|
Post by davycrockett on May 27, 2022 7:25:05 GMT 1
Whatever help is given wont be enough in some communities. I know. There was a woman on Nicky Cambell phone in who said she was desperate / struggling and had just put her last £5 in her car to get to work as a nurse… When questioned she said she was a senior nurse on £35 to £40 K but her husband only worked part time due to child care… Joint income around £50 K and zero savings
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on May 27, 2022 8:48:53 GMT 1
Personally now looking at household budget closely, particularly at non essential outgoing. Certainly Netflix and Spotify can go for the amount of use I get out of them. Find a lot to watch on catch up apps. It all helps.
|
|
|
Post by sheltonsalopian on May 27, 2022 9:00:15 GMT 1
The support is welcome but can't help but feel like it's a government with no plan whatsoever.
Why increase the national insurance tax if you were going to give money to everyone two months later? Just seems a lot of extra admin to get people back to where they were two months ago anyway.
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on May 27, 2022 9:11:06 GMT 1
The support is welcome but can't help but feel like it's a government with no plan whatsoever. Why increase the national insurance tax if you were going to give money to everyone two months later? Just seems a lot of extra admin to get people back to where they were two months ago anyway. Yes. Smoke and mirrors!!!
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on May 27, 2022 9:24:02 GMT 1
Whatever help is given wont be enough in some communities. I know. There was a woman on Nicky Cambell phone in who said she was desperate / struggling and had just put her last £5 in her car to get to work as a nurse… When questioned she said she was a senior nurse on £35 to £40 K but her husband only worked part time due to child care… Joint income around £50 K and zero savings That's arguably £3,000 a month minimum after tax, NI etc combined. The husband may even get a top up if he's part time, although I'm not sure on this. Even if rent/mortgage calls for £12,000, that leaves £24,000. You'd have to look more closely at their lifestyle but I can't for the life of me see how £36,000 minimum after tax can't fund a basic functioning household?
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 27, 2022 9:48:14 GMT 1
I know. There was a woman on Nicky Cambell phone in who said she was desperate / struggling and had just put her last £5 in her car to get to work as a nurse… When questioned she said she was a senior nurse on £35 to £40 K but her husband only worked part time due to child care… Joint income around £50 K and zero savings That's arguably £3,000 a month minimum after tax, NI etc combined. The husband may even get a top up if he's part time, although I'm not sure on this. Even if rent/mortgage calls for £12,000, that leaves £24,000. You'd have to look more closely at their lifestyle but I can't for the life of me see how £36,000 minimum after tax can't fund a basic functioning household? they probably live in a lovely big house that is beyond their means re the mortgage , and they would be comfortably well off if they downsized i don't know anything about them but i would happily swap lives with them
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on May 27, 2022 9:56:39 GMT 1
That's arguably £3,000 a month minimum after tax, NI etc combined. The husband may even get a top up if he's part time, although I'm not sure on this. Even if rent/mortgage calls for £12,000, that leaves £24,000. You'd have to look more closely at their lifestyle but I can't for the life of me see how £36,000 minimum after tax can't fund a basic functioning household? they probably live in a lovely big house that is beyond their means re the mortgage , and they would be comfortably well off if they downsized i don't know anything about them but i would happily swap lives with them Her salary is a minimum of £2,500 after tax, NI & pension. He can earn up to £1,050 a month tax free. Depending on the age of their child, they'll also get 30 hours free childcare. Cases like this are awful examples of people "struggling". That's pure mismanagement of finances and/or historical debt. They should be showing 2x people with children under 3 on £16,000 a year each, I'd say they'd be struggling awfully and I have every sympathy.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 27, 2022 10:07:11 GMT 1
Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, has criticised the decision to allow second home owners to get the £400 energy bills rebate twice. She claimed on Sky News that this would not have been necessary if the Treasury had not “rushed through” its package. She said:
If the government hadn’t have been resisting Labour’s calls for a windfall tax and this additional support for months, the government could have taken the time to get this package right.
It is not right that if you own a second or a third home you should get this £400 payment multiple times. You can now get a situation where somebody who’s incredibly wealthy gets £400 on three or four occasions because they own so many properties.
This is only happening because this package has been rushed through because the government has been resisting this.
The Guardian.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 27, 2022 10:20:49 GMT 1
Rather than making these one off payments, which may in fact turn out not to be one off and have to be repeated, would it not be more sensible to provide more permanent solutions?
