Wednesday 8th July 2015

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:21 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:He stole Labour's clothes.

The Living Wage thing is pure pre-distribution.

I don't like it (the best way of helping the poor is to give them money rather than fix prices) but it is good politics.

it didn't leak and so Harman fluffed her reply, talking about cuts to tax credits without any scheme to raise wages, when the whole point was he had just introduced such a scheme.

To some extent, SH, but then she did go onto whether we can trust his promises. Although I agreed with her, it didn't sit comfortably playing the man rather than the ball, in the House that is.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:23 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:C'mon, has Osborne made everybody here lose the power of speech?
Driving back from the hospital so a bit distracted, but heard something about him introducing the living wage with a rise of 40 pence above minimum wage. I've been wondering what people will spend it on.

Hope things went smoothly at today's hospital appointment. Please give Mr. Ohso a gentle hug from me and have one for yourself.

Stuff going on meant I didn't hear Osborne's speech – and the BBC Red Button news' Budget Summer 2015 section doesn't seem to have been much updated since before he stood up as it is full of "The Chancellor is expected to say/He will say/He might say..." – oh, just checked again and they've finally put up the Key Points, which is in the past tense, so I'll read it in a moment...

This rebranding of the National Minimum Wage as the 'National Living Wage' – with increases meaning that in 2020 the amount employers must pay (unless they find wiggle-room) will be a whole one pound an hour higher than it would have been under his original plans - is another typical example Tory Newspeak, of wrapping themselves in clothing that looks something like Labour's, if you don't look too closely. So in 2020 the NMW (sorry, NLW) will be £9 per hour rather than £8 per hour – starting with a rise from the current rate to £7.20 per hour (for over 25s) next year. This is still lower that the actual Living Wage should be, this year – with a higher rate for London, which Osborne's NLW doesn't reflect. In fact, his 2020 NLW will still be lower than the Living Wage rate for London now!

Jeremy Corbyn is now on his feet, so I'll listen to him then read the summary of this Bodge-it.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:27 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:He stole Labour's clothes.

The Living Wage thing is pure pre-distribution.

I don't like it (the best way of helping the poor is to give them money rather than fix prices) but it is good politics.

it didn't leak and so Harman fluffed her reply, talking about cuts to tax credits without any scheme to raise wages, when the whole point was he had just introduced such a scheme.

'The Living Wage thing is pure pre-distribution.
I don't like it (the best way of helping the poor is to give them money rather than fix prices)...'

A living-wage paid for work needing doing isn't 'helping the poor'?
Are you suggesting a citizens' income sort of thing?
I'm okay with that but I don't know if that's your meaning.
What would you do?

Greece & France are getting along fabulously at the moment; I think France is going to propose. Greece will likely say yes out of love, not being in it for the money. It's a love match, yeah.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/blo ... dd277089aa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:31 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:They've backed away from tax credit cuts and just frozen them for 4 years. That's something, I suppose. They realized that it would be disastrous politically.

They have done no such thing, Tubby.

Child tax credits, Universal Credit child component, restricted to 2 children from now; complete removal of family tax credit element of all new tax credit claims from now; increasing the tax credits taper from now; cutting the income rise disregard in tax credits from now.

Existing tax credits claims will only be protected for 4 years provided - the claimant is not moved onto Universal Credit; the claimant does not have a pay rise; the claimant has no change in any circumstances involving hours worked or pay earned or personal/family status.
Which means nobody, in reality.
If you get a bit of extra work and stop claiming for a while you will get a lot less if you claim again, especially if you have children; if you have a pay rise (and everyone will, even on NMW as it goes up in October) you will get less than now; and if you are made to move to Universal Credit you will lose a lot.

What Osborne said was that tax credits will be frozen (as with benefits) in terms of their current cash value - what is in the small print is that any of the changes mentioned above and the award will be subject to the new rules. That'll be 99.99% of all the awards, then.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:32 pm

A living-wage paid for work needing doing isn't 'helping the poor'?

Not particularly, because poverty depends a lot on circumstance. A living wage, like income tax cuts, is an inefficient way of doing that because it takes no account of circumstances. Good for single person living at home with parents though.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:32 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:They've backed away from tax credit cuts and just frozen them for 4 years. That's something, I suppose. They realized that it would be disastrous politically.

