more welfare cuts what do people predict?

[mrshess]

In the news that there is to be an extra 4 billion cuts on top of the 11 billion cuts to be announced in Oct to target long term claimants. What do people think they are going to cut and how?

What happened if people owned more than one house?

I would think a large house with extensive grounds and servants, could generate an awful lot of waste actually.

I would like to see them cut the child benefit (portable benefit) going to Polish children living in Poland, could save the government a whopping £24 million. I wish I could predict this but somehow I don't think they will do anything about it.

Quantify large house. 4 beds in some areas is large.

Post separation/divorce when my Mum was in the marital/family home on her own and it was CC, she paid less than the family in a similar house with four earning adults and generated less waste etc.

When CTAX came in, she had to foot the bill less 25% on her own, and hers had a higher band. Even with the 25% off she was still paying more; that's no more 'fair' than CC. CTAX is a bastard hybrid of rates and CC imo isn't much different, except you can always end up liable for the 50% property element. CC was easier for students though as if they could prove what degree they were doing, they had a 100% exemption. For CTAX if a student shares with others on a joint tenancy and someone drops out, there is suddenly a liability where there wasn't before, and they can all be held liable as they are all on the tenancy agreement.

You can't have much imagination if you need me to quantify a "large house with extensive grounds and servants"!!! You know, a bleeding great mansion!

Please confirm what the situation was with poll tax and people who had more than one property. Did they only pay once, for their main residence?

Not everyone lives in a bleeding great mansion. A 4 bed detached would be considered large in some places.

Standard charge was paid on the second residence, so the multiplier could be 0.5 x normal charge up to a maximum of twice personal charge. This is per the 1988 LGFA.

Plenty of people do live in bleeding great mansions. More than a handful, I can't see any reason to pretend people don't.

I don't understand your answer. So if 3 people lived in one house and had a second house for holidays, they paid 3 x on the first house and 3 x on the second? To the relevant local authoritites?

What about 3rd and subsequent properties?

Persons subject to standard community charge

(1)A person is subject to a charging authority?s standard community charge on any day if he has at any time on the day a freehold interest in the whole of a building, and the following conditions are fulfilled as regards the building throughout the day?

(a)it is situated in the authority?s area,

(b)it is not the sole or main residence of an individual (construing sole or main residence in accordance with section 2 above),

(c)it is domestic property,

(d)it is not designated for the purposes of collective community charges of the authority,

(e)it is not divided into self-contained parts, and

(f)it is not subject (as a whole) to a single relevant leasehold interest.

(2)A person is subject to a charging authority?s standard community charge on any day if he has at any time on the day a relevant leasehold interest in the whole of a building, and the following conditions are fulfilled as regards the building throughout the day?

(a)the conditions mentioned in subsection (1)(a) to (e) above, and

(b)the condition that it is not subject (as a whole) to a single relevant leasehold interest inferior to his interest.

(3)A person is subject to a charging authority?s standard community charge on any day if he has at any time on the day a freehold interest in the whole of a self-contained part of a building, and the following conditions are fulfilled as regards the part throughout the day?

(a)the conditions mentioned in subsection (1)(a) to (d) above, and

(b)the condition that it is not subject (as a whole) to a single relevant leasehold interest.

(4)A person is subject to a charging authority?s standard community charge on any day if he has at any time on the day a relevant leasehold interest in the whole of a self-contained part of a building, and the following conditions are fulfilled as regards the part throughout the day?

(a)the conditions mentioned in subsection (1)(a) to (d) above, and

(b)the condition that it is not subject (as a whole) to a single relevant leasehold interest inferior to his interest.

(5)A person is subject to a charging authority?s standard community charge on any day if he is at any time on the day the owner of a caravan, and the following conditions are fulfilled as regards the caravan throughout the day?

(a)the conditions mentioned in subsection (1)(a) and (b) above, and

(b)the condition that it is stationed on land which is a protected site.

Nope that's all dutch to me. It seems to be saying that you only have to pay if no-one lives there, and that can't be right.

I am impressed and not very astounded to find someone who says that yes, a duke should pay the same tax as his gardener. basic tory policy, innit, and we'll be getting more of the same.

hahahhaha

turned this up in hansard - question in the lords re the poll tax and second homes

guess what they all start going on about.. you guessed it... their expenses and can they claim it all back

also liked the assumption that anyone in teh lords would be male and have a wife and children at home elsewhere great stuff

whoops here

A person is subject to a charging authority?s standard community charge on any day if he has at any time on the day a freehold interest in the whole of a building, and the following conditions are fulfilled as regards the building throughout the day?