Choose from the Following:
1. Remove VAT from gas and electric bills.
2. Suspend or remove the 'green' levies on bills.
3. Increase state benefits and state pensions to reflect current inflation rates.
4. Remove the freeze on personal tax allowances which at present is in place until 2026.
5. Scrap the N.I. increase, which has already been watered down anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 27, 2022 10:34:31 GMT 1
Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, has criticised the decision to allow second home owners to get the £400 energy bills rebate twice. She claimed on Sky News that this would not have been necessary if the Treasury had not “rushed through” its package. She said: If the government hadn’t have been resisting Labour’s calls for a windfall tax and this additional support for months, the government could have taken the time to get this package right. It is not right that if you own a second or a third home you should get this £400 payment multiple times. You can now get a situation where somebody who’s incredibly wealthy gets £400 on three or four occasions because they own so many properties. This is only happening because this package has been rushed through because the government has been resisting this. The Guardian. why didn't labour bring this up weeks ago ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 10:39:25 GMT 1
That's arguably £3,000 a month minimum after tax, NI etc combined. The husband may even get a top up if he's part time, although I'm not sure on this. Even if rent/mortgage calls for £12,000, that leaves £24,000. You'd have to look more closely at their lifestyle but I can't for the life of me see how £36,000 minimum after tax can't fund a basic functioning household? they probably live in a lovely big house that is beyond their means re the mortgage , and they would be comfortably well off if they downsized i don't know anything about them but i would happily swap lives with them Years ago when I was about to get married my wife's boss said to me, if the interest rates doubled could you still afford to pay your mortgage? It was very sound advice, especially as this was in the mid 80s. Sadly I had some work colleagues who had mortgaged to the hilt, interest rates went up and they ended up in negative equity. Lifestyle has a lot to do with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 10:45:07 GMT 1
Rather than making these one off payments, which may in fact turn out not to be one off and have to be repeated, would it not be more sensible to provide more permanent solutions? Choose from the Following: 1. Remove VAT from gas and electric bills. 2. Suspend or remove the 'green' levies on bills. 3. Increase state benefits and state pensions to reflect current inflation rates. 4. Remove the freeze on personal tax allowances which at present is in place until 2026. 5. Scrap the N.I. increase, which has already been watered down anyway. And how would we as a country fund number 3?
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on May 27, 2022 10:49:58 GMT 1
That's arguably £3,000 a month minimum after tax, NI etc combined. The husband may even get a top up if he's part time, although I'm not sure on this. Even if rent/mortgage calls for £12,000, that leaves £24,000. You'd have to look more closely at their lifestyle but I can't for the life of me see how £36,000 minimum after tax can't fund a basic functioning household? they probably live in a lovely big house that is beyond their means re the mortgage , and they would be comfortably well off if they downsized i don't know anything about them but i would happily swap lives with them I don't know, we are insulated from some of the higher costs of rent/purchase in some areas of the country. Visiting someone the other week, they had "Homes under the hammer" on, I just cought the bit where the estate agent gives his estimate after a place is done up - It looked a perfectly ordinary house, don't no where it was, don't know what they thought it was worth, but when they said it should fetch £1300 a month rent my jaw dropped.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 27, 2022 10:58:53 GMT 1
Rather than making these one off payments, which may in fact turn out not to be one off and have to be repeated, would it not be more sensible to provide more permanent solutions? Choose from the Following: 1. Remove VAT from gas and electric bills. 2. Suspend or remove the 'green' levies on bills. 3. Increase state benefits and state pensions to reflect current inflation rates. 4. Remove the freeze on personal tax allowances which at present is in place until 2026. 5. Scrap the N.I. increase, which has already been watered down anyway. And how would we as a country fund number 3? By bringing forward the calculations that are made when increasing benefits and pensions in April 2023. And note that the real inflation rate will be much higher than 10%. Even the RPI is 11% already and the CPI would be 18% if we used the same calculation methods as 1990. Pensions have already dropped behind wages because of the removing of the triple lock for this year. The only reason for the triple lock was to stop that happening and that loss can't be made up. If inflation is lower in April 2023, then reduce the amounts paid out then. Why on earth are benefits and pension payments for April calculated on the basis of an inflation rate which existed 6 months earlier anyway?
