won't go down well with many in his party. Johnson reminds me of Farage for some reason.
I'm not sure Osborne is the right guiy for that job. Decent at No.11 but something doesn't quite fit.
Meanwhile, in Syria, Russian forces now number about 3500. Most are services troops but there is a decent contingent of fighting forces and most notably a very well balanced set of helicopters for air assault operations.
Much more significant though is the due presence of an anti aircraft vessel equipped with the rumoured very capable (even though they are largely not combat tested) S300 long range anti aircraft missiles. If that thing parks up off Tartus it creates an air screen that heavily restricts other countries freedom of operation for fear of an accident. In short, you have to either a) talk to the Russians and manage air movements with them (which no-one wants to do) or b) ignore it and tell the Russians if they open fire their cruiser will disappear in a puff of smoke.
No doubt the West will pick the former and Putin, yet again, bluffs his way to making countries far more powerful look useless.
This vessels potential presence serves a particular issue for the Royal Air Force who fly east (often over Israel)on their way to Iraq from Cyprus.
There are two jokers in the pack. One is the response of the Gulf states who so far, under US pressure haven't supplied decent MANPADS to Syrian insurgents. Its a blindingly obvious way to cause the Russians pain and given there is renewed talk of Jihad going on down in Riyadh, its under consideration.
The second is Israel who have a singular approach of protecting their own security. They do have surprises for the situation, if they have to act. Militarily Russia's ability to carry out true expeditionary warfare, i.e not just driving over from their own border is very limited so there is little doubt the Israelis would have few issues imposing their will on the situation if required. The Russian's know this and whilst stepping up to a few lines, are reportedly coy about stepping over it.
"That is bollocks. It is assuming the entitlement this year is £3211. That is nonsense. Unless they are assuming disability or something weird. Check the HMRC calculator yourself. And be more cautious in claiming others don't know what they are talking about."
You're wrong ..Maximum Tax credits in both years are £8,105; Excess income is £9960 in 15/16 and £12,530 in 16/17. Reduction due to income is £4084 in 15/16 (9960 x 41%) and £6014 in 16/17 (£12530 x 48%) Final award in 16/17 is £4021 and in 16/17 £2091
The question is not what the maximum is but what that single parent family with 1 child would get. I have cut and pasted the HMRC calculator. Your figures are very different from the Telegraph table as well.
The problem with Inheritance Tax is precisely the opposite...the value of the family home has almost certainly not been achieved through hard work, instead it is the result of the parents being the beneficiaries of an extraordinary boom in property prices. Nothing to do with hard work because a feckless individual who spent their entire life living off the state in a home purchased by their family would have benefited financially by EXACTLY the same as those who "worked hard".
How much of the money I earn do you think it appropriate that I be allowed to keep?
You can keep what you like but never confuse wealth created by the property boom since the 1980's with wealth created by hard work...to reward the beneficiaries of individuals who have by virtue of their good fortune generated substantial wealth with a £140,000 tax cut is wrong
Oh, wow, that seems really expensive for Osborne. So much could happen - there could be a Leave. I don't know enough about this market, but of the four prices, I'd back May. She is the only proper right-wing candidate of the four and members are liable to go back to the old religion, especially if Corbyn or McDonnell is leader.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
.
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
Not sure where your numbers come from - a single parent earning £16,380 gets far, far, far more than £1,617 of tax credits.
The Telegraph calculator says they get £4,021 (before changes). Plus of course £1,076 child benefit as well.
The size of tax credits is truly eye watering - which is of course the problem.
Oh, wow, that seems really expensive for Osborne. So much could happen - there could be a Leave. I don't know enough about this market, but of the four prices, I'd back May. She is the only proper right-wing candidate of the four and members are liable to go back to the old religion, especially if Corbyn or McDonnell is leader.
May is not that right wing. She is very pro-EU for a start.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
.
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
Not sure where your numbers come from - a single parent earning £16,380 gets far, far, far more than £1,617 of tax credits.
The Telegraph calculator says they get £4,021 (before changes). Plus of course £1,076 child benefit as well.
The size of tax credits is truly eye watering - which is of course the problem.
