George Osborne's 'stealth cuts' will force millions to miss economic recovery

More than three million low-income families risk missing out on the economic recovery even if wages start to keep pace with inflation, according to an analysis for The Independent.

The Resolution Foundation, an independent think-tank which aims to improve living standards for the less wealthy, accused George Osborne of burying a £385m “stealth cut” in the small print of last year’s Autumn Statement, which will force the working poor to “run uphill” and earn an extra £1,000 a year just to stand still.

The foundation has analysed the impact of the Chancellor’s decision to freeze the “work allowance” – the amount people can earn before their payment under universal credit starts to be withdrawn. The freeze means that even if their wages rise in line with the cost of living, their income will fall in real terms because the allowance does not keep pace with inflation.

More here... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/george-osbornes-stealth-cuts-will-force-millions-to-miss-economic-recovery-9038023.html

What a bunch of chancers this government is in conning the general public that they are trying to help them when in fact they are shafting them all over the place.

Get these clowns out of office at the first available opportunity.

There will always be winners and losers Iron.

The last Labour government gave a hell of a lot of money to foreigners and non-workers, this one is helping anybody who is willing to go out and work.

I see nothing wrong with that.

and 385 million or .385 billion is

.385/543 or 0.07% or 7p per 100 paid in all taxes

another massive saving hooray for george.....

only it wont be a saving after all...will it.......

BigAndy9 wrote:There will always be winners and losers Iron.

The last Labour government gave a hell of a lot of money to foreigners and non-workers, this one is helping anybody who is willing to go out and work.

I see nothing wrong with that.

no it doesnt help anyone only the higher paid, thats the point low paid workers (the majority) will lose out....again

BigAndy9 wrote:There will always be winners and losers Iron.

The last Labour government gave a hell of a lot of money to foreigners and non-workers, this one is helping anybody who is willing to go out and work.

I see nothing wrong with that.

Nether do I Andy. Just a pity that many of the jobs that this government are counting as real jobs are part time, zero hours contracts or jobs that don't offer enough hours for people to get by on.

So many people chasing jobs makes it difficult for anyone to get an interview let alone an actual real job.

Irn Bru wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:There will always be winners and losers Iron.

The last Labour government gave a hell of a lot of money to foreigners and non-workers, this one is helping anybody who is willing to go out and work.

I see nothing wrong with that.

Nether do I Andy. Just a pity that many of the jobs that this government are counting as real jobs are part time, zero hours contracts or jobs that don't offer enough hours for people to get by on.

So many people chasing jobs makes it difficult for anyone to get an interview let alone an actual real job.

Very true Iron.

And on other threads you will trumpet bringing millions of foreigners in to chase those jobs.

Nothing the last government did added up Iron.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Nether do I Andy. Just a pity that many of the jobs that this government are counting as real jobs are part time, zero hours contracts or jobs that don't offer enough hours for people to get by on.

So many people chasing jobs makes it difficult for anyone to get an interview let alone an actual real job.

Very true Iron.

And on other threads you will trumpet bringing millions of foreigners in to chase those jobs.

Nothing the last government did added up Iron.

I haven't trumpeted any such thing Andy other than to say that the reason for all the migration goes right back to Thatcher signing the Single European Act and John Major signing the Maastricht Treaty that took us into the EU and the freedom of movement for EU citizens that came with it.

Someone give Osborne an overdose of the cocaine he is so fond of, for crying out loud!

grumpy old git wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:There will always be winners and losers Iron.

The last Labour government gave a hell of a lot of money to foreigners and non-workers, this one is helping anybody who is willing to go out and work.

I see nothing wrong with that.

no it doesnt help anyone only the higher paid, thats the point low paid workers (the majority) will lose out....again

How will the lower paid lose out now they have less to pay in taxes, meaning they are much better off than they have been before.

Their record speaks for themselves:



Services sector grew every month in 2013
Index of growth declines slightly at end of year but economy remains on track to record fastest growth since 2007




Britain's dominant service sector continued its rapid expansion in December to complete a clean sweep year in which it grew every month,
The Markit/CIPS Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) of services activity, in which any reading above 50 indicates growth, reached 58.8 last month. This was below expectations and the weakest rate of growth for six months.
However, the average growth rate in new orders in the final quarter of the year was the best in survey history, according to Markit, boding well for the new year.
Services account for almost 80pc of Britain's economic output, making the PMI reading a key indicator of economic strength. December's figure was down from the 60 seen in November and the 62.5 of the previous month, when it hit a 16-year high.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10552858/Services-sector-grew-every-month-in-2013.html


If under labour, we would be in the same boat as France now, up the creek without a paddle

PhilDidge wrote:

grumpy old git wrote:

no it doesnt help anyone only the higher paid, thats the point low paid workers (the majority) will lose out....again

How will the lower paid lose out now they have less to pay in taxes, meaning they are much better off than they have been before.