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 27, 2022 11:20:25 GMT 1
Rather than making these one off payments, which may in fact turn out not to be one off and have to be repeated, would it not be more sensible to provide more permanent solutions? Choose from the Following: 1. Remove VAT from gas and electric bills. 2. Suspend or remove the 'green' levies on bills. 3. Increase state benefits and state pensions to reflect current inflation rates. 4. Remove the freeze on personal tax allowances which at present is in place until 2026. 5. Scrap the N.I. increase, which has already been watered down anyway. And how would we as a country fund number 3? We would most certainly have been in a better position to do so if this hadn't happened: More than £30bn of taxpayers’ money is estimated to have been wasted during the Covid-19 pandemic on Bounce Back Loans that won’t be repaid, www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60117513 overpriced and faulty personal protective equipment (PPE), and fraudulent claims on the many government schemes that were set up to handle the economic fallout. About £17bn is expected to be lost to the Bounce Back Loan Scheme, around £7.5bn may have been lost due to fraud on the furlough, self-employment support and Eat Out to Help Out schemes, and almost £9bn is estimated to have been lost as a result of overpriced, poor quality or expired PPE, with the DHSC estimating £2.7bn more is at risk. A New Statesman analysis of figures released in various reports by the National Audit Office (NAO), the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) and HMRC shows that about £33.6bn has been lost to fraud and wastage, with a further £2.7bn at risk. The figure is more than the combined budgets of the Home Office, Ministry of Justice and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office for 2021-22. Plus the questionable value of £37 billion allocated to Test and Trace: www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n663The NHS Test and Trace service in England failed to deliver its central promise to avoid a second national lockdown and there is no clear evidence its “unimaginable” costs have been justified, MPs on an influential committee have concluded. The damning report from the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee says that NHS Test and Trace must “wean itself off its persistent reliance on consultants and temporary staff.” In early February it was still employing around 2500 consultants at an average daily rate of £1000 (€1167; $1388) with some paid £6624 a day. Meg Hillier, the committee chair, said, “Despite the unimaginable resources thrown at this project, NHS Test and Trace cannot point to a measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic, and the promise on which this huge expense was justified—avoiding another lockdown—has been broken, twice.”
|
|
|
Post by camdenshrew on May 27, 2022 11:28:14 GMT 1
Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, has criticised the decision to allow second home owners to get the £400 energy bills rebate twice. She claimed on Sky News that this would not have been necessary if the Treasury had not “rushed through” its package. She said: If the government hadn’t have been resisting Labour’s calls for a windfall tax and this additional support for months, the government could have taken the time to get this package right. It is not right that if you own a second or a third home you should get this £400 payment multiple times. You can now get a situation where somebody who’s incredibly wealthy gets £400 on three or four occasions because they own so many properties. This is only happening because this package has been rushed through because the government has been resisting this. The Guardian. why didn't labour bring this up weeks ago ? Er, because he only introduced the measure yesterday?
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on May 27, 2022 12:03:56 GMT 1
I think the cost of living issue is going to dominate politics in the next 3-4 years, as all the economic predictions are we're in for a really tough couple of years.
In particular the issue of people in work - often reasonably paid work - being able to make ends meet is going to impact the local economy a lot, and also influence how we recruit and retain key workers into our essential services such as care and NHS work, food production and the retail sector. Shropshire is way behind the South East of England in terms of property prices, but we have many towns where the average house price is upto 10 times the annual average wage, and the private rented sector is often much higher than monthly mortgage costs. Add in the increasing fuel and heating costs, food price increases and cost of child care and its not hard to see how household earning less than £50k a year will start to struggle.
|
|
|
Post by block12massive on May 27, 2022 12:13:39 GMT 1
Rather than making these one off payments, which may in fact turn out not to be one off and have to be repeated, would it not be more sensible to provide more permanent solutions? Choose from the Following: 1. Remove VAT from gas and electric bills. 2. Suspend or remove the 'green' levies on bills. 3. Increase state benefits and state pensions to reflect current inflation rates. 4. Remove the freeze on personal tax allowances which at present is in place until 2026. 5. Scrap the N.I. increase, which has already been watered down anyway. Putting VAT on energy always has been scandalous.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 27, 2022 12:16:56 GMT 1
why didn't labour bring this up weeks ago ? Er, because he only introduced the measure yesterday? you didn't get that then 😜
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 27, 2022 12:27:12 GMT 1
We've survived inflation before. Look at these rates between 1971 and 1982. In 1975 it was over 24%!
