to wonder what benefits will get the chop from the £12 billion of cuts?

[steiner8]

Just that really. I'm wondering which benefits are going to go or be significantly cut. Anyone have any idea?

Can someone explain taxing benefits for me? I understand that some of the tax from wages etc, goes towards the benefits pot for people when they might need that extra support. So say that goes to someone like me, ESA Support group and Enhance PIP rates, they pay me it, then I pay them tax? Or do they just keep back that amount? Is that the same as reducing the benefit amount?

Tax confuses me, I know I paid it along with NI, but I never quite got things like tax codes or economics/government. I was hoping I'd get to study politics again this year on my Access course, but it's been dropped for Law and Sociology. I didn't grow up here, and we didn't have proper TV or newspapers or the internet, so I didn't pick it up off my parents, hell, I didn't even know what benefits were for the first few years I came back here to live.

re horses I have an old worthless one that I would pts if I had to get rid of I wouldn't rehome him he is my responsibility. It isn't true that horses are all worth ££££.

A lot of vile nastiness on this thread including from the fluffy socialists.

The only reason some people become very rich is by using the poor as They don't pay enough for their work

OMFG! People actually still think like this! We've already had "the rich were all born with a silver spoon in their mouths and the poor all had no chance in life" and now we have soundbites from Troksky's fucking diary.

PMSL.

If They tax all benefits I doubt The person will pay much tax anyway but They will count as income for tax credits so It will reduce the Tax Credits bill I suppose .

Tobysmum, it's the very right wing folk on here who think you should re-home your horse...not the "fluffy socialists".

I was making the point that most people going on to benefits will not have horses...they cost a great deal to keep and don't live in the home as pets in the same way as cats and dogs do.

Some are worth a lot of money, some can be loaned out. I take the point that this is not true in all cases.

I said some . Mainly big corporations and millionaires but also some smaller business if they are doing well . Those that can afford to pay a living wage but They don't to increase profit . I'm not talking about small business that can't afford a living wage . You can't say this is not happening because it is . There are also benefits in being born or in growing up in a supportive environment . That is a fact too . That environment can also be a poor household that supports their children education well and provides good values and with good community support but often in very poor areas children don't have that support as their own parents don't even value education that much .

whathefuck i did not get any of the schools i put down for my son. but i still got given a crapy school the ofstead is bad. and it even says the teaching is bad. i cant even appeal it. telling them the school is crap and i want better for my son does not work. i have put him down for othe schools not even sure thats a good idea

With good community support I meant good schools and youth clubs etc . I know unfortunally that is often not the case . Having said that as soon as the parents are supportive a child can get good grades even in a bad school although in Secondary peer pressure can affect children performance really , specially in a bad School and also bulling . So if he has friends and he is doing well where he is just let him there . If He has issues or is underperforming despite your support even if he misses his friends you have to put his name in another school as you are the adult and he will make friends elsewhere and in the meantime tutoring or whatever is needed . Just my opinion obviously but It is important to do to the best of his abilities when things are more and more competitive and there is less and less support out there if things go wrong . He needs a career . You have to be his rock at the moment and He has to learn to be his own rock as He grows up with the support from his family and friends . I think we have to still fight for state support and services but still try our best with our kids with what we have at hand while fighting these cuts etc .

The nastiness isn't in relation to the horse, he would have to go if it was a feed him or the kids situ.

My point is in relation to people being nasty generally. I think 99% of people want the same thing, but think there are different ways of getting there. Falling out is rather pointless. For me it always comes back to housing and the ridiculous cost, but no party has really said how they will solve it. The Tories right or wrong at least made some sense at election time, labour had no plan at all as far as I could see.

whathef your right :) thankyou

i agree about the cost of housing.

i think its social clensing..could be wrong im hovering on the fence

I think 99% of people want the same thing, but think there are different ways of getting there.

Exactly right. No one wants austerity. But some people think that austerity now will mean we avoid for greater austerity in the future.

The Tories right or wrong at least made some sense at election time, labour had no plan at all as far as I could see.

really? What was the tory plan for housing? their plan appears to be to download the responsibility on to local councils where nimbyism will prevent any house building. house building was woeful under the tories. their main action plan does nothing to address the problem, which is on the supply side. in fact, almost everything they propose (more right to buy, discounts for first time buyers, help to buy) simply increases demand and makes the problem worse, not better.

I agree tobysmum but that nastiness started when a poster became abusive by calling me "entitled" when I said I had kept my cats after I went onto benefits.

I am a Carer, I don't get to go out, I don't have holidays, I dont have Sky TV with oodles of channels, I don't have new clothes or shop in Waitrose etc.

I DO get nice new things regularly.by being part of a customer review programme for Amazon. So I am currently using very pricy nail polish which I didn't pay for....but no doubt people will look and judge "ooh shiny nails, how can she afford those on benefits?"

