I've been robbed !

Stop ruining the fantasy... Also most poorer people are better off, it's just young and middle-aged single poor people who are worse off, to the tune of £5 per week, which when I had £20 a week left after paying bills when I was on the dole would have hurt, but as repeated endlessly by the group hand-wringers, the dole lot have pots of cash these days and can afford expensive mobile phones, flash cars, huge houses, private jets and so on..

Plus of course fuel costs not being significant in the council tax given that things like paying people is a tad more expensive.

But heigh ho, we're pissing on people's whinging fantasies here, which is typical of people today, just can't let a moan run without interrupting, no manners any more, I blame the teachers etc etc.

Yes, but that's not necessarily the same people who have suffered under the tax changes. Also to obtain the discount you have to subject yourself to an intensively inquisitive and intrusive means test. Hence over 50% of available benefits remain unclaimed some £3.5b. It is an extremely complicated area - MPs voting on it don't understand it. Ws are fortunate here in that we have a dedicated person in Cab whose sole job is to help older people claim benefits - unlike DW&P whose sole purpose seems to be to obstruct people trying to claim benefits.

You would no doubt be the first to squeal if the tax changes took away say an additional 5% - 7% of your income. No doubt you are one of the gainers under these changes. The other group who are worse of are pensioners aged below 65 (women) who are therefore not receiving the over 65's increase in personal allowance.

Your bullshit about me "no doubt" being the first to sqeal is just flatulence. I've never squealed about my tax, I lived half my life on benefits due to disabled parents, I've spent 6 months homeless, 3 on the streets and 3 in friends houses, and now I lose 49% of the money coming into my hands to the government. I've appreciated the state, I've been a victim of state loopholes when I was homeless, and now I'm propping up the state with my earnings, I've not spent my life with my hand out demanding more and complaining bitterly at whatever decisions are made.

I'm not a low single earner, but what I do gain is as insignificant as the loss to the few who do lose out. Changes in company tax laws have made me lose quite a bit, but no complaints from me.

What's not remembered is that there are far more gainers than losers in the change to the tax bands, it's typical of the whinging mentality in Britain that the sole concentration is on the few losers and not the greater number of gainers.

So when will they be taking too much, 50, 52, 90% ?

Steve

Hmm. What do I gain, pray tell?

On or around Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:23:01 +0100, "Lee_D" enlightened us thusly:

The council want a fixed price, though.

fair enough. I can't see the council going for it, though, they like everything either fixed rate or the rates adjustable by themselves (they do some stuff on a mileage rate, but they set the rate, not the contractor).

I did include a bit extra for fuel increases, I wasn't banking on 25% in about 6 months.

On or around Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:50:11 +0100, hugh enlightened us thusly:

Pensioners also lose the 10% tax rate, for those who pay tax.

On or around Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:11:30 +0100, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:

I'll give you bloody good odds that the overall tax burden has increased, though.

The numbers I've seen would suggest that those making above the average wage round here (Stoke-on-Trent), either from pension or wages are better off, those below it are worse off.

On or around Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:57:47 +0100, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:

I can see a lot of wasted money in the mechanism of government in this country. Whether things would be better if it were all changed, I don't know, nor do I think it's likely that we'll find out as bureaucracy tends to be self-perpetuating.

I'll give you a good example: The council here got on to my parents and suggested they apply for pension credit. One of their employees came and went through the forms, and in due course, they got the pencred.

In about 3 months time, they had a request to submit all the forms again. Mother phoned them, and queried this, and was told that a random pick is made for people to "check up on" that their circumstances haven't changed.

There are 2 points to note here: 1) there should be in place something that rejects new applicants being pulled out of the hat for re-assessment for changed circumstances, it's a waste of time and resources. This is probably an inaccurate bit of programming, but there should be scope for the people on the ground saying "hang on, we've only just had a form from these people" and ignoring the computer.

No argument there, no idea why the civil service is so inefficient although I've seen it improve in a few ways, mostly down to neccessity due to people being sacked. I know a few people who used to work for the milk quota and similar crowd, they seemed to go through endless cuts.

I think it's been inefficient since the dawn of time! Still, there's a lot of good that comes out of it but you'll not find many who will admit that.

Well, when I was a student, I had endless fun with the grants department and even more when they changed over to loans. It's not much better in industry though, I've finally had the correct invoice for a job done 7 months ago by an electrical outfit here, after repeatedly calling them about the invoice being wrong and not even addressed to me. Each time they said they'd get it fixed but I just get more threats through the post for someone who doesn't live here. Finally they got it right.

And don't get me started on trying to report problems to or otherwise deal with ebay, Sony, Panasonic or any other large corporation, compared to whom the government and civil service are an absolute pleasure...

What's that got to do with anything?

If they don't claim other benefits to which they are entitled. The fuss is about the childless and relatively young people who are the worse off, however those who don't claim the benefits specifically aimed at them, then moan about being worse off aren't worth listening to. There are some losers but there's more gainers amongst the low-paid than losers supposedly. It's not good enough to just crank out the old refrain about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.

IR >There are some losers but there's more gainers amongst the IR> low-paid than losers supposedly. It's not good enough to just crank IR> out the old refrain about the rich getting richer and the poor getting IR> poorer.

Being sat on the wrong end of the 40% tax, I can see why those that have lost their 10% are having some problems, but as has been pointed out, there are plenty of benefits that can be claimed if you look into it. I'd rather that 40% of my earning went to legitimate claims than just some huge pot, but I guess I'll never know :(

Of course no-one ever seems to see it that way, those that earn more, pay more (tax), enabling those that don't earn enough to claim benefits, benefit from increased govt spending etc, that's the whole point of the system. Or at least, it was.

Just interested, I got the feeling losers 10% gainers nil, is all. You suggested otherwise.

Hmm, not sure what that actually means!! Or are you saying that you don't think anyone gained at all? One tax band was removed so those on it had to pay more tax, but the tax band they were moved to was reduced so those on it originally now paid less, and at the same time a load of benefits aimed at those on lower incomes were increased.

Have a quick browse around the beeb website's money section, should be something on there that makes it clear.

On or around Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:55:08 +0100, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:

...zero, in my case...

Probably true if you just look at the income tax/benefit equation; I doubt they're so stupid as to be caught out by such a transparent failure. However, I wouldn't take bets on the overall position.

even if it's true?