1982 8.60 % 1981 11.88 % 1980 17.97 % 1979 13.42 % 1978 8.26 % 1977 15.84 % 1976 16.56 % 1975 24.21 % 1974 16.04 % 1973 9.20 % 1972 7.07 % 1971 9.44 %
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on May 27, 2022 12:34:35 GMT 1
And how would we as a country fund number 3? We would most certainly have been in a better position to do so if this hadn't happened: More than £30bn of taxpayers’ money is estimated to have been wasted during the Covid-19 pandemic on Bounce Back Loans that won’t be repaid, www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60117513 overpriced and faulty personal protective equipment (PPE), and fraudulent claims on the many government schemes that were set up to handle the economic fallout. About £17bn is expected to be lost to the Bounce Back Loan Scheme, around £7.5bn may have been lost due to fraud on the furlough, self-employment support and Eat Out to Help Out schemes, and almost £9bn is estimated to have been lost as a result of overpriced, poor quality or expired PPE, with the DHSC estimating £2.7bn more is at risk. A New Statesman analysis of figures released in various reports by the National Audit Office (NAO), the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) and HMRC shows that about £33.6bn has been lost to fraud and wastage, with a further £2.7bn at risk. The figure is more than the combined budgets of the Home Office, Ministry of Justice and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office for 2021-22. Plus the questionable value of £37 billion allocated to Test and Trace: www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n663The NHS Test and Trace service in England failed to deliver its central promise to avoid a second national lockdown and there is no clear evidence its “unimaginable” costs have been justified, MPs on an influential committee have concluded. The damning report from the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee says that NHS Test and Trace must “wean itself off its persistent reliance on consultants and temporary staff.” In early February it was still employing around 2500 consultants at an average daily rate of £1000 (€1167; $1388) with some paid £6624 a day. Meg Hillier, the committee chair, said, “Despite the unimaginable resources thrown at this project, NHS Test and Trace cannot point to a measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic, and the promise on which this huge expense was justified—avoiding another lockdown—has been broken, twice.” And there we have it, the Tories should've stopped a global pandemic happening. I'm quite happy they lobbed money at all sorts to try and get out of the situation. Proper clutching at straws there.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on May 27, 2022 13:14:21 GMT 1
We've survived inflation before. Look at these rates between 1971 and 1982. In 1975 it was over 24%! 1982 8.60 % 1981 11.88 % 1980 17.97 % 1979 13.42 % 1978 8.26 % 1977 15.84 % 1976 16.56 % 1975 24.21 % 1974 16.04 % 1973 9.20 % 1972 7.07 % 1971 9.44 % Whilst we did get through it, these were very difficult economic times, and the UK had to get a loan from the International Monetary Fund to prop up the economy. I think in 1976. That then led to significant cuts in government budgets and high unemployment levels in the late 70s and 80s These were pretty bleak times for a lot of people and arguably a decade to recover from so are a good warning from history of the dangers of high inflation to all aspects of the economy
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 27, 2022 13:27:18 GMT 1
We've survived inflation before. Look at these rates between 1971 and 1982. In 1975 it was over 24%! 1982 8.60 % 1981 11.88 % 1980 17.97 % 1979 13.42 % 1978 8.26 % 1977 15.84 % 1976 16.56 % 1975 24.21 % 1974 16.04 % 1973 9.20 % 1972 7.07 % 1971 9.44 % Whilst we did get through it, these were very difficult economic times, and the UK had to get a loan from the International Monetary Fund to prop up the economy. I think in 1976. That then led to significant cuts in government budgets and high unemployment levels in the late 70s and 80s These were pretty bleak times for a lot of people and arguably a decade to recover from so are a good warning from history of the dangers of high inflation to all aspects of the economy Yes. In 1976, the cabinet backed Healey’s IMF-imposed reductions in government spending, tax increases and rises in interest rates. Gosh, that sounds familiar!
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 27, 2022 13:57:31 GMT 1
Don’t call it a windfall tax! Rishi Sunak has spoken out against such ideas, so obviously he’d never implement one. Labour has been demanding a windfall tax, and we all know how damaging their ideas would be to the economy. So what we had yesterday was – in the Chancellor’s words – a “temporary targeted energy profits levy”. When he came out with this euphemism, the laughter in the House of Commons was such that he struggled to finish his sentence.
After years banging on about the moral case for low taxation – the quaint idea that societies are fairer and stronger when people are allowed to keep more of the money they earn – the Tories have now given up. Handouts are preferred to general tax cuts, allowing the state to choose winners and losers.
