Fuck it - the government will look me

[Phonicshaskilledmeoff]

I am becoming increasingly frustrated with the way our country is run. I love my country, but what on earth can I do to fix it? the Rachel reeves pension and stamp duty rumours have tipped me over the edge.

I believe 90% of our lives is the summation of our own choices. Bar (some of) our own (and families) health and tragic life events, there is very little we can’t choose in this country.

I’m not saying that the playing field is fair - I absolutely acknowledge that some groups face structural barriers that make good choices harder. Others are unaware those choices even exist. That’s where government should step in—not to equalise outcomes, but to equalise access to meaningful choice.

I think we all acknowledge that bad governments are ones that take away choices. This government, however is also taking away choice by incentivising bad choices. Policies should nudge people toward self-sufficiency, not make state reliance easier than self-reliance, or rewarding short-term decisions over long-term

Our Government should be working towards equitable availability of choice (not equal - see below) to make sure those choices are as easy and available to everyone. Policies should be in place to make sure people are encouraged to make the right choices.

I increasingly feel like I make the right choices and think what was the bloody point!

I’m going to wish I never paid into my pension soon and went on holiday instead! Should I just spend my money, move into a smaller house and quit my job. At this point I think I’d be better off.

Jargon Buster - EQUALITY - It’s assumed there is a level playing field and everyone gets the same resources. EQUITY - Everyone gets what they need to succeed, which may mean different levels of support.

I actually think we can't be flippant about that possibility. I know people who have left and leaving, lots turning the idea over.

The bottom line is the vast majority of tax payers don't have an issue with supporting genuinely disabled people. The issue is the ever increasing definition of hidden disabilities and the ever increasing pathologizing of normal emotions. Everyone feels stressed and anxious sometimes but when one person receives a benefit for it and someone else pays for it despite suffering from it themselves then there will always be an divide.

Because it's the highest mobility element of PIP/DLA and it has been assessed that they are disabled enough to qualify for the highest mobility element?

That is what I said. Non-contributory benefits are not time-limited including UC.

I don't know what other countries do. But I assume most European countries have some kind of long-term benefit system, otherwise people would starve.

For example: a quick Google tells me Germany has a contributory system which is time limited and an open ended system:

"If a worker is not eligible for the full unemployment benefits or after receiving the full unemployment benefit for the maximum of 12 months, he is able to apply for benefits from the so-called Hartz IV programme, an open-ended welfare programme."

Yes that difference is a major factor and will impact behaviour. Especially over a long period of time.

Why did we diverge? It’s storing up an increasingly difficult issue to resolve.

Me neither. Not a clue.

However, that is not the higher earners, broadest shoulders or whatever. They pay exceptionally high rates compared to other economies.

@Legolava can you expand on the above. I already said upthread that lower & middle earners (on paye) pay less vs other European countries but I thought higher earners (paye) were broadly in line as opposed to exceptionally high. Do you mean the loss of childcare incentives etc?

You don't understand. The mobility element of PIP is not awarded to people so that they can use it to lease a car. It is awarded in recognition of their mobility needs.

But they can choose to use it for that. Other people use it for electric wheel chairs, or to pay for taxis or whatever they think fit.

I’m not sure I understand your point, so forgive me if I reply in a half-cocked way, but I am saying that when PIP is calculated, if it includes an amount to fund a car that is unwanted or unneeded, that amount should be removed. It shouldn’t be a case of ‘well you’re entitled to a car, so here’s £x,000 per year for a lease’ and then the recipient decides to spend that money on something else instead.
This is NOT free money, and shouldn’t be treated as such.

but I am saying that when PIP is calculated, if it includes an amount to fund a car that is unwanted or unneeded, that amount should be removed

It doesn't include an amount to fund a car.
Here is a simple explanation, which I hope will help you understand.

What PIP is for

Personal Independence Payment (PIP) can help with extra living costs if you have both:

a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability

difficulty doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of your condition

You can get PIP even if you’re working, have savings or are getting most other benefits.

