politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Polling Matters Podcast: What does Labour do next?

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Please, please, please, could we merge in NI?

A huge amount of work, they'd have to get on with it at the start of parliament.

NI is not progressive enough,and most of the burden of employer's contributions fall on the employee because of the nature of the labour market.

There are effects on the self employed aren't there? I think NI is important because it is an 'insurance' that pays for benefits. If there are any changes I would be keeping my fingers crossed.

NI has been on its last legs for a while as a contributory mechanism, but yes, handling the transition would be careful. NI contribs are only important for a higher rate JSA (which can) and the state pension right?

'insurance 'is not meant to be progressive, BTW

The pseudo socialist halfwit does not understand what "insurance " means. Scrap it and let people get their own insurance , would save people a fortune, create jobs and improve people's lot.

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Please, please, please, could we merge in NI?

A huge amount of work, they'd have to get on with it at the start of parliament.

NI is not progressive enough,and most of the burden of employer's contributions fall on the employee because of the nature of the labour market.

There are effects on the self employed aren't there? I think NI is important because it is an 'insurance' that pays for benefits. If there are any changes I would be keeping my fingers crossed.

NI has been on its last legs for a while as a contributory mechanism, but yes, handling the transition would be careful. NI contribs are only important for a higher rate JSA (which can) and the state pension right?

'insurance 'is not meant to be progressive, BTW

NI contributions also apply to Employment Support Allowance (ESA) (the benefit for those too sick or disabled to work). If you don't have the NI fully paid up in the previous couple of tax years before your claim you are then means-tested as to whether you get ESA. Never mind if you have paid in for twenty years before hand.

Personally, I think it time there was some serious exploration of how you could restore a proper sense of contribution/insurance across the whole system.

Did someone mention the Villa?

stjohn said:

Did someone mention the Villa?

No, I think it was West Ham...

MalcG Most other developed nations have compulsory social insurance contributions which pay for most unemployment benefits, pensions and much of healthcare. Making it voluntary would raise nowhere near the same amount,especially with an ageing population. One of the few sensible ideas Labour proposed in the election was to pay higher unemployment benefits to those who had paid in most NI

Call me a revolutionary, but dual track ESA is incoherent.

We have benefits to provide a basic standard of living to those in hard times. If you want more than a basic standard of living then you work for it, and, hopefully, we have given you the skills to earn enough to put some aside.

We cannot say to one person that the lower track is what's necessary to sustain their basic standard of living and give their neighbour more. Nobody would design a system from scratch that operated like this.

But the British people have been told to shoulder NI because they will get more later. It is little more than a shameful rouse. NI contribs are pounds and the payouts are pennies.

I find the idea of Jowell (for the mayoralty) at 5s remarkable. Surely when the nominations are revealed she'll close in (Jowell 33 / Khan 25) given Labour to win is 1.33 or so.

Scott_P said:

This is actually quite astonishing

@iainmartin1: Labour friends: if you think party should move left + oppose reform, read this in the @DailyMirror by @fleetstreetfox http://t.co/4GketD1XUy

Pretty harsh by the Mirror, reminds me of the US bumper sticker "Can't feed 'em? don't breed 'em!"

The problem with the benefit cap is that housing benefit is such a large part of it. Both this and generation rent need a real house building programme.

SouthamObserver said:

@Felix - Top post - and one which the people with influence in the Labour party will never understand. It is harsh but one of life's lessons is that if you are not a good earner, for whatever reason, both you, and if you are selfish enough to have children, them too, will ahve more limited lifestyle choices open to you. This is not something that the government can change - and nor should it interfere with in most cases.

I am glad the government interfered in my case. I am delighted the state offered me and millions like me an education, healthcare, benefits when needed, and so on. Before the state got involved these things were not available for most. The state changed lives for the better and enabled many - such as myself - to enjoy opportunities never available to our parents, grandparents and all those who went before. The state has done so much good and can continue to do so. What Labour needs to rethink is not the role of the state as an enabler or as a guarantor of minimum living standards, but how it happens. That's what the Labour leadership election should be about.

If people weren't selfishly having children this country would pretty quickly die on its feet. And if employers were not selfishly depending on the state to subsidise their employees - especially in London and the south-east - welfare payments would be much lower.

The whole of the human race would be in trouble, if we weren't selfishly having children.