Not quite. They're reducing the earnings level for tax credits withdrawal from £6,420 to £3,850. That looks like an effective tax credit cut to me.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:34 pm

Child tax credits, Universal Credit child component, restricted to 2 children from now; complete removal of family tax credit element of all new tax credit claims from now; increasing the tax credits taper from now; cutting the income rise disregard in tax credits from now.

Universal Credit doesn't exist for children.

It's children born after 2017, isn't it?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:36 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:They've backed away from tax credit cuts and just frozen them for 4 years. That's something, I suppose. They realized that it would be disastrous politically.
Not quite. They're reducing the earnings level for tax credits withdrawal from £6,420 to £3,850. That looks like an effective tax credit cut to me.

Ah right.

Nice poverty trap then.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:48 pm

OBR say the social security cuts over the next 5 years amount to £35bn.

So not £60bn then.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:48 pm

Snap, ephe – your posts came in while I was writing mine. Yours were far more comprehensive, though :raises glass: (It's apple and elderflower cordial)

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:49 pm

The chancellor unveiled "just under half" of the £37bn in cuts he says are needed to clear the deficit, with £12bn from the welfare budget and £5bn from a crackdown on tax avoidance.

That £5bn is meaningless.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:53 pm

utopiandreams wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:He stole Labour's clothes.

The Living Wage thing is pure pre-distribution.

I don't like it (the best way of helping the poor is to give them money rather than fix prices) but it is good politics.

it didn't leak and so Harman fluffed her reply, talking about cuts to tax credits without any scheme to raise wages, when the whole point was he had just introduced such a scheme.
To some extent, SH, but then she did go onto whether we can trust his promises. Although I agreed with her, it didn't sit comfortably playing the man rather than the ball, in the House that is.

When the honourable gentleman across the way is a low-down, lying scoundrel with a documented propensity of not telling the truth, not following through on what he said he'd do, not apologising for his serial failures, not showing evidence of his trustworthiness, the man is the ball & it's no fault but his own for talking falsely, acting wrongly & not giving a damn about representing the country like an honourable person. Osborne's a loser. His own List of Things I'm Gonna Do is documentation of that fact. I'd be uncomfortable if Harman didn't mention his personal failings as they are directly contributing to hardship for many more people in this country.

The fellow isn't in charge of his cat. But that's an aside - gossipy chatter me bringing up his feline. His cat's frequent escape attempts aren't directly relevant to Osborne's Chancellorship.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:53 pm

Tom Brake says that the Chancellor plans to consult on freezing the earnings level at which students start to repay their loans for five years...

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:56 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Child tax credits, Universal Credit child component, restricted to 2 children from now; complete removal of family tax credit element of all new tax credit claims from now; increasing the tax credits taper from now; cutting the income rise disregard in tax credits from now.
Universal Credit doesn't exist for children.

It's children born after 2017, isn't it?

Good question.
I don't know.
I'm frightened for people with more than two children depending on tax credits.
If it happens for them now, that's serious difficulty for those families in one go.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:59 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Child tax credits, Universal Credit child component, restricted to 2 children from now; complete removal of family tax credit element of all new tax credit claims from now; increasing the tax credits taper from now; cutting the income rise disregard in tax credits from now.
Universal Credit doesn't exist for children.

It's children born after 2017, isn't it?
Good question.
I don't know.
I'm frightened for people with more than two children depending on tax credits.
If it happens for them now, that's serious difficulty for those families in one go.

The BBC says, "Tax credits and Universal Credit to be restricted to two children, affecting those born after April 2017."

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:59 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:Tom Brake says that the Chancellor plans to consult on freezing the earnings level at which students start to repay their loans for five years...

Wait. What?
"Hey, hey, isn't this thoughtful? We've decided to keep you paid puny wages so you won't have those pesky extra earnings going toward your great big student loan debt. It's because we love you..."

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:01 pm

The current minimum wage, which applies to those aged over 21, is £6.50. Those entitled to the "living wage" will get £7.20 and that will rise to £9 an hour by 2020. Labour had vowed to increase the minimum wage to £8 by 2020 during the general election campaign.
The move is expected to boost the wages of six million people but may cause firms to recruit more under 25s, who will be on a lower rate, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.