How PIP works

There are 2 parts to PIP:

a daily living part - if you need help with everyday tasks
a mobility part - if you need help with getting around

Whether you get one or both parts and how much you get depends on how difficult you find everyday tasks and getting around.

I don’t believe we’re there yet either, but given the speed with which this chancellor nurtures huge Black Holes that suddenly need filling, I am worried about it.

We are also outliers on our welfare system. Many counties are time limited and contribution based. We have far too many people not contributing comparatively because our system allows it.

I agree our welfare model isn't sustainable because people haven't paid enough but how do you fix that now with such a large proportion of older people?

Right wing rage is often not awfully cogent.

This country was in free fall for years before the current government took power.

We are in the shit. Hard decisions will need to be made by whomever is in power.

Get ready for a REALLY hard time if Reform get in.

@Swiftie1878 & do you believe that if we to receive a bailout all state pension payouts would cease?

When this government came into power they gave immediate above inflation pay rises to train drivers and NHS workers. This was clearly an agreement and seemed to appease the unions. Ok! Both sectors wages have stagnated since the crash. I am not making a moral argument here.

Could the arrangement with the unions not have been put on hold for a year, by prior agreement, and that money used for investment?

That could have been a start!

But it clearly does. If the recipient ends up by a car with it. Or is this like a Schrodinger’s car? Maybe it’s there, maybe it’s not.

Exactly. And that is wrong.
If they aren’t going to, or can’t, use the money for its intended purpose, it should be withheld.
Surely this is just common sense?

I don’t think we can. The whole mindset needs to change. It is cultural and will take generations to fix. The countries people want to emulate take pride in contributing, they see it as their public duty. We just have a majority population who want to know what they are entitled to from other people’s money.

It is a mindset. We are crabs in a bucket. If you do well and are successful, you
can’t be congratulated or keep the fruits of that success. You’re cash cows for an ever increasing majority who feel entitled to that money. People here don’t want to better themselves, they want other people to do it and take reward.

A few key differences to those economies people want to emulate are: higher taxes on lower and middle earners, time limited welfare and universal incentives. Here, we punish high earners because they must redistribute their money 👀 In other western countries, tax allowances, childcare and child benefits are universal. That’s because they want the higher and productive earners paying in as much as they can. Win, win for everyone. The higher tax payers keep paying more in. They feel they are getting something back and are valued. Here, they are hated and punished at every turn. They should be thankful they can work apparently. The hidden marginals higher tax payers face are a disincentive to working more. We are an outlier on this and it makes the burden very high.

It has been modelled and studied time and time again. Our tax system is harming productivity. The electorate here are too short sighted to realise that actually, there is a tipping point with tax. If the barriers to the greatest taxpayers were removed, for example: reduction of childcare, 100k cliff edge etc. There would be more money to fund their welfare state. It’s an act of self harm because the general public cannot see past their own nose.

The point is the money is awarded and the recipient decides what they do with it. There is no requirement to use it to lease (not buy) a car.

Left wing whatever isn’t really doing that well. People are realising Labour is stuffing it up.

They came for the rich and realised that actually they were punishing the middle classes who then decided to not pay the VAT and put the children into state education instead. I know two people who are working in private currently. Both school’s reception numbers are low this school year. How sustainable that is going forward will depend on each individual school.

I get that, but if the benefit is substantial enough to pay to lease a car which the recipient does not want, then it shouldn’t be paid, surely?

I guess the problem is in the calculation to decide how MUCH money should be paid in PIP?

The intended purpose is to help with mobility. That isn't going to be a car for everyone, it might be an electric wheelchair or taxis.

To which I would add that very often those higher earners aren't relying on NHS or state education, which makes their higher contribution even more contributory.

It's hard because I genuinely think lower earners aren't in a position right now to contribute more.

Things are just feeling gloomy ...

The point is that it’s too much money, that should be handed out, if they can lease new cars with it.