HYUFD said:

MalcG Most other developed nations have compulsory social insurance contributions which pay for most unemployment benefits, pensions and much of healthcare. Making it voluntary would raise nowhere near the same amount,especially with an ageing population. One of the few sensible ideas Labour proposed in the election was to pay higher unemployment benefits to those who had paid in most NI

Regardless it needs reforming , more people should be contributing , including pensioners and stricter control on recipients.

Flightpathl said:

malcolmg said:

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Please, please, please, could we merge in NI?

A huge amount of work, they'd have to get on with it at the start of parliament.

NI is not progressive enough,and most of the burden of employer's contributions fall on the employee because of the nature of the labour market.

There are effects on the self employed aren't there? I think NI is important because it is an 'insurance' that pays for benefits. If there are any changes I would be keeping my fingers crossed.

NI has been on its last legs for a while as a contributory mechanism, but yes, handling the transition would be careful. NI contribs are only important for a higher rate JSA (which can) and the state pension right?

'insurance 'is not meant to be progressive, BTW

The pseudo socialist halfwit does not understand what "insurance " means. Scrap it and let people get their own insurance , would save people a fortune, create jobs and improve people's lot.

Carte blanche to reply, Moderator?

what have you got to say about a reply to someone else you halfwit, you cannot even read or comprehend what and who my post was referring too.

TWR If Goldsmith does not run Ivan Massow is a good bet for Tory candidate for Mayor

HYUFD said:

TWR If Goldsmith does not run Ivan Massow is a good bet for Tory candidate for Mayor

Who knows what other candidates might pop up. The current void will encourage them, I think.

SquareRoot said:

Malcolm does not mean most of what he says, he just says it to get a reaction. Ignore.

It was not directed at the halfwit either, he needs to go to Specsavers

SouthamObserver said:

Scott_P said:

This is actually quite astonishing

@iainmartin1: Labour friends: if you think party should move left + oppose reform, read this in the @DailyMirror by @fleetstreetfox http://t.co/4GketD1XUy

It's absolutely spot on. All those who abuse the welfare system make it easier to dismantle.

The problem is not so much having a lot of children, (when my mother was growing up in Ireland, it wasn't uncommon for poor families to have 8 children), it's the failure to instil any sense of responsibility in them. If three children are adults, in a town with 2,000 job vacancies, then they should be working, and contributing to the household budget.

HYUFD said:

In the US, Canada, Italy, Spain and Japan you can only claim unemployment benefits if you have paid in enough insurance.

I'm not sure any of those are right, but Japan is definitely wrong. There's a contributory part and a non-contributory part.

malcolmg said:

Flightpathl said:

malcolmg said:

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Flightpathl said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Please, please, please, could we merge in NI?

A huge amount of work, they'd have to get on with it at the start of parliament.

NI is not progressive enough,and most of the burden of employer's contributions fall on the employee because of the nature of the labour market.

There are effects on the self employed aren't there? I think NI is important because it is an 'insurance' that pays for benefits. If there are any changes I would be keeping my fingers crossed.

NI has been on its last legs for a while as a contributory mechanism, but yes, handling the transition would be careful. NI contribs are only important for a higher rate JSA (which can) and the state pension right?

'insurance 'is not meant to be progressive, BTW

The pseudo socialist halfwit does not understand what "insurance " means. Scrap it and let people get their own insurance , would save people a fortune, create jobs and improve people's lot.

Carte blanche to reply, Moderator?

what have you got to say about a reply to someone else you halfwit, you cannot even read or comprehend what and who my post was referring too.

Why reply to me about someone else without a name check then? But any way, others have managed to infiltrate the weak (some might say half-witted, but I could not possibly comment) logic of your opinion.

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

MalcG Most other developed nations have compulsory social insurance contributions which pay for most unemployment benefits, pensions and much of healthcare. Making it voluntary would raise nowhere near the same amount,especially with an ageing population. One of the few sensible ideas Labour proposed in the election was to pay higher unemployment benefits to those who had paid in most NI

Regardless it needs reforming , more people should be contributing , including pensioners and stricter control on recipients.

Reforming the welfare state is something best done in a time of low unemployment. Sanctions for refusing to make an effort are much less fair when there genuinely is no work.

As well as sanctions there do need to be supports so that people can improve themselves. Kendalls idea of foundation years before school are pretty near the mark.

