David Cameron is UK's new prime minister

[bitchface]

i thought the point of the debate wasnot weather it encouraged employment,but weather it was a plus point for the labour goverments time in office.

to encourage employment they could simply have adjusted the tax codes accordingly to give the same benifits.

but they chose to scrap a very simple system (robbing all the most needy)and replace it a year later with a system where they send out (two sets of forms if their are two parents)forms for you to fill in yourself ,guessing how much you think you will earn in the year to come.

a system that right from the offset has been splashed on the news for overpayments,underpayments ect...first few years the overpayments were wiped clean after press involvment.costing us millions.

a system which as i said overpaid me thousands,then underpaid then overpaid ,dispite me phoning up on several occassions to question its validaty.
well ive not seen another penny for the last two or three years because of thier last mistake.,which as a part time posty is a tad inconviniant

please, if i am a typical case,which i am ,how is that a plus for the labour party...


can anyone think of another plus point of the labour party's time in goverment.

[andy2007]

You're right. It's a severely flawed system. And they should have simply increased the tax allowances instead, which is exactly what you suggested. But IF it'd resulted in getting more people into work, then it could have been seen as a positive, despite it's failings. Although I don't believe that it's created even a single job. All it's done, is allowed those who were caught in the benefits trap, to escape. Which they could have done just as easily by changing their tax codes!

[Tman]

How do you work that one out Tman?

How? Maybe because the conclusion he made wasn't "proved" by the previous statements, and to cover that he waffled?

[El-Bandito]

The tax credit system was set up to get those with families back into work, it does not 'create jobs' as many have asserted. It was also aimed at those who lost money through working, compared to when on benefits. Meaning that people would be better off working, and recieving tax credits, rather than leaning further on the welfare system we have in place.

Furthermore, unemployment is at a high because we are coming out of a recession. A recession that we are more than likely to dip back into with the cuts which Osborne and his Lib Dem side-kick will introduce in their emergency budget.

[mazza111]

That's the point i was trying to make, it did encourage a lot of people back to work.

I just feel that under this new lot RM and NHS will be the first to suffer. Watch this space

[andy2007]

That's the point, which I think is so debatable. Has it encouraged more people into work, or just DIFFERENT people back into work. Personally, I think that the same jobs would have been taken by people who could afford to loose some money, but were determined to work. Which is one of the major flaws with the system.

[fishtank]

That's the point, which I think is so debatable. Has it encouraged more people into work, or just DIFFERENT people back into work. Personally, I think that the same jobs would have been taken by people who could afford to loose some money, but were determined to work. Which is one of the major flaws with the system.

Does it not also encourage apathy once in employment?
Why go for that more stressful but better paid job when what you gain in one hand is taken away in the other?
Why fight for higher pay when actually it will mean very little to you in the long run?
There are many flaws in this and almost any system of artificially boosting peoples income.

[andy2007]

That's precicely why it's neccessary to increase Tax Allowances in our Tax Codes, so that no-one pays Income Tax, until they're earning as much as they'd get if they were getting Benefits. And by that, I don't mean disposable income. But the gross amount, including Housing Benefits, etc.. That way, there WOULD be an incentive to go for promotions. Because it would make a real difference to your income, rather than just decreasing the amount of Benefits you get, to top up your wages.

Now, the obvious argument against a system like that, is that it would put up Income Tax. But how much difference would it actually make?
There'd be a huge drop in the cost of providing Benefits. Because there'd be a lot less people claiming them. Obviously, it wouldn't cover the whole cost. But the remaining increase to the burden of taxation, shouldn't be more than we could comfortably cope with. And it would give more people their dignity back, because they wouldn't have to rely on handouts anymore. Isn't it a price worth paying, for that?

[maisymoo04]

boys and girls we should turn this topic into TAXES AND CREDITS CHAT SITE am not bein nasty but who is arsed anyway

[andy2007]

The people who're affected by it. Which includes many of our collegues.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

boys and girls we should turn this topic into TAXES AND CREDITS CHAT SITE am not bein nasty but who is arsed anyway

39 other posts totalling 3 pages not including your post would seem to infer that there are some interested but your not. Hey ho thats the way of things.

RMC allows all sorts of important discussions from Political Activism, to Menstrual Cycles, and discussing RM and CWU agreements and strikes. But we also have more light hearted topics like sightings of the timid lesser spotted yellow perstrop, and the recent Fish Factory puns, and long may it continue.

[fishtank]

The idea that Tax Credits exist to protect the low paid is complete nonsense.
They are actually a "get out of jail card" for the financial capatilist model.
Low wages mean low prices,High prices mean high wages,that's simple economics.
Tax credits mean employers get the best of both worlds..low wages subsidised by goverment handouts and higher prices.
They are simply designed to fuel consumer spending and at the same time control wage costs,nothing else.
If Cameron removes them he better have a plan b or the ar*e could fall out of the economy very quickly.

[Lounge Lizard]

boys and girls we should turn this topic into TAXES AND CREDITS CHAT SITE am not bein nasty but who is arsed anyway

39 other posts totalling 3 pages not including your post would seem to infer that there are some interested but your not. Hey ho thats the way of things.

RMC allows all sorts of important discussions from Political Activism, to Menstrual Cycles, and discussing RM and CWU agreements and strikes. But we also have more light hearted topics like sightings of the timid lesser spotted yellow perstrop, and the recent Fish Factory puns, and long may it continue.

"sightings of the timid LESSER SPOTTED yellow perstrop" - Where was that ?

[clashcityrocker]

If Cameron removes them he better have a plan b.

Plan b is blame the Lib Dems.
What other function do they serve in this coalition?

[maisymoo04]

terrier i no what you mean dog but theres more important things goin on in royal mail like our pensions etc am not bein funny but the topic said david cameron as new pm