And cut hours to do the same work. Which would increase productivity, but people can't quite start banking their extra money yet.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:02 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:They've backed away from tax credit cuts and just frozen them for 4 years. That's something, I suppose. They realized that it would be disastrous politically.
Not quite. They're reducing the earnings level for tax credits withdrawal from £6,420 to £3,850. That looks like an effective tax credit cut to me.

It is - whenever Osborne does his party tricks, he pretends that he is being kind but the devil is in the detail.
He has changed the qualifying criteria and the points I listed above - these are cuts dressed up as non-cuts.

This idiotic National Living Wage is the same. NMW will reach £9/hour by 2020 on its' current trajectory anyway.

All those "shy Tories" out there who think this isn't too bad really are in for a nasty shock. If they get tax credits, they will lose.

As for the tinkering with Universal Credit, what originally started out as nearly reasonable thing if anything IDS said of it was true (and it has taken time to find out that none of it is), has been warped beyond all recognition by Osborne's latest shenanigans.

As JSA and WRAG claimants know, Jobcentres and Work Programme providers are already very quick to sanction on the basis of no reason whatsoever - they will be expected to sanction more now, and get people into crappy little jobs on Universal Credit or what's left of tax credits, and millions of people will find they are even poorer than they were before.

As UC becomes more widespread, this is what will happen - I'm not being Cassandra here, it's in the rules and now in the budget -
no new claimant will be able to claim as much in housing benefit as they could under the old system;
no new claimant with children will be able to claim for more than 2 children from 2017;
no new claimant will get help with childcare costs for more than 2 children from 2017;
no new claimant will have the same tapers/disregards on earnings - from now;
and, of course, no new claimant will be able to be self-employed and claim UC unless they earn £13,000PA because that is the income floor - and all those businesses they were encouraged to start will be closed down by HMRC as unsustainable so there will be more claims for the JSA element of UC not less and they will all involve cuts to HB and child support.

Removing the extra WRAG element is the cruellest cut of all. No new claim including those currently waiting for their first WCA assessed as WRAG will get the extra; despite the fact that they are not capable of work and may be undergoing treatment of any/all kinds.
Some very seriously ill people are in the WRAG, and of all new claims lasting 12 weeks, more people end up in the WRAG than in any other group - this is a massive cohort of people who will now not be getting the money they need to deal with their illness and all the jobsearching bollocks they are required to engage in. There will be more untoward deaths and suicides as a result.

Still, lots of people will think that this is a very good thing and will start to wonder why Support Group claimants get so much......well, they needn't worry, because that'll be for next year's budget. Mark my words.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:05 pm

This idiotic National Living Wage is the same. NMW will reach £9/hour by 2020 on its' current trajectory anyway.

With the Bank's inflation target of £2? Nowhere near.

It is a quite substantial rise in itself. The cuts to in work benefits though hit hard too.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:09 pm

Tubby and LadyC - you are correct about the children's allowances changing in 2017.

I got a bit carried away - nevertheless, children now will be affected anyway, due to the earnings disregards changes and allowances.
Not to mention the HB cuts, the freeze on the value of benefits and tax credits, etc.

However you look at it, it's all smoke and mirrors and none of it - NONE of it - is actually good news for poor people.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:11 pm

However you look at it, it's all smoke and mirrors and none of it - NONE of it - is actually good news for poor people.

Agree.

And take your point about UC too. Though I'll believe it when I see it.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:12 pm

From Ephemerid...

...and if you are made to move to Universal Credit you will lose a lot.

I've known this since I've known IDS & his Universal Credit project. A disaster system totally unfit for purpose. The National Audit Office (NAO) can't find out if it's value for money because they're not allowed to audit the DWP. Outrageous. I don't ever want to touch UC or be involved in it in any way. I'm frightened of the system because it doesn't work. I've no reason to believe it's functional. For years now we've talked about UC. It should've been dumped or modified dramatically - anything other than the secrecy & malfunction of the system. And Tory government have placed the country's entire social security provision system on UC.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:13 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
The chancellor unveiled "just under half" of the £37bn in cuts he says are needed to clear the deficit, with £12bn from the welfare budget and £5bn from a crackdown on tax avoidance.
That £5bn is meaningless.

So about as the same as £100bn in IDS' World, Tubby?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:16 pm

Robin Brant ‏@robindbrant 1m1 minute ago
One minister on way to the '22 tells me they will be voting against easing restrictions on #foxhunting

There is at least one with some scruples then.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:18 pm

That could be Dominic Raab. He's against fox hunting.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:19 pm

Jim Pickard ‏@PickardJE 31m31 minutes ago
Miliband was painted as a Trot for this stuff: bank charge, Living wage, buy to let tax hit, making companies pay for apprenticeships etc

Quite.