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
Nick - you have to be admired for desperately hanging on to the sinking ship that is or was the labour party
He probably thinks it's a submarine and is indicative of a new kinda politics
@bbclaurak: Ouch! Boris will attack govt plans to cut tax credits tmrw saying poorest and hardest working must be protected
If it's on the front page of the Sun, Tory voters will take notice.
What does it have to do with Sun readers?
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
I cements the view of a very significant number of voters that the Tories are a bunch of shits who care very very little about the 60% who didn't vote for them
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
Tories have done an astonishingly good job in weaning the electorate off them without adverse political impacts.
6.3m families in 2009/2010. 4.5m families in 2013/2014.
It will go under 4m soon.
These cuts are going to send tens of thousands in to a spiral of debt that it will be impossible to get out of...as a result of the way that it is structured it is nigh on impossible to earn your way out of debt because for every pound the recipient earns in salary they will lose 80 pence (48% tax credits, 12% NIC an 20% PAYE) and more importantly for Osborne it hits those on £20k+ with kids
Sorry, but that is bollocks. What is the debt you talk about?
No mention of the increased minimum wage, or of the massive rise in personal allowances since 2010. No-one working less than 30 hours on minimum wage is paying any income tax at all.
Under the last Labour government, working 24 hours a week could leave you worse off than working 16 - where is the incentive there to do more work?
Another Tory who doesn't know the first thing about these tax credit cuts. A parent with one child earning £16,380 will be £1,850 worse off next year (after PAYE uplift). For every extra pound that person earns to make up the difference they will lose 80% of it. How can that be an incentive to work?
What's the alternative? If it's better then there is no incentive.
The alternative is to phase the changes in over a period of time - this is NOTHING to do with deficit reduction. If it is then why is Osborne cutting corporation tax by 2% to 18%.- what sort of economist reduces one of his main income streams when trying to reduce the deficit
Cutting CT has been aggressively used by some to increase revenue substantially although I'm not suggesting that this is the sum total of the motivation here. Stick to what you understand
I'm not sure Osborne is the right guiy for that job. Decent at No.11 but something doesn't quite fit.
Meanwhile, in Syria, Russian forces now number about 3500. Most are services troops but there is a decent contingent of fighting forces and most notably a very well balanced set of helicopters for air assault operations.
Much more significant though is the due presence of an anti aircraft vessel equipped with the rumoured very capable (even though they are largely not combat tested) S300 long range anti aircraft missiles. If that thing parks up off Tartus it creates an air screen that heavily restricts other countries freedom of operation for fear of an accident. In short, you have to either a) talk to the Russians and manage air movements with them (which no-one wants to do) or b) ignore it and tell the Russians if they open fire their cruiser will disappear in a puff of smoke.
No doubt the West will pick the former and Putin, yet again, bluffs his way to making countries far more powerful look useless.
This vessels potential presence serves a particular issue for the Royal Air Force who fly east (often over Israel)on their way to Iraq from Cyprus.
There are two jokers in the pack. One is the response of the Gulf states who so far, under US pressure haven't supplied decent MANPADS to Syrian insurgents. Its a blindingly obvious way to cause the Russians pain and given there is renewed talk of Jihad going on down in Riyadh, its under consideration.
The second is Israel who have a singular approach of protecting their own security. They do have surprises for the situation, if they have to act. Militarily Russia's ability to carry out true expeditionary warfare, i.e not just driving over from their own border is very limited so there is little doubt the Israelis would have few issues imposing their will on the situation if required. The Russian's know this and whilst stepping up to a few lines, are reportedly coy about stepping over it.
Or simply Syria matters more to Russia that to the Americans, so is Yemen to Saudi Arabia than Syria. This whole situation is actually very simple, no one wants a war with Russia over something valuable mainly for Russia, and I can see the Russians supplying the Yemen rebels against the Saudis if the Saudis supply the Syrian rebels against the Russians.
@bbclaurak: Ouch! Boris will attack govt plans to cut tax credits tmrw saying poorest and hardest working must be protected
If it's on the front page of the Sun, Tory voters will take notice.
What does it have to do with Sun readers?
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
I cements the view of a very significant number of voters that the Tories are a bunch of shits who care very very little about the 60% who didn't vote for them
It cements the views of people who don't like the Tories to start with. C'est la vie.
