to ask if most of you realise the tax credits cuts affect people who work, not the unemployed?

[ssd]

yes, that's right, people who work get tax credits, you must work to get them

the cuts affect people in work, not people who dont work

I'm fed up reading here about the lazy unemployed who will get their tax credits cut...err no they wont.

We probably do need to examine that Bath but look how society is right now? So many base so much on financial gain. For a lot of people, it's money or material things that give them their sense of self worth. I'm not saying any of it is right, but that's what has become.

I know you didn't say the same should be paid for everyone, I'm largely going on the comment from someone else on that!

The knowledge and satisfaction of the earnings and paying things by their own hand doesn't come into it, they see it as pointless for the work they put in!!!

In many cases they are right.

Why would you expect the poorer people in a society based on respect for, lack of taxation of, and entitlement to unearned wealth to care about things that don't trouble the men making these decisions about their lives?

Either we all take pride in earning our way, in which case we don't give massive tax breaks to people receiving inheritances.

Or it is acceptable to be smart and canny enough to see that it is a waste of your time from a financial perspective (the only one that counts, remember?) to work when you won't be much better off at the end of the month.

It's not smart and canny, it's sad.

How is it sad? My DP is an electrician, its hard tough work he does. One year he did £500 worth of overtime and we lost most of it in child tax credits deductions. He is knackered every day he comes home. Would an MP think twice about putting that sort of money down in expenses?

Why is it sad?

Is it sad that I have an accountant that helps me make sure I don't pay more tax than I am legally required to?

I wouldn't do hours of extra work per week for no financial gain, and I'm not even particularly interested in money.

Elite football players are paid so much because they make money for the club. Nothing to do with having a rare talent. Before matches were televised, elite football players were not well paid. It is exactly the same now with elite players in sports that are not televised.
The idea that what people get paid matches their skills and experience is a naive one. There are plenty of people greatly underpaid for their level of skills and experience. It is about what makes money.

Nothing to do with having a rare talent.

Of course it is to do with their talent. The fact that there are TV rights and therefore money in the game, doesn't change the fact that the teams are in competition for players who have a demonstrable talent.

But many elite athletes in sports that are not televised, are very poorly paid. If it was just to do with talent, why are they paid so little?

Yes, lots of elite athletes who coach in their spare time or have jobs as they're paid so little.

But is IS for financial gain, that extra £10, £20 or £30 they won't work for is how much extra they would have AFTER any reductions in benefits. These benefits are meant to top up people who don't 'have enough' money, people moan like crazy when they lose some, they say they don't have enough money for x, y or z, yet so many, when the opportunity for a bit extra money a week, refuse to take it because they see it as a waste of their time. You don't find that odd or sad? That is what the benefits system has, over time, created.

I also don't agree with the whole concept of not working if it only gives you the same amount as you would get on benefits. It increases state reliance and seriously minimises your change of ever getting further

*chance

We received a tiny amount of housing benefit. Recently my husband received a pay rise along with a new position and move to a new department.
This reward has now left us worse off each month. By a couple of hundred pounds. We personally wanted him to receive what he was 'worth' , we wanted a fair wage for him. However, we now wonder why?

What kind of insane welfare system has allowed this

Giving tax breaks/grants etc to companies to pay workers properly, said companies don't do it (well apart from senior executive pay) so government pays out again or there would be anarchy.

DH used to be a self employed decorator, claiming housing benefit because he was earning so little. Housing benefit forced him to go on JSA or they would stop his housing benefit, because he "wasn't earning enough to support his family". He took a part time job for 2 reasons: so we could still get housing benefit and also because he's 61 and 20 hours a week knackers him as it is. We'd have to earn a ridiculous amount to afford to pay our own rent and childcare.

Trip, your use of the word "they" to describe people like me amd my family is starting to irk me. I am here.

This "work pays nonsense" is infuriating.
I'm dreading the universal tax credit being introduced in our area, this mess is bad enough.
Sorry to hear about your situation bath

Also, my dp has been working for the same guy for 10 years. He is an electrician. Thats it. He wont do anything else. His rate is set by JIB. He works for a small business.

Bear I am specifically talking about those who are able to earn more, have been offered the chance, will have a financial gain no matter how small AFTER the reductions that would occur due to their increase yet refuse to do so because 'it's a waste of time', then spend their time moaning about money that I am referring to. Not everyone.

It's things like that that have caused people to dislike the current system. It's (part of the reason) why there are people out there who sneer at those who receive tax credits.

Of course another way to raise wages, is reduce population.

For those that know, after the Black Death (1348 onwards in the UK), the loss of 30-50% of the working population led to possibly the last shift in societal structure in Britain. The lack of workers to keep their estates going forced the nobility to (a) pay them more and (b) grant them more rights.

There was a brief attempt to pass a law making it illegal to pay more than the pre-1348 wages, which was immediately ignored by the nobility, as they selfishly wanted their lands farmed (a point to note in 2015. Lawmakers are happy to pass laws they have no intention of upholding if it hurts them).

It's fascinating that in the post-war era, when labour was scarce (i.e. similar to 1348) the first thing the government of the day did was to ship in loads of nice, cheap labour. Which prevented (and still prevents) the workers having the upper hand.

Well, just my musings.

That is very interesting lurking.
I guess if employers find people quite happy to work for less, what hope have people trying to get a fair wage got?

It's fascinating that in the post-war era, when labour was scarce (i.e. similar to 1348) the first thing the government of the day did was to ship in loads of nice, cheap labour. Which prevented (and still prevents) the workers having the upper hand.

The EU free movement of labour rule is intended to do exactly the same thing. They call it 'labour market flexibility' but really it's about using competition to keep wages down.

Yes TripTrap the extra £10 after the reduction means that they are doing this extra work for £1 an hour or so.

If your boss asked you to work overtime would you work an extra 10 hours a week for £10 just so that you could claim that you earned it yourself, even though the petrol/bus/parking to get there might entirely wipe out any gain?

Personally I'd rather use that time to stick something on ebay for £10 and enjoy spending time with my family. I don't see why that's so hard to grasp.

cereal the cuts are hitting people who work long hours and study. Right now I'd settle for not being called lazy rather than more money.

No it doesn't Mark, because those who complain never have to work a huge amount of extra hours! That's the whole blinking point!

Even if they did, it makes no difference. What the hell happened to supporting yourself? They are not only working for that additional amount but for the ENTIRE amount they receive. That's normal.