QUITE.

(I think I should have that particular post response in an instant pasteable format for a while ...)

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:20 pm

The Office for Budget Responsibility said public spending would be £83bn higher over the next five years than Mr Osborne said in his March Budget - and the £24,6bn tax cuts announced in the Budget would dwarfed by £47.2bn in tax rises. Welfare cuts would add up to £35bn over the next five years.

So he was talking out his arse before the election?

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:21 pm

citizenJA wrote:
utopiandreams wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:He stole Labour's clothes.

The Living Wage thing is pure pre-distribution.

I don't like it (the best way of helping the poor is to give them money rather than fix prices) but it is good politics.

it didn't leak and so Harman fluffed her reply, talking about cuts to tax credits without any scheme to raise wages, when the whole point was he had just introduced such a scheme.
To some extent, SH, but then she did go onto whether we can trust his promises. Although I agreed with her, it didn't sit comfortably playing the man rather than the ball, in the House that is.
When the honourable gentleman across the way is a low-down, lying scoundrel with a documented propensity of not telling the truth, not following through on what he said he'd do, not apologising for his serial failures, not showing evidence of his trustworthiness, the man is the ball & it's no fault but his own for talking falsely, acting wrongly & not giving a damn about representing the country like an honourable person. Osborne's a loser. His own List of Things I'm Gonna Do is documentation of that fact. I'd be uncomfortable if Harman didn't mention his personal failings as they are directly contributing to hardship for many more people in this country.

The fellow isn't in charge of his cat. But that's an aside - gossipy chatter me bringing up his feline. His cat's frequent escape attempts aren't directly relevant to Osborne's Chancellorship.

I do understand, гражданка, but would rather she had tackled the order of events, i.e. the removal of social security before his minimum wage promise and highlighting those it disadvantages; those with kids or rather the kids themselves. Failure to keep his promises would then have become an addendum rather than her main thrust. There's a time and a place for playing the man and should they not have separate urinals these days that place would be squarely against the slab.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:22 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:That could be Dominic Raab. He's against fox hunting.

I don't hold out much hope for the rest of them though. Cameron is clearly trying to introduce it this way because he thinks he can get it through by this skulduggery ... that those who don't support a full repeal will fall for the nonsense this amendment is and believe it's not so bad. It's straight out of the FUW / Simon Hart tactics book.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:26 pm

Willow904 wrote: Cameron was all over the place, stumbling over his words and at one point later referred to someone else as the "Prime Minister" before correcting himself in one of the most incoherent sentences I've ever heard from him. In the battle of the selective facts, Cameron came off much worse, at one point trying to take credit for a rise in sport participation since London won the Olympics bid, when attempting to avoid admitting it had gone down since 2012 (which it has). Really desperate stuff.

(my bold & edit)

This is important - what you've noticed here because Dave Cameron does this habitually.
Dave repeatedly become overwhelmed in filming footage during the time of floods a couple years ago.
He wandered in his speech & spoke of 'the Prime Minister' in the third person.
Not arrogant, not the royal 'we' sort of thing, Cameron gets confounded & disassociates.
It was alarming to watch him split.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:29 pm

utopiandreams wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
utopiandreams wrote: To some extent, SH, but then she did go onto whether we can trust his promises. Although I agreed with her, it didn't sit comfortably playing the man rather than the ball, in the House that is.
When the honourable gentleman across the way is a low-down, lying scoundrel with a documented propensity of not telling the truth, not following through on what he said he'd do, not apologising for his serial failures, not showing evidence of his trustworthiness, the man is the ball & it's no fault but his own for talking falsely, acting wrongly & not giving a damn about representing the country like an honourable person. Osborne's a loser. His own List of Things I'm Gonna Do is documentation of that fact. I'd be uncomfortable if Harman didn't mention his personal failings as they are directly contributing to hardship for many more people in this country.

