Institute of Fiscal Studies, Household Income still 2% below the peak of 2009/10

Average household income is now back at pre-recession levels but is still more than 2 per cent below its 2009–10 peak, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).

According to the think tank’s latest briefing note published today, the recovery in living standards has been much slower than after the three previous recessions, with median income growing by less than 2 per cent between 2011–12 and 2014–15.

The news confirms Labour’s election message that voters are worse of today than they were when the coalition took office back in 2010.

Real household incomes continued to grow during the recession of 2008 and 2009, according to the report, due in part to temporary fiscal stimulus measures brought in by the previous Labour government. Median income then fell by 4.0 per cent from its peak in 2009-10.

However the IFS says it is “almost certain that incomes would have fallen significantly under any government”.

“It would therefore be misleading to attribute all trends in living standards before May 2010 to Labour, and all trends since then to the coalition,” it adds.

It also says that household income is finally strengthening thanks to an improving labour market and falling inflation, with real median income growing by 1.1 per cent in 2014-15 – and therefore returning to around its pre-recession (2007–08) level.

But it cautions that the recovery in living standards has been slow and household consumption is still at pre-crisis level. Between 2011–12 and 2014–15, median income grew by just 1.8 per cent compared to 9.2 per cent in the early 1980s and 5.1 per cent in the 1990s.

This, the IFS says, is mainly the result of weak growth in earnings for those in work. “Tax increases and benefit cuts, implemented as part of the government’s deficit reduction plan, have also reduced incomes,” it adds.

According to the briefing note, changes in living standards have been different for different groups:

* Falls in income have been larger for higher-income households because real earnings fell significantly after the recession, while initially social security benefits were broadly protected. However since 2012–13 middle-income households have done better than low- and high-income households.

* Low-income households have faced higher inflation due to changes in the period up to and including 2009–10. Low-income households were hit harder by rising food and energy prices, and benefited less from falling mortgage interest rates, the IFS says.

* Incomes for those of working age remain below pre-crisis levels, with median income for young adults projected to be 7.6 per cent lower in 2014–15 than in 2007–08. It is also estimated to be 2.5 per cent lower for those aged 31 to 59. Meanwhile, median income for those aged 60 and over is projected to have risen by 1.8 per cent over the same period.

http://leftfootforward.org/2015/03/household-income-more-than-2-per-cent-below-2009-10-levels-according-to-ifs/

Left foot?
OMG

They are simply quoting THE INSTITUTE OF FISCAL STUDIES

OMG!

They are left wing drivel giving their view.

They are left wing and proud of it giving the FACTS from the INSTITUTE OF FISCAL STUDIES Report.

Who would want to be a arse crawling grovelling right winger?

risingsun wrote:They are left wing and proud of it giving the FACTS from the INSTITUTE OF FISCAL STUDIES Report.  

Who would want to be a arse crawling grovelling right winger?

Well left wing and proud of it does not make for any argumnent.
Good luck to them.
Its still drivel and not going to bring about a Labour victory love

It is facts by the INSTITUTE OF FISCAL STUDIES, who are recognosed by all sides and their figures are audited and used by the Conservative Party.

And don't you 'love' me you squirming little weasal just because you have been shown to have the brain power of a squashed rabbit that has been hit by a 20 ton truck.

I have already provided this story which differs from the left wing drivel of above.
So that is down to how one view the data.
The facts are this, Labour placed tis country into a nightmare with the recession, the Tories have turned this around and now people are better off.
You hate these facts.

Okay love.

you know the right dont like unadulterated data....they prefer to "massage" it first

Do they? Is that why the left here are so deserpate to make something which is actually good news into bad news again?

no...and I'm not left BTW....it may have escaped your notice...

will you and ben kindly make up your mind which side of the political spectrum you want to place me in...i'M gettin dizzy here.....

however....its funny how the right "huffnpuff" when someone presents blunt figures from somewhere like the IFS or ONS

yet lap up the rubbish produced by their idols....


pffft...

the truth is out there.....

You do hold socialist views and hold nationalist views, which means you hold both righ and left wing views.
Again tis is good news, it points in the right direction though again you only see negative.
That speaks volumes.

