Sick & disabled to be targeted in massive welfare changes.
Discussion
TooMany2cvs said:
Have a play with https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/tax-calculator/
Somebody earning £15k (roughly FT minimum wage) currently pays £700 income tax. They would pay £2,250 under this suggestion.
Somebody earning £20k currently pays £1,700 income tax. They would pay £3,500.
Somebody earning £25k currently pays £2,700. They would pay £4,750.
Somebody earning £30k currently pays £3,700. They would pay £6,000.
...and so on.
.
.....and receive £6K extra a year in each instance. So the person earning £15k would be £4.5K a year better offSomebody earning £15k (roughly FT minimum wage) currently pays £700 income tax. They would pay £2,250 under this suggestion.
Somebody earning £20k currently pays £1,700 income tax. They would pay £3,500.
Somebody earning £25k currently pays £2,700. They would pay £4,750.
Somebody earning £30k currently pays £3,700. They would pay £6,000.
...and so on.
.
But in any case it is a moot point as a Flat rate of tax is a completely different argument to a universal basic income.
kowalski655 said:
Rovinghawk said:
gooner1 said:
I would imagine it's hard enough being either disabled or long term sick.
Pretty sure being collateral damage does nothing to ease that hardship.
If they want to get free money they have to prove they're entitled to it- doesn't sound overly harsh to me.Pretty sure being collateral damage does nothing to ease that hardship.
And now here we are again, although the system has become more real World assessment.
For those that say ‘these people can work’ I suggest that they offer a % Of the jobs within thier businesses, in other words money where the mouth is.
REALIST123 said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Hoofy said:
Bit mean of me, but I can't help thinking that someone in a powerful position needs to catch a spot of cancer and require some really fun chemo to the point of not being able to work for a decade due to some side-effects and on the verge of running out of cash. They just are so out of touch it is embarrassing.
Until we see a cabinet minister doing the job while, say, blind, or a US president in a wheelchair I agree entirely.knk said:
The numbers need crunching to see if it would work out. Bare in mind all are getting the £6k (or whatever it works out to) so "Somebody earning £20k currently pays £1,700 income tax. They would pay £3,500." but they would receive £6000 so would be up by £2500.
And you don't think that the minimum wage would drop (£6k/yr would be a reduction of a bit over £3/hr) to take that into account? And that would feed on all the way up the pay scale? If not, then isn't that going to be rather massively inflationary?knk said:
What does one have to earn currently to be a net contributor to the system?
Doesn't that rather depend on what they "cost" "the system"...?crankedup said:
TooMany2cvs said:
crankedup said:
Increase the pressure on tax avoidance is a good place to start.
Do you mean "avoidance", or do you mean "evasion"?They'll stop you saving in ISAs, and make you use a lot more petrol?
JagLover said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Have a play with https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/tax-calculator/
Somebody earning £15k (roughly FT minimum wage) currently pays £700 income tax. They would pay £2,250 under this suggestion.
Somebody earning £20k currently pays £1,700 income tax. They would pay £3,500.
Somebody earning £25k currently pays £2,700. They would pay £4,750.
Somebody earning £30k currently pays £3,700. They would pay £6,000.
...and so on.
.
.....and receive £6K extra a year in each instance. So the person earning £15k would be £4.5K a year better offSomebody earning £15k (roughly FT minimum wage) currently pays £700 income tax. They would pay £2,250 under this suggestion.
Somebody earning £20k currently pays £1,700 income tax. They would pay £3,500.
Somebody earning £25k currently pays £2,700. They would pay £4,750.
Somebody earning £30k currently pays £3,700. They would pay £6,000.
...and so on.
.
But in any case it is a moot point as a Flat rate of tax is a completely different argument to a universal basic income.
Any scheme that pays someone to do nothing will result in some people choosing to do nothing.
98elise said:
AshVX220 said:
voyds9 said:
Perhaps they could become party planners as within 24hrs of the appointment they have managed to get news coverage and the sympathy vote.
One figure I have not seen is how many of those declared fit to work were indeed fit.
All we do get to hear about are the tragedies. (why did he not apply for a hardship payment)
....and what was his real problem, diabetes does not stop people from working, I've had many colleagues with diabetes.One figure I have not seen is how many of those declared fit to work were indeed fit.