The fellow isn't in charge of his cat. But that's an aside - gossipy chatter me bringing up his feline. His cat's frequent escape attempts aren't directly relevant to Osborne's Chancellorship.
I do understand, гражданка, but would rather she had tackled the order of events, i.e. the removal of social security before his minimum wage promise and highlighting those it disadvantages; those with kids or rather the kids themselves. Failure to keep his promises would then have become an addendum rather than her main thrust. There's a time and a place for playing the man and should they not have separate urinals these days that place would be squarely against the slab.

You're quite right to bring this up - I've only read Harman's response to Osborne, I haven't watched the entire exchange. Thank you for your patience with me, my friend, sincerely.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:31 pm

Jim Pickard ‏@PickardJE 1h1 hour ago
Apparently a new SNP MP has described his constituency as having areas of grave "depravity" in maiden speech today...

Love that.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:34 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
The Office for Budget Responsibility said public spending would be £83bn higher over the next five years than Mr Osborne said in his March Budget - and the £24,6bn tax cuts announced in the Budget would dwarfed by £47.2bn in tax rises. Welfare cuts would add up to £35bn over the next five years.
So he was talking out his arse before the election?

Ah. If Harman said this somewhere in response to Osborne's budget thingy, she's said it beautifully.
Perfect, succinct & true, Tubby Isaacs.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:38 pm

UKIP MP Douglas Carswell said it might become "politically unsustainable" to keep public sector pay rises frozen at 1% for four years if the economy grows.
But he welcomed cuts to tax credits, saying "we've got to unravel the disastrous system that Gordon Brown created" where public money subsidises big firms paying low wages.

Created by Edward Heath though expanded by Thatcher then Gordo. And supported by mad lefty, Ronald Reagan among others.

Robert Reich:

"People don't realize it," but the Earned Income Tax Credit is "the largest anti-poverty program right now in the United States," he said.

"It is a very good and important program; it is a wage subsidy for people at the bottom," he added.

Reich, however, also said that "it's the combination of the earned income tax credit and the minimum wage and ideally an increase in both that really is the best. "

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:38 pm

David Schneider ‏@davidschneider 4h4 hours ago
A great budget. As long as you're over 25, own a house, have a well-paid job, live in the South East and aren't ill or disabled #budget2015

He should be writing Harman's responses ...

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:42 pm

The Independent ‏@Independent 39m39 minutes ago
George Osborne’s 'living wage' is not actually a living wage, says Living Wage Foundation http://ind.pn/1S8RbvX" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna 3m3 minutes ago
If the so called National Living Wage doesn't apply in the public sector, how is it uniform and "national" in application?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:44 pm

Incentivised by a few quid a week a person with cancer and renal failure stays determined to remain in the Support Group,the hassle of being asked of the date of death to further discentivise not withstanding.
The endless depths of the depraved disgraceful mentality of the Tory mind.

Support or bust for many.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:46 pm

Incentivised by a few quid a week a person with cancer and renal failure stays determined to remain in the Support Group,the hassle of being asked of the date of death to further discentivise not withstanding.
The bottomless depths of the depraved disgraceful mentality of the Tory mind.

Support or bust for many.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:53 pm

Kevin Maguire ‏@Kevin_Maguire 3m3 minutes ago
Sports Minister @tracey_crouch hates bloodsports. Voting against fox-hunting

Tracey Crouch ‏@tracey_crouch 9m9 minutes ago
While pro-hunt lobby are v happy with plans for vote next Thurs to relax foxhunting legislation via the backdoor, I will be voting against

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:56 pm

dominic dyer retweeted
Sarah Wollaston MP ‏@sarahwollaston Jul 2
FGS, all the genuine rural issues they could be addressing to stay relevant in 21st century & the CA still obsessing about hunting, move on!

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:56 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Child tax credits, Universal Credit child component, restricted to 2 children from now; complete removal of family tax credit element of all new tax credit claims from now; increasing the tax credits taper from now; cutting the income rise disregard in tax credits from now.
Universal Credit doesn't exist for children.

It's children born after 2017, isn't it?
Good question.
I don't know.
I'm frightened for people with more than two children depending on tax credits.
If it happens for them now, that's serious difficulty for those families in one go.

I know there aren't that many of them, but what about those families with upwards of six children?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:58 pm

HindleA wrote:Incentivised by a few quid a week a person with cancer and renal failure stays determined to remain in the Support Group,the hassle of being asked of the date of death to further discentivise not withstanding.
The bottomless depths of the depraved disgraceful mentality of the Tory mind.

