Page 3 of 6

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 1:30 pm
by Mr Hyde
Employers are taxed about 20% to pay you, you're then taxed about 20% on those earnings and then taxed 20% VAT on anything you buy, then more tax on things like stamp duty, and if after all that if you manage to save any money to pass onto your kids as inheritance that'll get taxed.

....so how about less whinging about the state not paying enough benefits, cut benefits and cut tax (so workers would have about 50% more income to spend on unemployment insurance/savings etc) and look after yourselves.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 1:37 pm
by magma
Mr Hyde wrote:Employers are taxed about 20% to pay you
Ey? Companies pay corporation tax on profits leftover after wages and other costs have been dealt with - the only person paying tax on a PAYE salary is the employee.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 1:49 pm
by Jizz
yeah agree with magma on this, class based on forms of currency will only create problems

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 1:56 pm
by Pistonsbeneath
And many many people have paid tax all their life...vast amounts if they had a well paid job and you're saying they should now lose out?

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 2:02 pm
by Genevieve


The damn internet didn't even exist when most people living today were born and now it's a fundamental human rights violation when someone doesn't have access to it?

It truly is the entitled generation.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 2:06 pm
by Mason
loool at internet being a human right what a load of bollocks

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 2:12 pm
by scspkr99
wub wrote:
Riddles wrote:It might help to reduce the negativity directed at people who claim benefits maybe, if people knew they could only spend it on necessary stuff
A massive upshot, given the state of the economy and apathy towards 'scroungers' in the red tops.
An upshot for who, the people receiving vouchers instead of benefits or those that would pass judgement on them? I'd be way more concerned with receiving vouchers than I would be the attitudes of the ignorant.

I'd like those who could to send the government vouchers for ethical government spending rather than actual taxes given the government feels entitled to tell people how to spend the benefits they receive.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 2:18 pm
by Pistonsbeneath
Mason wrote:loool at internet being a human right what a load of bollocks
Without the internet people can't apply for jobs now...the employers insist on it

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 2:19 pm
by DRTY
the internet is a crazy place. A lot of bad things happened because of it, and a lot of good, so meh.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 2:20 pm
by Mason
Without a pen people couldn't handwrite applications 10 years ago doesn't make a pen a human right.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 2:28 pm
by Mason
without a car some people can't get to work is a car a human right?
without a phone some people can't have interviews for a job is a phone a human right?
etc etc

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:09 pm
by Dystinkt
Not supporting the voucher idea, but if I gave someone money to get them through the week and they spent it on an xbox and weed I'd be pretty fucked off

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:24 pm
by lovelydivot
We are going to have to face the fact - That right now...

There isn't enough plugs for all the people that want access...

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:27 pm
by Pedro Sánchez
Hypothetical for a single person living on his jones.
Housing Benefit goes to the landlord (limit capped by LHA if private)
Council Tax Benefit goes to Council
£71p/w JSA goes to...
Gas Water Electric (Call it £30 give or take depending where you live)
Travel for shopping and Job searching activities plus visiting relatives (£12-15)
Food and general shopping (£25pw if you are being careful)
Clothing or replacing things that need repair or have broke down???
*edit Credit for phone???
WHERE AM I GETTING 39.99 FOR AN XBOX GAME?

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:29 pm
by Forum
Pedro Sánchez wrote:Hypothetical for a single person living on his jones.
Housing Benefit goes to the landlord (limit capped by LHA if private)
Council Tax Benefit goes to Council
£71p/w JSA goes to...
Gas Water Electric (Call it £30 give or take depending where you live)
Travel for shopping and Job searching activities plus visiting relatives (£12-15)
Food and general shopping (£25pw if you are being careful)
Clothing or replacing things that need repair or have broke down???
WHERE AM I GETTING 39.99 FOR AN XBOX GAME?
Image

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:35 pm
by magma
Cheeky wrote:Not supporting the voucher idea, but if I gave someone money to get them through the week and they spent it on an xbox and weed I'd be pretty fucked off
This is the crux of it, I think. People have very different relationships with the money they receive and people's priorities are as individual as their fingerprints. If you personally give a friend money for a specific purpose and they misuse it, you have the right to be pissed off, to ask for your money back and maybe to punch them in the face for the disrespect; but that isn't what's happening when the country gives money via the Welfare State.