I like music which is free thanks to radio, a bit of gardening (when I get time) and my rescue cats which came to me when I was in work and which have benefitted my son in his communication with the world. But I am "entitled" for having them because my life is now so different and much poorer than when I was in work... I am not living the life of Riley.

When I was in work I paid a lot of tax, it never occurred to me to resent those whose lives were difficult. I would certainly never suggested to those people that they send their pets away, for some that's what makes their lives worthwhile. I was happy with my life, I didn't need to resent others or think them "entitled".

This poster STILL has not suggested where these cats could go (or indeed all the other cats/dogs which belong to people out of work) or addressed the fact that the rescues are overflowing. Consequently I suspect this was posted to be goady and for no other reason.

I am now hiding this thread as I am fed up with it all and I have lots to do over the next few days. Mostly hospital appointments and school meetings, whi h is why I currently cannot work.

keepitsimple I agree they havent but neither did labour. It was a very difficult choice who to vote for for all the wrong reasons. Personally I don't think working people should be on benefits unless there are very special circumstances (ie dla/ carers allowance). However the infrastructure just isn't there for many people to succeed independently at the present time. If there was basic housing available for sensible rent it would help massively in relation to the cost of living.

Childcare is crazy and must be more inclusive than it is at present. Childcare is highly regulated and expensive because of the government . People can't just pay a mate to look after their dc for example because of the OFSTED registration requirement But despite all this registration/ regulation people can't get places for disabled children.

I agree tobysmum but that nastiness started when a poster became abusive by calling me "entitled" when I said I had kept my cats after I went onto benefits.

If being called entitled is your idea of abuse, you are utterly bonkers. It's an opinion, one I stand by, that people who think welfare state payments should be enough to cover ongoing pet ownership are indeed entitled.

I think the Tories should have given details of where they planned to cut welfare before the election. But they didn't. Only said where they wouldn't cut. But I don't see why people on around £26K a year get tax credits and yet somebody on a lot less than that gets none and gets taxed. I don't object to free childcare places but I think it should be free places rather than tax credits for people earning up to £65K a year.

Seriously do people earning 65k get tax or wtc. I doubt it as they don't even get child benefit.

Or do you think people earning 65k should get help with raising their children.

Childcare and housing costs are insane and its a direct result of government interference. You can't have a family friend look after your DC and the ratios of insane. This results in the costs being stupidly high. With housing you can't get planning permission and if you do the size is restricted. The limits for housing benefit have become the standard that is used to rent which is pushing up rents. I'm shocked to see agents in Chester listing rooms for rent and the going rate for a double room is over £100/wk. That was never the case before and the rents are insane.

If the government fix those two issues the welfare bill would drop like a lead ballon.

I agree they havent but neither did labour. It was a very difficult choice who to vote for for all the wrong reasons. Personally I don't think working people should be on benefits unless there are very special circumstances (ie dla/ carers allowance). However the infrastructure just isn't there for many people to succeed independently at the present time. If there was basic housing available for sensible rent it would help massively in relation to the cost of living.

first of all, I am not a labour supporter. However, labour's misdeeds are more than 5 years old, and their housing problem wasn't nearly as acute. The Cons have had much longer for it to sink in. Furthermore, much of labour's problems were of neglect, but the Cons are actively making the problem worse with the methods I mentioned.

I actually have a lot of sympathy for the policies that the Cons have halfheartedly implemented. The trouble is that they are totally ideologically and not economically driven. Cutting immigration down in the best area (skilled immigrants) was done to satisfy the xenophobes; the bedroom tax would have made sense had it applied to the older people, but now it's just causing hardship with no little benefit, unless you count political point scoring a benefit. Reducing housing benefit, which I entirely support, is crazy without a plan to drastically increase housing.

I looked up the limit for tax credits and it's £65K in a household where childcare costs are claimed. I was shocked at how high this was. From what I saw on the news tax credits are only going to be cut by around £1,200 per year. But I still think the threshold for claiming should come down massively.

really? What was the tory plan for housing? their plan appears to be to download the responsibility on to local councils where nimbyism will prevent any house building. house building was woeful under the tories.

I don't know exactly what the Tory or the Labour plan for house building was, I didn't vote for either, but I can look out of my car window when I'm driving around anywhere within a five mile radius of my home and see a huge amount of building happening. Honestly, there is shitloads. To the point that it's actually quite worrying because the infrastructure just isn't equipped to deal with so many more households. Every spare inch of land is having houses built on it round here. That has only happened in the last couple of years under the coalition, there was next to none in this area under labour.

Yes exactly we need the infrastructure to succeed, housing is part of that but not all.

WanttobSupermum have a read of this

www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/11785509.Tenants_fear_Watford_housing_trust_proposals_to_replace_bungalows_with_development_of_32_new_homes/?ref=mr

www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/12961852.Elderly_tenants_of_Watford_housing_association__in_tears__at_development_project_that_will_force_them_out_their_homes/

newer article