All-round Budget thread

[longfingernails]

.

I think all benefits that aren't sickness related , such as jsa, should come in food voucher form. I cannot understand for the life of me why child benefit exists - why should you be paid to have a child!? Surely noone should have a child until they can feed, clothe and HOME themselves and the child rather than force the government/tax payers to do so for them. Obviously not all children are planned etc... hence safety net, not way of life.

I'd love to know what percentage of the welfare bill actually goes to people who have never worked and refuse to work.

I believe it is a rather small proportion.

This shows the breakdown of spending, according the Daily Mail

wubbly

The attack on people on benefits is a red herring. They're an easy target, so the right-wing press likes to attack them.

According to the government, benefit fraud costs less than £1 billion annually. This is less than 1% of total expenditure on welfare. Put in perspective, it's a tiny tiny fraction of the government budget.

www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/BenefitsTaxCreditsAndOtherSupport/BenefitFraud/DG_10014876

citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/tax-evasion-costs-treasury-15-times-more-than-benefit-fraud/a378274

In comparison, the amount lost to the treasury from tax avoidance and tax evasion is estimated to be £120 Billion. That is, over 120 times the amount lost from benefit fraud.

If we concede that tax avoidance is legal, but that perhaps tax law should be reformed, and take only tax evasion, which is illegal, then that costs at least £15 Billion or 15 times the money lost from benefit fraud.

TSC I'll use that one.

Yes, it is Xenia.
The welfare state is a bloated, abused mill stone around our collective necks.

No it isn't, that's hysterical.

It is no longer a safety net but a way of life for millions.

No it isn't, that's hysterical.

It is the single thing that needs addressing above and beyond all else. It is, quite simply, unsustainable.

It isn't really. Money lost from benefits fraud cost less than £1 billion per year. This is less than 1% of total welfare expenditure, and 1/700th of the total budget. Get a grip and stop reading the Daily Mail.

We're not talking about fraud. We're talking about a system that is completely unsustainable. Can you not see that? That it costs more to keep people on benefits of any kind than it does to support the NHS.

Nigella, around 50% of that bill is directly related to pensions and pensioners. What do you suggest we do about them?

Nigella

What's unsustainable? If they're not committing fraud, then they're on benefits legally and rightfully. That is, they're on welfare so they can find work. Would you rather they had no income and starved to death or committed crimes?

If you want to reduce the cost of welfare, then make sure there are enough jobs out there for people to work, and make sure they're paid well enough so that people don't need to claim other benefits to help them survive.

Bailing out banks with £1 Trillion pounds of public money, after they caused a recession, putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work and on the welfare, and then complaining about the cost of welfare is, well... both incoherent and nasty as hell.

Look, it's quite obvious surely that NO ONE begrudges the old, the vulnerable and the sick support.

But why should the taxpayer support those to choose not to work or choose to SAH with their children which they seem to think is their right. A right which thousands of working families don't have, BTW.

I'd introduce a system where you work for your benefits too.

Still waiting.

Nigella, I think most of us would agree with the gist of what you say, but it's not simple to implement. If you for example introduce work for benefits, one outcome will be to lower wages for that work, which may shrink the overall economy; if you force all women/parents back to work, that too may be uneconomic in some areas - if I were a nurse in London, say, childcare might swallow up as much as I earned, and then how would I actually eat? If it were as easy as you make it sound, it would have been done.

I'm not so sure it's that clear cut though.

The coalition clearly do begrudge some of the vunerable and sick their support. They must do, otherwise why change the rules of ESA to force cancer patients having oral chemotherapy to undergo a medical exam?

Why threaten to take away the mobility allowance for some disabled people?

Why are those people any less deserving than the likes of Peter Stringfellow receiving a winter fuel payment?

I know Second coming.
Insane isn't it? I mean, everyone else has to work but that's unacceptable for benefit claimants. They're clearly above having to work for their bread like the rest of us.

And £60? Oh, please!

Look, it's quite obvious surely that NO ONE begrudges the old, the vulnerable and the sick support.

Are you sure? It sounds to me that some people do - unwittingly or not.

But why should the taxpayer support those to choose not to work or choose to SAH with their children which they seem to think is their right. A right which thousands of working families don't have, BTW.

If people 'choose not to work' and claiming benefits, they are committing fraud. I've just tried to explain to you that benefit fraud amounts to £1 Billion annually - that's 1% of the welfare bill, and 1/700th of the budget.

I'd introduce a system where you work for your benefits too.

Brilliant! You do realise that looking for a job is already a full-time job, and that it's hard enough to survive, let alone pay for suits, transport, photocopying, etc. you need to get a job? No, I don't suppose you do, perhaps because you've never been in that situation.

So your cunning plan of making the 99% of people who claim benefits legally and morally also work for their benefits will actually decrease their chances of becoming employed, which will end up costing the tax payer more money.

It really sounds to me that you have a problem with the very idea of welfare. Your tax money isn't being 'wasted' on welfare. Go pick on a bigger, and more worthy target, like the many many billions lost annually in tax evasion and avoidance from big businesses and the rich. Leave the poor and vulnerable alone.

Where the fuck have I taken a pop at your work ethic? I haven't a clue who you are/what you do.

I heart ttosca.

Ttosca. You have NO idea what situations I have or haven't been in .

I'm shocked that you are naive enough to think that 99% of people on benefits are all desperately looking for work and simply down on their luck. Do you not concede that maybe, just a few even, have no intention of working when they can live quite happily off the tax payer.

Community and volunteer work. Same as millions of people do now. You know, charity shops, community litter pick, repainting and repairing community facilities, support in schools ( parents do tons of this).

Slave labour? Hilarious. People have to work for a living. Most people EARN their crusts, yeah? You get that?

I said vouchers so the money is going towards necessary things not 'necessities' like tvs, alcohol or cigarettes (obv not all but possible and not for the gov to pay for). Shouldn't people do some form of community service for JSA etc...? I don't think it's that insane a suggestion that people do something for the community that is supporting their existence.

The financial sector has created more than the bail out and I've heard the benefits claimant joke before - the difference is the banker would have earned his biscuits. And I dont read the bloody daily fail.