Daily Telegraph.
|
|
|
Post by edgmond on May 27, 2022 14:24:14 GMT 1
That's arguably £3,000 a month minimum after tax, NI etc combined. The husband may even get a top up if he's part time, although I'm not sure on this. Even if rent/mortgage calls for £12,000, that leaves £24,000. You'd have to look more closely at their lifestyle but I can't for the life of me see how £36,000 minimum after tax can't fund a basic functioning household? they probably live in a lovely big house that is beyond their means re the mortgage , and they would be comfortably well off if they downsized i don't know anything about them but i would happily swap lives with them I also try not to jump to assumptions, but you also wonder what their car is and how they pay for it. When you see how many oversized SUVs are on the road, the vast majority on PCP finance, you can only begin to guess at how large the monthly payments must be. Such vehicles seem to have become the norm for many families. There must be a potential cost saving there. Of course, she may well be driving a 20 year old banger.....
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 27, 2022 15:17:23 GMT 1
Don’t call it a windfall tax! Rishi Sunak has spoken out against such ideas, so obviously he’d never implement one. Labour has been demanding a windfall tax, and we all know how damaging their ideas would be to the economy. So what we had yesterday was – in the Chancellor’s words – a “temporary targeted energy profits levy”. When he came out with this euphemism, the laughter in the House of Commons was such that he struggled to finish his sentence. After years banging on about the moral case for low taxation – the quaint idea that societies are fairer and stronger when people are allowed to keep more of the money they earn – the Tories have now given up. Handouts are preferred to general tax cuts, allowing the state to choose winners and losers. Daily Telegraph. so you cry out for them to bring in a windfall tax and then mock them when they do sounds familiar ? We need PPE We want PPE We want it now why is there no PPE stockpiles ? we need to order PPE LIKE NOW, order anything, just get some ppe arrives Its faulty ( its not faulty by the way, it will be used ) Why are we stockpiling PPE ?
|
|
|
Post by vladimir on May 27, 2022 15:24:03 GMT 1
I think the cost of living issue is going to dominate politics in the next 3-4 years, as all the economic predictions are we're in for a really tough couple of years. In particular the issue of people in work - often reasonably paid work - being able to make ends meet is going to impact the local economy a lot, and also influence how we recruit and retain key workers into our essential services such as care and NHS work, food production and the retail sector. Shropshire is way behind the South East of England in terms of property prices, but we have many towns where the average house price is upto 10 times the annual average wage, and the private rented sector is often much higher than monthly mortgage costs. Add in the increasing fuel and heating costs, food price increases and cost of child care and its not hard to see how household earning less than £50k a year will start to struggle. But Matt have you factored in "having the latest smartphones, or multiple TV subscription package".
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on May 27, 2022 15:32:27 GMT 1
they probably live in a lovely big house that is beyond their means re the mortgage , and they would be comfortably well off if they downsized i don't know anything about them but i would happily swap lives with them I also try not to jump to assumptions, but you also wonder what their car is and how they pay for it. When you see how many oversized SUVs are on the road, the vast majority on PCP finance, you can only begin to guess at how large the monthly payments must be. Such vehicles seem to have become the norm for many families. There must be a potential cost saving there. Of course, she may well be driving a 20 year old banger..... Where they live will be a huge factor but £50k combined is not a lot of money these days, particularly if you're renting somewhere where prices are rising but you may have kids in local schools etc.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on May 27, 2022 15:57:00 GMT 1
I also try not to jump to assumptions, but you also wonder what their car is and how they pay for it. When you see how many oversized SUVs are on the road, the vast majority on PCP finance, you can only begin to guess at how large the monthly payments must be. Such vehicles seem to have become the norm for many families. There must be a potential cost saving there. Of course, she may well be driving a 20 year old banger..... Where they live will be a huge factor but £50k combined is not a lot of money these days, particularly if you're renting somewhere where prices are rising but you may have kids in local schools etc. It might not be a lot, but it's more than enough to pay rent/mortgage, bills, support your kids, fuel your car and have money left over. There is no way a family earning £50k should be putting their last £5 in the petrol tank unless they're mismanaging their finances. Whether it's mismanagement now or historical mismanagement, it's still mismanagement. I'm not saying they should be rich or privileged or anything like, but they should be getting by fine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 16:00:01 GMT 1
Blimey, if families can't manage on £50k combined then heaven help those in the much lower income bracket.
On the subject of oversized SUVs on the road (most on PCP you would think), I visited my daughter yesterday (she lives on a new estate in Sandbach). The estate is only 70% complete yet there are already issues with car parking. Nearly every house has at least 2 or 3 vehicles and the vast majority are certainly in the mid to higher range price bracket. I hate to think what some of these families are spending monthly on PCP just to have a nice/fancy car.
|
|