Support or bust for many.

If it should come to that with Mr Ohso, I promise I shall punch the person who says it to him or me....

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:05 pm

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam 4m4 minutes ago
The @resfoundation cited by @george_osborne calculates even before today's tax credit cuts, "National Living Wage would rise to £10 by 2020"

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam 5m5 minutes ago
But @resfoundation say: "London Living Wage would jump from £9.15 to £12.65 without any in-work support".

Osborne is just giving people crap telling them it's chocolate cake ... and many (probably including a lot of those who will be directly affected) will believe him.

I'm not expecting the BBC to properly unpick any of this misrepresentation - do the research and present the detail - especially after Nick Robinson's basic error re WRAG and ESA this morning.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:07 pm

Compare and contrast.

Re Osborne's (welcome) increase in minimum wage to £9 by 2020

Businesses were largely positive about the move, said Simon Walker, director general at the Institute of Directors.

"We should not understate the boldness of this move, and many businesses will have been taken by surprise, but the IoD accepts that after several years of slow wage rises, now is the time for companies to increase pay."

Re Ed Miliband's plan to increase minimum wage to £8 by 2020:

Responding to Labour’s plans to raise the minimum wage to £8 per hour by the end of the next parliament, Simon Walker, Director General of the Institute Of Directors, emphasised that the vast majority of IoD members already pay the higher ‘Living Wage’, but stressed that decisions on the minimum wage must be taken by the independent Low Pay Commission

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:10 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Compare and contrast.

Re Osborne's (welcome) increase in minimum wage to £9 by 2020

Businesses were largely positive about the move, said Simon Walker, director general at the Institute of Directors.

"We should not understate the boldness of this move, and many businesses will have been taken by surprise, but the IoD accepts that after several years of slow wage rises, now is the time for companies to increase pay."
Re Ed Miliband's plan to increase minimum wage to £8 by 2020:

Responding to Labour’s plans to raise the minimum wage to £8 per hour by the end of the next parliament, Simon Walker, Director General of the Institute Of Directors, emphasised that the vast majority of IoD members already pay the higher ‘Living Wage’, but stressed that decisions on the minimum wage must be taken by the independent Low Pay Commission

Politicians should address the underlying issues holding back pay rises, and must resist the temptation to turn the general election into a wage auction.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:10 pm

Anyone going to take Simon Walker to task in the media?

Or will he be treated as a purely objective business commentator?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:18 pm

Hello. I missed all this because...

Car goes into service - on the walk back I meet wife on the way to GP with severe nose bleed (again) - no GP appointments - get cab to A&E - they stop the bleeding and pack said nose - ambulance to 2nd hospital with an ENT unit - they take a look and admit her overnight for obs - get bus home alone - phone garage and head back out to pick up car. And breathe.

So was it for everyone else?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:21 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam 4m4 minutes ago
The @resfoundation cited by @george_osborne calculates even before today's tax credit cuts, "National Living Wage would rise to £10 by 2020"

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam 5m5 minutes ago
But @resfoundation say: "London Living Wage would jump from £9.15 to £12.65 without any in-work support".
Osborne is just giving people crap telling them it's chocolate cake ... and many (probably including a lot of those who will be directly affected) will believe him.

I'm not expecting the BBC to properly unpick any of this misrepresentation - do the research and present the detail - especially after Nick Robinson's basic error re WRAG and ESA this morning.

BBC website spoke of people on £30k in social housing getting a "subsidy".

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:28 pm

So you don't consult the Low Pay Commission or employers on the minimum wage. You announce it suddenly in the Budget.

What on earth would happen if Labour did this?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 6:29 pm

Has George Osborne really introduced a living wage?
The chancellor announced a compulsory national living wage for over-25s from next year that will rise to £9 an hour by 2020. What does it really mean?

http://www.theguardian.com/society/real ... iving-wage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No.
The Tory Chancellor's fan club are posting lies below the line.
Blatant, intentional obfuscation in posts pulling numbers out of who knows where, failing to link data & indicating the numbers come from a legitimate source.
Searching to confirm whether or not the post is accurate I discover quickly it's ridiculous cheer-leading for Tory government.
I'd be happy to be utterly wrong.
I'd be thrilled if current government were doing a good job for the people & nation.
Surprised as hell & wary, but thrilled.

http://www.livingwage.org.uk/calculation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;