Just about all benefits are means-tested these days now that child credits and family allowance have bitten the bullet; so people should only be given money that is earmarked for a valid expense. Of course, once the hits their account it's entirely up to them what to do with it... 'benefits' aren't gifts, they're not a savings scheme that you pay into whilst you work and then claim when you don't want to work anymore, they're a necessary insurance scheme that makes the country work. The unemployed don't have to steal from the employed. When a 'benefit' is paid to someone in need, it benefits everyone.

Benefits shouldn't be seen as gifts or "handouts". The country, society being a natural extension of the family, has an obligation to give its citizens opportunities; it's then up to the citizens what they do with those opportunities. We're all given education, we're all afforded a roof, we're all treated when we're sick, we're all given enough to survive if/when the worst happens, we're all allowed to vote to decide the government of the country. It's every person's right to waste every opportunity their given by their country (or, indeed, their parents) - I'm sure most of us have failed the odd exam, skipped a day's school or turned up the opportunity to vote - yet we don't ask for rights to be taken away from people that do this.... why are wasted cash 'benefits' seen as such a huge issue compared to the other things society lets us fritter away? A wasted education costs a LOT more than a family allowance wasted on Special Brew.... so why do we laugh at the naughty kid in class asking "What am I ever going to use Maths for?", but glare at the family he comes from? A high-stress career spent slurping espesso and yamming business dinners might lead to medical ailments that cause an unfair burden on a person's family and the NHS in later life; yet this sort of behaviour is lionised rather than regarded as selfish and short-sighted.

Everyone plays this game differently. All Government can do is prepare the playing field and let us get on with winning and losing at it.

The idea that poor people should have less fun than rich people is a DISTINCTLY WORRYING ONE. We all need to be able to socialise. We all need recreation time. We all need escape from our routines, even if they don't involve going to work. The poor are people; they can't be left sitting silently in their houses until a generous employer knocks on the front door and asks them if they want a job.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:37 pm
by Pedro Sánchez
magma wrote:The idea that poor people should have less fun than rich people is a DISTINCTLY WORRYING ONE. We all need to be able to socialise. We all need recreation time. We all need escape from our routines, even if they don't involve going to work. The poor are people; they can't be left sitting silently in their houses until a generous employer knocks on the front door and asks them if they want a job.
:Q: Nail on the head...I wish I could use that same nail to crucify IDS with.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:40 pm
by scspkr99
Cheeky wrote:Not supporting the voucher idea, but if I gave someone money to get them through the week and they spent it on an xbox and weed I'd be pretty fucked off
what if they earned that money?

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:47 pm
by Mr Hyde
magma wrote:
Mr Hyde wrote:Employers are taxed about 20% to pay you
Ey? Companies pay corporation tax on profits leftover after wages and other costs have been dealt with - the only person paying tax on a PAYE salary is the employee.
I don't know the ins-and outs of tax for everyone, but I work at a place where I process payments for consultants and temps, if someone charges £100 a day then the company needs to pay them 20% tax on top of that payment so we pay out £120 to the employee. I guess they then just pay tax on that £120 earned so it's like they earned £100.

Re: Alternative proposal for benefits allocation

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 3:48 pm
by magma
Mr Hyde wrote:
magma wrote:
Mr Hyde wrote:Employers are taxed about 20% to pay you
Ey? Companies pay corporation tax on profits leftover after wages and other costs have been dealt with - the only person paying tax on a PAYE salary is the employee.
I don't know the ins-and outs of tax for everyone, but I work at a place where I process payments for consultants and temps, if someone charges £100 a day then the company needs to pay them 20% VAT on top of that payment so we pay out £120 to the employee.
Yes, but (assuming they turnover more than £40k per year) the company gets to claim the VAT back from the taxman.

Only consumers should pay VAT.