All we do get to hear about are the tragedies. (why did he not apply for a hardship payment)
gooner1 said:
As for free money, you assume that the long term sick or disabled have never
held a job or paid taxes?
Let's presume that they have. I have to jump through lots of hoops to pay money in- why can't they do similar when getting money out?held a job or paid taxes?
gooner1 said:
I 'm all for wheedling out the freeloaders but I'm sure that
cab be sensibly done without punishing genuine claimants. However temporarily.
Is it totally impossible for those doing the assessing to do their jobs properly?cab be sensibly done without punishing genuine claimants. However temporarily.
kowalski655 said:
As the vast majority of appeals against disability benefit refusals are successful I would say they DID prove it but the DWP still refuse, thus making the genuinely sick & disabled go through more stress and struggle to get their entitlement.
Devil's Advocate here- presuming your appeals claim to be accurate, did the appeal succeed through genuine need or because the appeals department are generous where there is the slightest doubt?98elise said:
In that case where would the 6k be coming from. For someone to receive a 6k income for no work, someone has to pay 6k in taxes to fund it.
Any scheme that pays someone to do nothing will result in some people choosing to do nothing.
It depends on the level at which the Universal basic income is set. Some of the levels proposed, as in the Swiss referendum are ludicrously high.Any scheme that pays someone to do nothing will result in some people choosing to do nothing.
We are discussing £6K a year. This is not necessarily the correct amount, but neatly subdivides to £500 a month. Which seems enough to fund a very basic existence in most parts of the country. Yes someone could take this and do nothing, but they could also receive state benefits now if they do nothing.
As to where the money will come from.
This is in three main areas. The elimination of existing tax allowances is one (such as the personal allowance) for a higher rate tax payer that will cost them up to £4,600.
The second main area is the elimination of many existing benefits and the administration of them.
The shortfall would likely to have to be made up through tax rises elsewhere.
The cost would be £6K times adult population of 40 million, or £240bn. If it were to be restricted to, say, exclude the elderly who would keep the current system, then that would be lower. It would be higher if a similar flat rate allowance were paid to children.
Total spending on benefits and tax credits is around £220bn, but this includes a number of benefits that would likely be retained under such a system such as the state pension (which is after all based upon years of contribution) and various disability benefits. The state pension is £92 billion of that.
There would be clear winners and losers under such a system. The main gainers would be those on low and middle incomes who do not receive much, if anything in the form of state benefits and tax credits.
The losers would be those receiving higher benefits than a flat rate allowance and those who would pay more in tax than the flat rate allowance in order to pay for it.
The incentives in the system would change massively. A two adult household would be far better in the new system as you would get two universal incomes. Under the current system a lone parent household is favoured as the benefits are higher. Also of course instead of facing benefit withdrawal rates of 63% for additional income there would be instead only be tax and then national insurance to think of.
Edited by JagLover on Friday 12th January 11:58
Rovinghawk said:
kowalski655 said:
As the vast majority of appeals against disability benefit refusals are successful I would say they DID prove it but the DWP still refuse, thus making the genuinely sick & disabled go through more stress and struggle to get their entitlement.
Devil's Advocate here- presuming your appeals claim to be accurate, did the appeal succeed through genuine need or because the appeals department are generous where there is the slightest doubt?But here's a credible source for stats on the number of PIP assessments, the number of appeals, and their results...
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
April 2013 to October 2017
p3
New claims - 45% allowed, of 2m.
Reassessed claims - 73% allowed, of 1.2m.
p5
New claims - 352k appealed. 84% no change.
Reassessed claims - 317k appealed, 78% no change.
So of a total of 3.2m claims, only 120k were initially refused then allowed at appeal. 3.75% of claims...
p6
36% of all claims are from a mental health condition.
p8
DLA -> PIP reassessments concluded - 947k.
39% increased payment, 22% reduced, 21% stopped after assessment.
27% awarded highest rate.
The whole benefits system needs an overhaul, my experience of it has been shocking.
One of my parents suffered a brain haemorrhage back in 1999, they were left with a variety of permanent disabilities which has left them with a much reduced quality of life. Getting by day to day is a job in itself, let alone actually working.