The NMW/NLW rises by £1456 in April. The workers will notice.
The violence shown by a few protestors is disgusting. But to put it in perspective:
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
To be fair, there's probably a large number of people involved in peaceful protest, and that's only right in a democracy.
There is however a huge difference between waving placards and shouting slogans, and the egging, spitting, swearing and misogyny that we've seen in Manchester in the last couple of days.
The problem for Labour is that it was clear a week ago that the nutters would all turn up, and the Leader of the Opposition should really not want to associate himself with these idiots. That he does reflects badly on both him and his party, however he tries to spin it.
He looks and sounds like he recognises them as kindred spirits.
I'm still not convinced that the Tax Credit issue won't come back to haunt Osborne...I've wittered on here about it months ago about the impact of these cuts that are truly eye-watering
.
I mean the alternative to working more for the person on £15k.
There is none!
Well the incentive is to work more.
Take that example of the single parent on £16,380 - she would have to earn an extra £5,796 a year just to maintain that family income at this years levels
Can you explain how the reduction is more than a single parent with 1 child in full time education on that wage would get? What other assumptions are you making? This is complicated and there are a lot of very misleading numbers being thrown around.
Edit from the HMRC calculator: Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:- Child Tax Credit £1617.85 Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00 Sub total £1617.85 Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00 Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit. Total £1617.85 This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
Not sure where your numbers come from - a single parent earning £16,380 gets far, far, far more than £1,617 of tax credits.
The Telegraph calculator says they get £4,021 (before changes). Plus of course £1,076 child benefit as well.
The size of tax credits is truly eye watering - which is of course the problem.
Oh, wow, that seems really expensive for Osborne. So much could happen - there could be a Leave. I don't know enough about this market, but of the four prices, I'd back May. She is the only proper right-wing candidate of the four and members are liable to go back to the old religion, especially if Corbyn or McDonnell is leader.
May is not that right wing. She is very pro-EU for a start.
OK, she is definitely more right-wing than Osborne. Or Johnson. Javid is like the Tory Jarvis to me, almost an anagram actually, both blank slates being backed for their back stories.
@bbclaurak: Ouch! Boris will attack govt plans to cut tax credits tmrw saying poorest and hardest working must be protected
If it's on the front page of the Sun, Tory voters will take notice.
What does it have to do with Sun readers?
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
I cements the view of a very significant number of voters that the Tories are a bunch of shits who care very very little about the 60% who didn't vote for them
It cements the views of people who don't like the Tories to start with. C'est la vie.
The NMW/NLW rises by £1456 in April. The workers will notice.
@bbclaurak: Ouch! Boris will attack govt plans to cut tax credits tmrw saying poorest and hardest working must be protected
Someone's spoiling the mood. Naughty Boris.
I think it's simply putting a lid on Osborne, other leadership contenders need something to get rid of the favourite of the race.
Yes
If everyone else plays nicey nicey with Cameron/Osborne, Osborne should win, barring a bad referendum result. If events go badly, it opens the door to other candidates (But I don't see how it would be a candidate more conciliatory or centrist than Osborne)
@bbclaurak: Ouch! Boris will attack govt plans to cut tax credits tmrw saying poorest and hardest working must be protected
If it's on the front page of the Sun, Tory voters will take notice.
What does it have to do with Sun readers?
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
I cements the view of a very significant number of voters that the Tories are a bunch of shits who care very very little about the 60% who didn't vote for them
It cements the views of people who don't like the Tories to start with. C'est la vie.
Except tax credits are mainly concentrated in the crucial C2 demographic which traditionally decides elections.
In most marginal seats, the % of people on tax credits is bigger than the Tory majority.
Comments
Chief Superintendent John O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police said: “Today around 60,000 people took part in a demonstration and I would like to thank them for their cooperation. The overwhelming majority of people have exercised their democratic right to protest with dignity and good grace. The fact that only four arrests have been made throughout the day so far was particularly pleasing.”
Is it possible to bring 60K people together without a few anarchists etc. trying to take advantage? No. Will the nutters inevitably get disproportionate coverage? Yes. That's the problem about all large public political events.
And who exactly elected Lindsay German ?