Jeepers you cant see it in front of you.....they looses out because the point at which their tax credits get with drawn IF they get a pay rise has been held stiil, instead of following inflation at least.

However someone on higher rates of pay not getting tax credits will not have this happen of course

so mr 30,000 per year gets a 1000 pound rise ...he gets to keep it all (bar tax)
mr 10,000 per year wont see any of it and may actually get an effective pay cut because his tax credits will fall faster than his money increases....

ok so those figures are not strictly accurate becasue i dont know the threshold for tax credit withdrawal but you get the mechanism...

grumpy old git wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

How will the lower paid lose out now they have less to pay in taxes, meaning they are much better off than they have been before.

Jeepers you cant see it in front of you.....they looses out because   the point at which their tax credits get with drawn IF they get a pay rise has been held stiil, instead of following inflation at least.

However someone on higher rates of pay not getting tax credits will not have this happen of course

so mr 30,000 per year gets a 1000 pound rise ...he gets to keep it all (bar tax)
mr 10,000 per year wont see any of it and may actually get an effective pay cut because his tax credits will fall faster than his money increases....

ok so those figures are not strictly accurate becasue i dont know the threshold for tax credit withdrawal but you get the mechanism...

Simple maths for you, lowest incomes now pay less tax than under labour, thus better off than they were before, surely you can understand simple maths?

You see thats the problem with the R/W...they are simple.....they dont see the complexity that lies behind these matters....

that may well be the case (about the taxes) BUT what you are (deliberately I suspect) ignoring, is that THIS particular piece of idiocy is designed to increase further the gap beween high and low paid, thus effectively wiping out the tax cuts ...what one hand gives the other taketh away...and then some. Fred gets ALL his pay rise ...sid gets none...or even a cut in effect.....sorry if thats too difficult a concept for you. Thats why you are so in love with the tories.....

grumpy old git wrote:You see thats the problem with the R/W...they are simple.....they dont see the complexity that lies behind these matters....

that may well be the case (about the taxes) BUT what you are (deliberately I suspect) ignoring, is that THIS particular piece of idiocy is designed to increase further the gap beween high and low paid, thus effectively wiping out the tax cuts ...what one hand gives the other taketh away...and then some. Fred gets ALL his pay rise ...sid gets none...or even a cut in effect.....sorry if thats too difficult a concept for you. Thats why you are so in love with the tories.....

I know the complexity, I am asking you a simple question, are people on lower incomes better off with the higher tax threshold?

The answer is yes

PhilDidge wrote:

grumpy old git wrote:You see thats the problem with the R/W...they are simple.....they dont see the complexity that lies behind these matters....

that may well be the case (about the taxes) BUT what you are (deliberately I suspect) ignoring, is that THIS particular piece of idiocy is designed to increase further the gap beween high and low paid, thus effectively wiping out the tax cuts ...what one hand gives the other taketh away...and then some. Fred gets ALL his pay rise ...sid gets none...or even a cut in effect.....sorry if thats too difficult a concept for you. Thats why you are so in love with the tories.....

I know the complexity, I am asking you a simple question, are people on lower incomes better off with the higher tax threshold?

The answer is yes

The answer is no, because they will stand still or lose as benefit will be taken away, so they won't be any better off and might be worse off.

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:



I know the complexity, I am asking you a simple question, are people on lower incomes better off with the higher tax threshold?

The answer is yes

The answer is no, because they will stand still as benefit will be taken away, so they won't be any better off.

Still yes as they get benefits as well with low earners, so again better off

You can't add up can you, and it appears, you can't read either.

I can as what benefits have they lost if they are low earners sassy.

Take your time

Cant answer the question then?

never mind, keep on repeating that pet mantra of yours it will comfort you...

Get it into your ossified intellect....they were better of last year...they may even be better of THIS year, but next year and the year after they will become progressively worse off, some quite badly so as a result of this. AND whats the POINT of perfoming well, and getting a rise...when its immediatly snatched off you ???leaving you no better off....and dont say the satisfaction...that doesnt put food on the table etc.