Not for the dodgy one it's not, it's something he does his best to avoid. Well, he is a Con Job.

Yet more left wing intolerance.

victim alert

Wahhh...they are being "poiliticist"

darknessss wrote:victim alert

Wahhh...they are being "poiliticist"

Just a realist and finally opening my eyes how each side is so intolerant, hence why little ever gets achieved.

yup didge...like your intolerance of the unfortunate....

and the fantasy you hold in your heart that absolutely anyone can find a job, no matter how disabled they are...

I bet you even agree with that idiot who suggested that employers should be able to pay disabled people £2 per hour

darknessss wrote:I bet you even agree with that idiot who suggested that employers should be able to pay disabled people £2 per hour

Nope, this is why the left lose debates they start coming out with all kinds of crap

darknessss wrote:yup didge...like your intolerance of the unfortunate....

and the fantasy you hold in your heart that absolutely anyone can find a job, no matter how disabled  they are...

Wrong again I am all for people out of work to have work and that many can have work being as there is over 700,000 job vancancies many of which are not being filled of which you provide no explannation for when this number remains consistant. To me work brings purpose and meaning to many peoples lives,.

Brasidas wrote:

darknessss wrote:yup didge...like your intolerance of the unfortunate....

and the fantasy you hold in your heart that absolutely anyone can find a job, no matter how disabled  they are...

Wrong again I am all for people out of work to have work and that many can have work being as there is over 700,000 job vancancies many of which are not being filled of which you provide no explannation for when this number remains consistant. To me work brings purpose and meaning to many peoples lives,.

the inference thus being that it does so for all...regardless...

talk about defining for people what they want....

I thought THAT was a lefty trait...dictating to others whats good for them

darknessss wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Wrong again I am all for people out of work to have work and that many can have work being as there is over 700,000 job vancancies many of which are not being filled of which you provide no explannation for when this number remains consistant. To me work brings purpose and meaning to many peoples lives,.

the inference thus being that it does so for all...regardless...

talk about defining for people what they want....

I thought THAT was a lefty trait...dictating to others whats good for them

Working does bring positivity, there is no denying this compoared to not working which brings about anxiety and stree from then meony concerns.
Again you are avoiding my question.
I am not defening anything other than the benefits of working

Brasidas wrote:

darknessss wrote:

the inference thus being that it does so for all...regardless...

talk about defining for people what they want....

I thought THAT was a lefty trait...dictating to others whats good for them

Working does bring positivity, there is no denying this compoared to not working which brings about anxiety and stree from then meony concerns.
Again you are avoiding my question.
I am not defening anything other than the benefits of working

you are..you are defending the victimisation and demonisation and sanctioning to death(literally in many cases) the countrys most vulnerable....

make NO mistake


there can be NO excuse

for "target driven " sanctioning
for "mistakes"
for in fact any "reason"

for what has happened...IN YOUR NAME (you did say you voted for em didnt you?)

to some of the MOST vulnerable in our society.....all to catch out a few lazy fraudsters

would that some of this enthusiasm was applied to the real culprits of our problems....

You are deflecting away from the same point on two threads which is backing aup a valid reason why some people should have their money stopped oif they are clearly not activelly seeking work.
Your argument is slipping badly here Victor and you have no where to run

From what I see on here brings to mind a quote which Quill introduced a wee while back by John Kenneth Galbraith. These words...

The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

John Kenneth Galbraith

You are doing exactly what you did on the other thread Dodgy and made a fool of yourself again.  Ignoring the facts and not reading what is actually happening.  People WHO ARE IN HOSPITAL DYING are being sanctioned!

risingsun wrote:You are doing exactly what you did on the other thread Dodgy and made a fool of yourself again.  Ignoring the facts and not reading what is actually happening.  People WHO ARE IN HOSPITAL DYING are being sanctioned!

Another post seeking to deflect away from the facts I am pointing out in regards to over 700,000 job vancancies which is consistant throughout the year.
If you do not have an answer then I suggest you move along.

No, you are doing the deflecting because the thread is about the fact that people STILL HAVEN'T RETURNED TO THE INCOMES THEY HAD IN 2009/10

Brasidas wrote:

risingsun wrote:You are doing exactly what you did on the other thread Dodgy and made a fool of yourself again.  Ignoring the facts and not reading what is actually happening.  People WHO ARE IN HOSPITAL DYING are being sanctioned!

Another post seeking to deflect away from the facts I am pointing out in regards to over 700,000 job vancancies which is consistant throughout the year.
If you do not have an answer then I suggest you move along.

THIS is what matters.....

NOt your pointless point....


seriously i dont give a damn about "how many jobs there are"

the point remains and ALWAYS WILL remain
that......

you talk of "civilised" and yet what I have said above is the bald and patent truth

and is far from "civilised"

it is utterly WRONG and indefensible that those unfortunates in sassy's post were treted like that...

it is unacceptable to make excuses like "mistake"

IF you are going to posit a harsh and strict system then it had better NOT make ANY mistakes

otherwise it becomes a disreputable monstrosity

NOR can you deny that as far as the countries finace is concerned, the payments "lost" due to fraud and or so called "workshy" is not only miniscule as a proportion of the benefits bill, but pales into utter insignificance in comparison to what is drained from the country by the tax doging rich

CLEARLY you are defending the victimisation and demonisation and sanctioning to death(literally in many cases) the countrys most vulnerable....

make NO mistake


there can be NO excuse

for "target driven " sanctioning
for "mistakes"
for in fact any "reason"

for what has happened...IN YOUR NAME (you did say you voted for em didnt you?)

to some of the MOST vulnerable in our society.....all to catch out a few lazy fraudsters

would that some of this enthusiasm was applied to the real culprits of our problems....

More deflecting try again and understand what Job seekers support is sassy and why there is over 800,000 and why there is over 700,000 job vancanices

darknessss wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Another post seeking to deflect away from the facts I am pointing out in regards to over 700,000 job vancancies which is consistant throughout the year.
If you do not have an answer then I suggest you move along.

THIS is what matters.....

NOt your  pointless point....


seriously i dont give a damn about "how many jobs there are"

the point remains and ALWAYS WILL remain
that......

you talk of "civilised" and yet what I have said above is the bald and patent truth

and is far from "civilised"

it is utterly WRONG and indefensible that those unfortunates in sassy's post were treted like that...

it is unacceptable to make excuses like "mistake"

IF you are going to posit a harsh and strict system then it had better NOT make ANY mistakes

otherwise it becomes a disreputable monstrosity

NOR can you deny that as far as the countries finace is concerned, the payments "lost" due to fraud and or so called "workshy" is not only miniscule as a proportion of the benefits bill, but pales into utter insignificance in comparison to what is drained from the country by the tax doging rich

CLEARLY you are defending the victimisation and demonisation and sanctioning to death(literally in many cases) the countrys most vulnerable....

make NO mistake


there can be NO excuse

for "target driven " sanctioning
for "mistakes"
for in fact any "reason"

for what has happened...IN YOUR NAME (you did say you voted for em didnt you?)

to some of the MOST vulnerable in our society.....all to catch out a few lazy fraudsters

would that some of this enthusiasm was applied to the real culprits of our problems....

Still more deflective bollocks

Wjat is Job seekers allowance?

doe "what it is " matter to the dying person that has just been sanctioned

or is found "fit to work" whilst expiring on a hospital gurney????

MONSTER

There you go, Dodge has reached the very low limit of his much vaunted intelligence and shown himself to be a real scum bag. - AGAIN

darknessss wrote:doe "what it is " matter to the dying person that has just been sanctioned

or is found "fit to work" whilst expiring on a hospital gurney????

MONSTER

Did I say I agreed with those decisions?
No poor attempts yet again and playin the victim card in the worst possinble way to the points I am making.
Woeful
Try again and answer my question or admit you have not got a cluie

you dont have to "say " you agree with those decisions.....

your silence speaks volumes

see didge ...its like this

no "benefit" system can be both fair AND fraud proof..its NOT possible

so......If AVOIDING things like what have happened with those deliberate (in many cases) target driven sanctions (which are worse in many respects than mere mistakes, since they are ,malicious), means that a FEW (and it is few) workshy scroungers get away withit...then so beit...

otherwise what you end up with is what we are now seeing...an inhumane and destructive system that penalises the MOST needy...