MarqueeMark said:

HYUFD said:

Plans to open an anti Thatcher Museum to counter new Thatcher museum and archive
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/plans-anti-thatcher-museum-london-showcase-5783793

"It’s unlikely the official museum will address Thatcher’s unflinching support for brutal regimes like the Khmer Rouge In Cambodia"

I must have missed Pol Pot addressing Conference.....

I certainly wasn't aware that Margaret Thatcher was a Maoist.

Come to think of it, I would have thought he'd see support for Pol Pot as being a point in favour of Margaret Thatcher.

HYUFD said:

Plans to open an anti Thatcher Museum to counter new Thatcher museum and archive
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/plans-anti-thatcher-museum-london-showcase-5783793

LOL, wicked.

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

MalcG Most other developed nations have compulsory social insurance contributions which pay for most unemployment benefits, pensions and much of healthcare. Making it voluntary would raise nowhere near the same amount,especially with an ageing population. One of the few sensible ideas Labour proposed in the election was to pay higher unemployment benefits to those who had paid in most NI

Regardless it needs reforming , more people should be contributing , including pensioners and stricter control on recipients.

Reforming the welfare state is something best done in a time of low unemployment. Sanctions for refusing to make an effort are much less fair when there genuinely is no work.

As well as sanctions there do need to be supports so that people can improve themselves. Kendalls idea of foundation years before school are pretty near the mark.

Absolutely agree , however it is just like the tax system , they do not want to touch it as it is difficult. They trumpet on about all the jobs they have/are creating yet we continue to dole out ever increasing amounts on benefits. Health service si another one , rather than preventative care at reasonable cost they prefer to wait and spend shedloads when people are knackered. None of the politicians have the courage of their convictions to really fix things, it is all geared to keeping themselves on the gravy train.

foxinsoxuk said:

rottenborough said:

SandyRentool said:

CD13 said:

An old work colleague of mine moved to the Dordogne when he retired and he and some other ex-pats meet on Sundays in one of the local restaurants. The waiters are not always fluent in English and one of the ex-pats (who has lived there for twenty years without knowing a word of French) gave a long sigh.

"Look," he said. "We've been coming here for years, you'd think they'd make an effort, wouldn't you?"

They're not 'ex-pats'. They are immigrants.

Will they get an IN/OUT ref vote?

If less than 15 years out of the country, they are entitled. Probably vote out, then wonder what happened to their rights as migrants in France...

Excellent post.

EdinTokyo That is right as far as I am aware for all those nations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment_benefits

The US does have food stamps you can claim for a few months if you have not contributed enough unemployment insurance or if you have children. In China there is a non-contributory minimum living allowance but in Japan I believe payments are made based on length of time employed and payments made into the unemployment insurance system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment_insurance_(Japan)

malcolmg said:

When compared to minimum wage work , the benefits system is very lucrative if you are not a single person.

Yes which is why Labour's basic challenge is first to identify who the most vulnerable in society really are before thinking about ways to help them.

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

MalcG Most other developed nations have compulsory social insurance contributions which pay for most unemployment benefits, pensions and much of healthcare. Making it voluntary would raise nowhere near the same amount,especially with an ageing population. One of the few sensible ideas Labour proposed in the election was to pay higher unemployment benefits to those who had paid in most NI

Regardless it needs reforming , more people should be contributing , including pensioners and stricter control on recipients.

Reforming the welfare state is something best done in a time of low unemployment. Sanctions for refusing to make an effort are much less fair when there genuinely is no work.

As well as sanctions there do need to be supports so that people can improve themselves. Kendalls idea of foundation years before school are pretty near the mark.

The Mirror article and it's tone suggests that benefits paid as vouchers is needed

Ishmael_X said:

JosiasJessop said:

calum said:

Sean_F - Speaking from my experience most severely disabled people do want to live, however many end up dying prematurely due to the lack of proper care and equipment.

I was diagnosed with MND in March 2010. As a 46 year old with three young children this was a devastating piece of news, particularly given the poor prognosis. However, I decided from the outset that I was not going to give in easily to this condition. I kept working for two years and we had lots of family holidays around the world. I became wheelchair bound in March 2012 and seriously ill during the autumn of 2012. I appeared to be in the typical end of life spiral of MND and after a period in ICU in Edinburgh during November 2012, I was transferred to my local hospice in early December 2012. By this time I was ventilated, had a feeding tube fitted and my prognosis at this point was not good – in fact I was not expected to live for more than six weeks.

