The Tory attack on family 'v' The State of the Economy. I don't want to like the Tories, I Would Rather Eat my Own Arse. So help Me Understand

[Tortington]

abolition of Child Trust Funds;

money in bank for being born was always a shit idea. lets give kids £100 for existing.

the economy down the shitter - i think its proper that we pull this.

the Health in Pregnancy Grant;

not essential is it. does one reaaaaaaaally need a grant to be healthy in pregnancy?

jesus again i have to say - as a benefit to be pulled, its hardly essential considering that cut back have to be made

Surestart Maternity Grant for second child;

i dont know what this is- more money for having children?

the three-year freeze on child benefits whats the problem
and the introduction of housing benefit caps.
great

then theres the biggee - CB.

WTF am i not seeing that everyone seems to be going apoplectic about?

is there general agreement that a cb cut should be on household income? is it that its unfair in this way?

if that is the case - i see the point.

if its just bitching becuase people who earn over 45k aren't getting cb, then im finding it hard to agree.

and the argument that its a failsafe paid to women that help them get out of abused situations etc - you can't just pay women benefits on the offchance that one dayt hey will be abused.

am i missing a mahoosive point?

tell me the tories are targeting poor people like this but are not targeting rich people.

tell me that yes yes!! yes yes yes!!! you would agree with benefits like this being withdrawn, IF he also targetted rich people by some tax or other

tell me the equality?

they seem like non essential benefits to me - that have to be reined in cos we're financially up the shitter? or are we - maybe we aren't financially up the shitter and its a huge lie and the tories are just lying and whipping poor people? tell me?

If the richest people left the country, they would take most of their wealth with them and this would be extremely damaging to the economy and the country as a whole as the wealthiest in the country pay a large proportion of the tax and are less likely to use public services then compared to people of less wealth.

The wealthiest people also tend to be the better educated and so an exodus of these people would diminish economic performance as there would be far fewer highly skilled workers in the economy and so productivity would be reduced.

If the richest people left the country it would

Free up an awful lot of real estate which would bring property prices down (good) and make vast tracts of land accessible to less wealthy people

Ditto free up trillions of second homes which are also driving property prices

Free up top jobs so everyone can move on up

Better educated does not = brighter, more talented or cleverer. Plus there are loads of well educated people who are not in the top pay brackets. Are we saying people like the extended royal family (ie v wealthy and v well educated) are highly intelligent skilled workers? (ha!)

Plus as I said earlier not all wealthy people only act in their own self interest, and not all wealthy people will go anywhere just for the sake of a few quid

i don't buy it, not at all.

riven I don't think the next tier would be able to produce the same amount of wealth as they are not as highly skilled.
I don't have any figures but I think you would find if you investigated it then the majority of people who earn over £100,000 would be russell group university graduates.

ISNT I agree that not all of the wealthiest people would leave but I believe a significant proportion would as it is estimated that 1 in 4 hedgefund managers have left since the imposition of the higher rate of income tax and the banking levy. Financial services are our most productive industry and the City Of London generates around 9% of GDP so this is not a good sign.

I also agree that there are some very wealthy people who have simply been born into wealth and so are not highly skilled workers but there are a lot who are not and if some of these people were to leave then this would hurt our productivity and so our competitiveness, this is particulary important in the context of globalisation.

riven I think the market is very efficient in estimating and rewarding people skills and abilities and so although your DH might be able I don't think this would be replicated across the country.

"I think you would find if you investigated it then the majority of people who earn over £100,000 would be russell group university graduates."

I would be interested in seeing what proportion of those who earn over £100K also had very wealthy parents. Old boys network is still alive and well. I've met very few high earners who I was "wowed" by, in terms of their originality of thinking, performance or charisma. They're just the same as everyone else, with a bit of luck thrown in.

ISNT I agree that a majority of those who earn 100k+ come from wealthy background but that is because social mobility is very low in this country and has been declining for the last 25 years.

I don't agree that those on high salaries are the same as everybody else (I do not earn anything like 100k btw), they tend to have good degrees in acadademically rigourous subjects from russell group universities and also have professional qualifications ie llb or acca. Most people on lower incomes do not have these and so they are not as highly skilled so the labour market does not value them as highly so they are not paid as much.

riven scientists are valued, people with degrees in the sciences tend to do very well in the job market, usually better than those with degrees in the humanities.

huddspur that's just not true.

For a start, what about the hordes of professionally qualified women who have been forced into alternative lower paid work because their employers do not accept flexibility in working patterns? Thousands of really great people just waiting for the right circs.

Honestly I don;t see it.

ISNT women who require flexibility in their work patterns are not valued as much in the labour market because employers are having to make allowances for them that they probably don't have to make for a male member of staff. These allowances cause inconvienence and can incur additional costs so these women are not valued as highly by the labour market and so they are paid less/ work in lower alternative work.

Huddspur, don't you think it would be great if the labour market was forced to rethink their ideas about presenteeism etc?

I think it would be great. I am beginning to think that if all of the top earners fucked off we could have some really worthwhile revisions of our society and working practices.

I'm liking everything so far. Lower property prices, more social mobility, employers becoming more family-friendly.... great!

ISNT the market by its very nature does not consider those things as it is only interested in the efficient allocation of rersources and the maximisation of output it does not take into account social considerations. That is why the Government intervenes and regulates it to a certain extent.

I don't see why you think all the top earners leaving the country and taking there skills, businesses, consumption and tax revenue with them would be a good thing. The wealthiest people in the country pay large amounts (top 10% pay 53% of income tax for example) of tax and often don't use public services. If they were to leave then the Government would have far less tax revenue and we would be unable to sustain public services.

Add to this it would cause a skill shortage that would make us far less attractive to transnational corporations who may wish to invest here and create wealth and jobs so our economy would suffer as a result.

Why would this be desirable?

huddspur your post has many points in it which are not quite right.

No-one pays 53% income tax on all of their earnings. Tax rates are only applicable on amounts over that threshold. Unless you are including NI and things like that.

The rich don't use public services? Police, roads, bins, trains, NHS etc etc they use them of course they do.

if the top 1% wealth-wise left the country I am in absolutely no doubt that the country would manage just fine. these people are not irreplacable, others would simply step up to replace them. Skills shortage - laughable TBH.

Do you honestly think that if they put a few pence on the £40Kish rate, people would leave in droves? They wouldn't. People have ties here - normal people don't just go wherever will make them richest, they have roots, connections, family etc.

This is an argument being made on another thread - that communities are irrelevant. They aren't.

It;s people with a tory mindset ie self interest first and foremost who think like that - not everyone has a tory mindset - not even all rich people have a tory mindset. It would be fine.

"ISNT the market by its very nature does not consider those things as it is only interested in the efficient allocation of rersources and the maximisation of output it does not take into account social considerations."

Plus the old boys network is still beavering away as strong as ever.... So I'm not even sure about that point TBH.

We're going to go around in circles here.

I believe that the vulnerable in society should be protected, and that where there are areas of deep poverty and ingrained benefit dependence, assistance should be given to educate and train the people there and get them into jobs.

I'm a carrot rather than a stick person. IME there aren't that many people who don't want to work, there are just a lot of people with difficult circumstances who can't see the wood for the trees.

I believe that it is wrong that the gap between the top paid in companies and the bottom paid is now so huge - much much larger than it was even 30 years ago. I would be very happy to see a shake-up in attitude of large corporations towards their employees.

I believe that our society is basically constructed in a way that allows the rich to grow richer and the poor trapped, and I think that is wrong. I think that education and opportunity are needed and then social problems will start to ease.

I do not believe that forcibly moving some of the most vulnerable families in our society away from support networks, removing vulnerable children from schools where they will have built up relationships with teachers etc, and dumping them somewhere else quite random, while at the same time cutting back to enough money to provide for 2 children (even if there are 10) is the right thing to do. I think that it is cruel and unnecessary.

I also think that it will make social problems even worse. We know that children from large families on benefits have worse life outcomes than others. Now take those children and remove them from everything familiar - their school, their friends, their extended families - and what do you have? A whole lot of children with worse life outcomes who are now isolated and angry. Sounds like a recipe for success to me

Sorry I didn't make my point on tax clear. 53% of all income tax paid in the economy is paid by the top 10% of earners. If these people were to leave then there would be an obvious shortfall in tax revenue.

I stand by my point that wealthier people tend to use less public services than those on lower incomes (private schools, private healthcare and tend to claim very little welfare).

I can see we are not going to agree on the skills shortage point but I feel confident if doctors,lawyers,accountants and investment bankers were to leave the country we could not easily replace them.

The 40% tax rate would be targetting more people than the richest 10% of the country and would damage aspirational middle income earners.

I agree that communities are not irrelevant but I think that community links are quite weak in modern society.

I'm not a tory, I have voted Liberal Democrat at every election I have ever voted in.

You sound like a tory to me mate.

Doctors leaving the country to get a few quid

The ones I know (NHS docs) are all labour voters, they're hardly going to throw a wobbler over paying a bit of tax now are they.

I think we'll be here all day - it's just a total ideological opposition. i will never understand you and you will never understand me.

I just used doctors and others as an example as a possible skills shortage and of course there would be differences within and between professions.

Yes we do have different ideological position to you and we will probably never agree