(a)it is situated in the authority?s area,

(b)it is not the sole or main residence of an individual (construing sole or main residence in accordance with section 2 above),

(c)it is domestic property,

Above, if a second/third home was owned standard charge was due, as under (b) not the prime sole/main residence (ie second home not main residence).

The standard charge was the CC for the LA x whatever the multiplier was for that LA. There were exemptions, for instance if a service man was paying CC on a Married Quarter in Rosyth whilst trying to let out the family home on Cornwall, which was empty in the meantime, then you could apply not to pay standard charge. Some authorities allowed the exemption, some made you pay 50% of the CC in that case. This was unfair.

I think with CC it was fair because you paid per head in the property. There is never going to be a way of financing Local Govt that pleases everyone - I think we should move to a sales tax as they do in the US, and then we all pay according to what we buy.

So it is definitely fair that a duke should pay the same as his gardener.

Just looked at US sales tax

"Sales taxes can be applied to tangible goods like food (in some states), clothing, cars, furniture, household items, and other goods that often made up the bulk of lower-income and middle-income family budgets.[7] By comparison, the sales tax does not generally apply to landscaping services, attorney fees, private school tuition, stocks and bonds, real estate investments, and other purchases more typically made by higher-income families."

Yes that sounds about right.

So you have a single duke living in a 16 bedroom mansion with extensive grounds, generating stacks of waste etc. He pays x poll tax, and x for his food etc, luckily for him and his ilk this tax does not apply to things like school fees, stocks etc.

Meanwhile his gardener lives in a small derelict hovel just off the estate with his fmaily. He pays 4 x the taxes the duke does. naturally he does not benefit from the exemptions for private school fees, stocks etc.

It's a tory utopia!

cuts to tax credits
chiild benefit will either be frozen or tiny increases
more means testing (eg equity in house for elderly care)
I know I asked Daddy

the Winter fuel allowance discussion reminds me of the convo I overheard on holiday.
Pensioner complaining to his son-in-law (I think) that his pension was taxed and at the higher rate too then went on to comment that this was the 5th holiday they'd had that year! it did make me chuckle

They will cut JSA and IS by about 5pounds a week, and cap HB so that more and more people will have to pay the extra rent out of their (already reduced)food money.

It will become harder and take longer to claim JSA on becoming unemployed, and many people who are ill will no longer get DLA. Especially people with slightly less obvious complaints, such as depression and MS, who are sometimes ok but would take so much time off work that it would be impossible to hold down a job.

There will be a substancial increase in the numbers of homeless people, and so squatting will become more commonplace.

Many people will have no alternative but to turn to crime, there will be more prostitution, drug dealing and mugging.

More children will be malnourished and domestic violence and child abuse will increase due to stress and depression caused by financial hardship.

Millions of public sector workers who have been made redundant will have to wait for months to receive benefits, buy the time they do they will have been made homeless and possibly had their children taken into care for being unable to cope, thus putting more strain on social services.

Many will find it more and more difficult to find a job due to the fact that funding for retraining has been pulled, and many that do find work will become depressed for having to work in dead end jobs that do not reflect their level of skills or offer any kind of prospect. This will put extra strain on the NHS.

They will first freeze then reduce working and child tax credits, risking that those on the lowest incomes will default on their bills and possibly even rent. Many parents will be forced to choose between food and electricity on a weekly basis. More women will go to prison for stealing clothes for their kids because they cannot afford uniforms or shoes.

Yes, I predict a riot.

I think basically everyone should start paying hand over fist for private health care now ,dont bother eating ,just pay the premiums ,because youre going to need it

...or just take care of yourself: eat well, exercise, don't smoke and don't drink to excess.

'...or just take care of yourself: eat well, exercise, don't smoke and don't drink to excess.'

Yes, because things like cancer, Parkinson's disease, MS, ALS, disability or long-term illness due to accident, etc. only strike people who brought it on themselves through not looking after themselves .

"...or just take care of yourself: eat well, exercise, don't smoke and don't drink to excess."

You forgot to add "Dont catch infectious diseases and dont have accidents, OK, otherwise its all your own fault you lazy feckless sick person."

The people will say they have no money for bread, and the tories will say 'let them eat cake'.