Might even also ease pressure on housing, although a lot the most egregious benefit fraud cases are those where a 'single' mother moves in with a man but doesn't declare this to the authorities.
Iowa
Fiorina 52%
Clinton 38%
Bush 50%
Clinton 40%
Trump 48%
Clinton 41%
Fiorina 45%
Sanders 42%
Bush 46%
Sanders 44%
Sanders 48%
Trump 43%
New Hampshire
Fiorina 50%
Clinton 42%
Bush 49%
Clinton 42%
Clinton 48%
Trump 45%
Bush 46%
Sanders 46%
Sanders 47%
Fiorina 45%
Sanders 52%
Trump 42%
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/sanders-outperforms-clinton-general-election-match-ups-ia-nh-n438491
"TV box sets have become the new novels
The best small-screen dramas offer morality tales and interior worlds on a par with Victorian authors"°
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/11912881/TV-box-sets-have-become-the-new-novels.html
There is however a huge difference between waving placards and shouting slogans, and the egging, spitting, swearing and misogyny that we've seen in Manchester in the last couple of days.
The problem for Labour is that it was clear a week ago that the nutters would all turn up, and the Leader of the Opposition should really not want to associate himself with these idiots. That he does reflects badly on both him and his party, however he tries to spin it.
Under Osborne that trap has been dramatically tackled. On the lower end the elimination of Income Tax for low incomes has removed that disincentive while at the higher end the reforms to tax credits and increase to the Living Wage has lowered the upper rate end point at which this is no longer an issue.
It is better for people not to be on any tax credits at all as if they are not on tax credits then for every £1 extra they earn they keep 68% of it whereas if they're on tax credits then they only keep 20p per pound.
Tax credits are a burden on the poor that traps them into poverty.
What it boils down to is that up to now people with children can happily split up knowing that there is a colossal subsidy for any single earner with children. In future that subsidy comes down - and down significantly.
Everyone on the TV goes on about tax credits subsidising low pay but they don't - anyone on just £15k without children doesn't get them anyway (before changes).
And if there are two parents together and they both work on £16,500 each then even with 2 children they get nothing (before the changes - that falls to £14,500 each post changes).
As for corporation tax, the sort of economist that understands basic principles such as the Laffer Curve, Investment and international competition is the sort that lowers tax rates to raise more growth and more revenue.
The sort of person that knows what they're doing in other words.
*) I doubt China are up to speed with operations (although they might have been keeping a great deal secret)
*) Using it in operations would allow other nations to learn a great deal about their capabilities (although they might want to send the message they have those capabilities).
*) It's risky.
*) Why do China want to get involved militarily in Syria?
They may have sent it as a sign of strength (fly the flag), deliver supplies and manpower, and perhaps fly a few planes off to little effect. If it's actually there.
A man dressed as a crusty from the 1990s pushed in front of me in the lunchtime queue in Sainsbury's at lunchtime today, holding a bottle of wine*. After suspiciously and belligerently checking I wasn't here for the conference, he proudly told me he'd been in the cells until 4 this morning for "tw*tting a Tory - I just couldn't help myself - the police arrested me but they were laughing about it". I didn't really want to get into a political conversation with someone who was clearly violent and intending on drunkenness even if he hadn't yet achieved it, so just sort of stared through him until it was time to buy my sandwich. But heading up Peter Street there were many more like him.
It's a really horrible atmosphere. It makes me very angry, not only because the intimidation is so bloody anti-democratic but also because I like the party conferences, and having them is good for the economy of the city. And these ignorant fuckers are trying to drive them away.
They may be a minority. But they are not a tiny one, and the trouble they are causing is real and unprecedented.
*I didn't look at his choice too closely, and I may be wrong about it being wine; still, this particularly detail is slightly incongruous.
I suspect that there are plenty of photos and then a few early morning raids.
Edit from the HMRC calculator:
Based on the information you have entered, your household may be entitled to the following tax credits award:-
Child Tax Credit £1617.85
Childcare element of Working Tax Credit £0.00
Sub total £1617.85
Working Tax Credit (less the childcare element of Working Tax Credit) £0.00
Note: The childcare element of Working Tax Credit will always be paid direct to the person who is mainly responsible for caring for the child or children, alongside payments of Child Tax Credit.