"any system of welfare that is fair to all, and effective at achieving its aim MUST ACCEPT that there will be a degree of parasitism upon it"

cant remember where i saw that....but non the less its true......

OMG the deflections get worse by the minute.
I never claimed any system is perfect and again mistakes happens. You have avoidied my question for 10 posts now


Try again

Brasidas wrote:OMG the deflections get worse by the minute.
I never claimed any system is perfect and again mistakes happens. You have avoidied my question for 10 posts now


Try again

NOT an acceptable excuse..even if they were"mistakes"

if the "system" wants to be strict and harsh , then it should expect to be judged "strictly and harshly"

moreove if these were mistakes, due to the effect of these the people that made the "mistake should be sacked and blackballed immediately....

slung on the scao heap with no chance EVER of getting an even remotley "professional" job..indeed even their educational acheivements right down to gcse's should be stripped from them.

(and then if I had my way they would be slowly skinned and rolled in salt.....)

darknessss wrote:

Brasidas wrote:OMG the deflections get worse by the minute.
I never claimed any system is perfect and again mistakes happens. You have avoidied my question for 10 posts now


Try again

NOT an acceptable excuse..even if they were"mistakes"

if the "system" wants to be strict and harsh , then it should expect to be judged "strictly and harshly"

moreove if these were mistakes, due to the effect of these  the people that made the "mistake should be sacked and blackballed immediately....

slung on the scao heap with no chance EVER of getting an even remotley "professional" job..indeed even their educational acheivements right down to gcse's should be stripped from them.(and then if I had my way they would be slowly skinned and rolled in salt.....)

I am not excusing it just as i would not excuse a doctor making a mistake, but they do happen.
Now again is there a need for better measures, of course and is there a need to help ensure people get back into work, of course, is there a need to stop people taking the piss, very much so.
Now stop avoliding my point and answer the question

I think when Robert Tressell wrote this:

“Poverty is not caused by men and women getting married; it's not caused by machinery; it's not caused by "over-production"; it's not caused by drink or laziness; and it's not caused by "over-population". It's caused by Private Monopoly. That is the present system. They have monopolized everything that it is possible to monopolize; they have got the whole earth, the minerals in the earth and the streams that water the earth. The only reason they have not monopolized the daylight and the air is that it is not possible to do it. If it were possible to construct huge gasometers and to draw together and compress within them the whole of the atmosphere, it would have been done long ago, and we should have been compelled to work for them in order to get money to buy air to breathe. And if that seemingly impossible thing were accomplished tomorrow, you would see thousands of people dying for want of air - or of the money to buy it - even as now thousands are dying for want of the other necessities of life. You would see people going about gasping for breath, and telling each other that the likes of them could not expect to have air to breathe unless the had the money to pay for it. Most of you here, for instance, would think and say so. Even as you think at present that it's right for so few people to own the Earth, the Minerals and the Water, which are all just as necessary as is the air. In exactly the same spirit as you now say: "It's Their Land," "It's Their Water," "It's Their Coal," "It's Their Iron," so you would say "It's Their Air," "These are their gasometers, and what right have the likes of us to expect them to allow us to breathe for nothing?" And even while he is doing this the air monopolist will be preaching sermons on the Brotherhood of Man; he will be dispensing advice on "Christian Duty" in the Sunday magazines; he will give utterance to numerous more or less moral maxims for the guidance of the young. And meantime, all around, people will be dying for want of some of the air that he will have bottled up in his gasometers. And when you are all dragging out a miserable existence, gasping for breath or dying for want of air, if one of your number suggests smashing a hole in the side of one of th gasometers, you will all fall upon him in the name of law and order, and after doing your best to tear him limb from limb, you'll drag him, covered with blood, in triumph to the nearest Police Station and deliver him up to "justice" in the hope of being given a few half-pounds of air for your trouble.”
― Robert Tressell, The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists

the people who would drag you to the nearest Police Station are people like Dodge.

I never knew sassy was so obsessed with me, is quite flattering really.