At this point Stirling Council and various parts of the NHS came together to ensure I was able to come home - to die. A comprehensive care package was quickly put into place and after spending what we all thought was my last Christmas in the hospice, I came home on 27th December 2012. Amazingly, due to the combination of good care, equipment, and physiotherapy my condition improved and has since pretty much stabilised. Now I have limited mobility but I am still able to talk normally and eat a good, albeit modified diet. I can use the computer via Eyegaze/Dragon Dictation equipment, which enables me to control my computer with my eyes and voice - this gives me full access to the internet and the ability to type.

However, there are many MND sufferers and those with related conditions out there who through lack of resources have access to none of this, something that needs to change, and soon. Most of us don't have long - average life expectancy after diagnosis is less than two years.

I'm campaigning to ensure everyone with MND gets the same access to care, equipment and physiotherapy:

https://www.justgiving.com/Calum-Ferguson1/

An inspiring story, Calum. Hope all goes well in the future.

As an aside, an ex's dad died a few years back from MND. He died under a year from initial diagnosis (which was late as he tried to ignore symptoms). He was a keen scuba diver before he became ill, and essentially he just gave in to the disease and did not even try to fight it - even to the extent of not taking some drugs.

It's great to see someone fighting it with verve.

Perhaps we could respect the decision he made for himself in his appalling predicament, rather than anonymously exhibiting him on the internet as an example of lack of moral fibre?

Sorry, that was not the way I meant it to be taken.

MalcG Much of that problem could be solved by capping child benefit at 2 children, as some Tories suggested, though I believe those with children on minimum wage can claim it too

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Plans to open an anti Thatcher Museum to counter new Thatcher museum and archive
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/plans-anti-thatcher-museum-london-showcase-5783793

LOL, wicked.

MalcolmG, I'd guess, voted for Thatcher in 1979, 1983 and 1987. Sick.

Lucian_Fletcher said:

I read Fleet Street Fox's article last night and I was frankly amazed The Mirror allowed it to carry its branding. Either they have had an attack of common sense, or a web sub was sleeping on the job and FSF is about to negotiate a move to Mail Online. It's a totally sensible and bang on article. People like those parents harm their family for generations and make the average person less sympathetic to the cause of people on benefits as a whole.

It would be much easier to fund a high level of support on a safety net basis of people didn't lie on the floor with a nest of other people's earnings.

Correct. This particular family looked to have a further expose behind it to be honest.

"the period up to the late 1960s would have exposed the genuine 'workshy' rather than those the victim of circumstances largely beyond their control."

When I was at school in the mid-sixties, I managed a coup by getting myself employed once for a few weeks in a factory in the summer rather than being a gang-van inmate. This meant I had no wet-days. It was a cabbage factory (really) and we chopped and dried them for soup constituents.

We also received a bunch from the local exchange but they were a mixed bunch indeed. One old bloke really struggled to stand upright but did his best. Another young man was a self-confessed layabout who was only there because "they'd stop his dole money otherwise."
He spent his time sloping off and trying to sabotage the cabbage choppers to ensure a regular break. Completely shameless with me (only a schoolkid) but more careful with the other adults.

Unemployment was low, especially with so much land work available in the season, and the unemployed were either unemployable (mental or physical problems) or skivers.I suspect the number of the first has remained constant.

NeilVW said:

foxinsoxuk said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

MalcG Most other developed nations have compulsory social insurance contributions which pay for most unemployment benefits, pensions and much of healthcare. Making it voluntary would raise nowhere near the same amount,especially with an ageing population. One of the few sensible ideas Labour proposed in the election was to pay higher unemployment benefits to those who had paid in most NI

Regardless it needs reforming , more people should be contributing , including pensioners and stricter control on recipients.

Reforming the welfare state is something best done in a time of low unemployment. Sanctions for refusing to make an effort are much less fair when there genuinely is no work.

True, and with unemployment down to 5.5% (almost level with the US which is on 5.4%), and still on a downward trend, now would seem to be a good time to press ahead with reforms. On current trends it seems at least possible we could beat the 4.7% achieved in 2005 which was itself a 30-year low. At those levels we would be close to functional full employment (there is always a certain inevitable frictional unemployment).

If you consider economic inactivity - the fudge so adored by red and blue governments - then we are in a much better position than the US and a better position already than 2005. That being said I would love a commitment to full employment to be for 4% and not 5%.

New Thread

Flightpathl said:

Hilarious article in Spectator coffee house by Farage's mini-me.