Total £1617.85
This is based on your household income of £16380.00.
The chinese are busy building their bases in Djibouti at the moment to control the sea lanes off the Red Sea, Syria is far from any major trade routes so China has no specific commercial interest apart from the stability in the wider region.
Since you raise it, IHT is the single most egregious tax that there is - do you not want to leave what you have worked hard your whole life for, to your children?
One is Soap. The other is Work.
Anyway he has until Nov.27th which is the filing deadline for N.H. , realistically the last day, since most states have filling deadlines before the end of this year.
If he doesn't file for N.H. then he might be willing to wait until after the primary there but it would be to late to file in many states by then. The ship would have sailed.
Slash their benefits.
she would fancy her chances against Trump and is ruthless enough to dispatch both Biden and Sanders
He would not have the chance to get near enough delegates even if he won every primary that had filling deadlines after the N.H. primary had finished.
Realistically it's either till Nov.27th or bust for Biden.
The problems for Biden is that:
1. He will be seen as a continuity candidate for a president that is not so popular
2. He has done some shady dealings, like having his son hired on the board of an ukrainian state energy company just after his visit to Ukraine.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/11913128/Michael-Gove-People-should-challenge-the-undeserving-rich-who-undermine-society.html
For how long will the Blairites stick with the new Labour party of Corbyn..?
The Telegraph calculator says they get £4,021 (before changes). Plus of course £1,076 child benefit as well.
The size of tax credits is truly eye watering - which is of course the problem.
You're wrong ..Maximum Tax credits in both years are £8,105; Excess income is £9960 in 15/16 and £12,530 in 16/17. Reduction due to income is £4084 in 15/16 (9960 x 41%) and £6014 in 16/17 (£12530 x 48%) Final award in 16/17 is £4021 and in 16/17 £2091
Meanwhile, in Syria, Russian forces now number about 3500. Most are services troops but there is a decent contingent of fighting forces and most notably a very well balanced set of helicopters for air assault operations.
Much more significant though is the due presence of an anti aircraft vessel equipped with the rumoured very capable (even though they are largely not combat tested) S300 long range anti aircraft missiles. If that thing parks up off Tartus it creates an air screen that heavily restricts other countries freedom of operation for fear of an accident. In short, you have to either a) talk to the Russians and manage air movements with them (which no-one wants to do) or b) ignore it and tell the Russians if they open fire their cruiser will disappear in a puff of smoke.
No doubt the West will pick the former and Putin, yet again, bluffs his way to making countries far more powerful look useless.
This vessels potential presence serves a particular issue for the Royal Air Force who fly east (often over Israel)on their way to Iraq from Cyprus.
There are two jokers in the pack. One is the response of the Gulf states who so far, under US pressure haven't supplied decent MANPADS to Syrian insurgents. Its a blindingly obvious way to cause the Russians pain and given there is renewed talk of Jihad going on down in Riyadh, its under consideration.
The second is Israel who have a singular approach of protecting their own security. They do have surprises for the situation, if they have to act. Militarily Russia's ability to carry out true expeditionary warfare, i.e not just driving over from their own border is very limited so there is little doubt the Israelis would have few issues imposing their will on the situation if required. The Russian's know this and whilst stepping up to a few lines, are reportedly coy about stepping over it.
85% of the electorate do not receive tax credits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2WVu6A-Fvw
This whole situation is actually very simple, no one wants a war with Russia over something valuable mainly for Russia, and I can see the Russians supplying the Yemen rebels against the Saudis if the Saudis supply the Syrian rebels against the Russians.
The NMW/NLW rises by £1456 in April. The workers will notice.
As soon as I saw your numbers I knew they had to be wrong - because tax credits are far, far, far more generous than your numbers.
If a single parent (even with only one kid) was only getting tax credits of £1,617 there really wouldn't be a problem!
If everyone else plays nicey nicey with Cameron/Osborne, Osborne should win, barring a bad referendum result. If events go badly, it opens the door to other candidates (But I don't see how it would be a candidate more conciliatory or centrist than Osborne)
In most marginal seats, the % of people on tax credits is bigger than the Tory majority.