However, despite this and various letters from consultants, hospitals, specialists being sent to the benefits agency, every couple of months my parents will get a letter saying they are going to carry out a reassessment. Then someone comes out to the house, asks them questions to which the only responses that can be given are 'Man, Mouth, Chris...'.
The assessor realises that they are wasting their time and go.
Last assessment was in October, guess what letter they had through the post the other day.
Its not just the fact they are wasting everyone's time, the letters that come are covered in threats of stopping all benefits, reduced payments etc etc.
Last time i spoke to them they justified it by saying 'well, they learnt to walk again so you never know....'
One of my parents suffered a brain haemorrhage back in 1999, they were left with a variety of permanent disabilities which has left them with a much reduced quality of life. Getting by day to day is a job in itself, let alone actually working.
However, despite this and various letters from consultants, hospitals, specialists being sent to the benefits agency, every couple of months my parents will get a letter saying they are going to carry out a reassessment. Then someone comes out to the house, asks them questions to which the only responses that can be given are 'Man, Mouth, Chris...'.
The assessor realises that they are wasting their time and go.
Last assessment was in October, guess what letter they had through the post the other day.
Its not just the fact they are wasting everyone's time, the letters that come are covered in threats of stopping all benefits, reduced payments etc etc.
Last time i spoke to them they justified it by saying 'well, they learnt to walk again so you never know....'
In some respects I agree with her proposals. There are many fakers in the system, playing it for all it's worth, and that's a disgrace. These people, with the risk of sounding all Daily Mail, belong in jail.
The flip side is that certain individuals need ring fencing away from this process (frequent assessments)
I have two disabled adult siblings. One blood brother with severe Cerebral Palsy, and an adopted sister with Downs, again at the severe end of the spectrum. Every 6 months my mother had to fill in a 32 page form for my sister to continue with her benefits. What the bloody hell were they thinking, she woke up one morning without her condition?!
Likewise my brother, earning close to £50K lost his motability allowance. Earning too much according to the rules. Fair enough you may say, but he lives in fairly central London, as he works for the BBC. He certainly doesn't have enough disposable income to fund a heavily modified car.
IMO strong opinion people with (amongst other conditions and illnesses) severe physical or mental disabilities, terminal debilitating illness, blindness, to name just some need leaving out of the process, and deserve care and compassion.
Miss Mcveys track record doesn't fill me with hope.
The flip side is that certain individuals need ring fencing away from this process (frequent assessments)
I have two disabled adult siblings. One blood brother with severe Cerebral Palsy, and an adopted sister with Downs, again at the severe end of the spectrum. Every 6 months my mother had to fill in a 32 page form for my sister to continue with her benefits. What the bloody hell were they thinking, she woke up one morning without her condition?!
Likewise my brother, earning close to £50K lost his motability allowance. Earning too much according to the rules. Fair enough you may say, but he lives in fairly central London, as he works for the BBC. He certainly doesn't have enough disposable income to fund a heavily modified car.
IMO strong opinion people with (amongst other conditions and illnesses) severe physical or mental disabilities, terminal debilitating illness, blindness, to name just some need leaving out of the process, and deserve care and compassion.
Miss Mcveys track record doesn't fill me with hope.
oyster said:
REALIST123 said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Hoofy said:
Bit mean of me, but I can't help thinking that someone in a powerful position needs to catch a spot of cancer and require some really fun chemo to the point of not being able to work for a decade due to some side-effects and on the verge of running out of cash. They just are so out of touch it is embarrassing.
Until we see a cabinet minister doing the job while, say, blind, or a US president in a wheelchair I agree entirely.JagLover said:
Mrr T said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Until we see a cabinet minister doing the job while, say, blind, or a US president in a wheelchair I agree entirely.
The longest ever serving President of the US (a record unlikely ever to be broken) was in a wheel chair.TooMany2cvs said:
JagLover said:
Mrr T said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Until we see a cabinet minister doing the job while, say, blind, or a US president in a wheelchair I agree entirely.
The longest ever serving President of the US (a record unlikely ever to be broken) was in a wheel chair.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff