Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
There’s only so many times you can keep pissing on the base of your party before it goes elsewhere.
There’s only so many times you can keep pissing on the base of your party before it goes elsewhere.Cant see it TBH. Reform and Greens maxed out last election. Greens are already tearing themselves apart and being accused of supporting genocide. Reform will last as long as Farage can be arsed which I doubt will be more than a year or two.
Of course if they don’t deliver anything they were elected on then like the Tories in 2019 they’ll get booted out. Which is why worrying about the optics of shit like this in the first month is moron shit. Get on with delivering, the only people that will remember you using the left as an example will be the left.
Cancelling Bibby Stockholm and Rwanda is apparently going to save £7B over 10 years so there’s a good chunk. Starmers missed a trick if you ask me to not reallocate those savings to scrapping the cap and then making a fuss about how cancelling Tory follies allows us to look after our own.
As I was saying though, if reducing child poverty is what people want, removing the two cap limit is a poor and inefficient way to do it. If there’s other reasoning to remove it then that’s different but that’s not been the main argument
The main issue is that the party have claimed they still want to end the cap but can’t afford it despite finding £3 billion for Ukraine.Cancelling Bibby Stockholm and Rwanda is apparently going to save £7B over 10 years so there’s a good chunk. Starmers missed a trick if you ask me to not reallocate those savings to scrapping the cap and then making a fuss about how cancelling Tory follies allows us to look after our own.
Why is it inefficient?
Given the figures banded about by Poverty action groups about the cost of child poverty I'd say its nobrainer,(if their figures are correct)
Here’s a crazy idea - why not lift the 330k kids out of poverty, AND then do something for the 1m living in destitution.As I mentioned in my other post
‘Removing the cap benefits 1.6m kids, 330k of which are said to be in living in poverty because of it. This costs 3.5bn per year (17bn over Parliament). I’m saying I’d personally rather have all that money directly spent on the 1m kids that live in destitution’
So if the estimations are correct basically 20% of the kids benefiting from the removal of the cap are being helped out of poverty. 1.2m+ kids benefitting aren’t in poverty. I’m saying there’s surely better ways of more targeted assistance if you want to help kids out of poverty and I’d personally want it targeted at the estimated 1m kids classed as living in destitution.
There’s only so many times you can keep pissing on the base of your party before it goes elsewhere.
Here’s a crazy idea - why not lift the 330k kids out of poverty, AND then do something for the 1m living in destitution.
This is supposed to be a country at the forefront of the 21st century, not some post-empire backwater.
Have I missed something? I don't recall Starmer or Reeves saying they weren't removing the cap but were going to spend billions on other measures to help life children out of poverty?As I was saying though, if reducing child poverty is what people want, removing the two cap limit is a poor and inefficient way to do it. If there’s other reasoning to remove it then that’s different but that’s not been the main argument
Have I missed something? I don't recall Starmer or Reeves saying they weren't removing the cap but were going to spend billions on other measures to help life children out of poverty?
All I've seen is Starmer and Reeves parroting theirs no money to any questions before starting to change their tune, to an extent that people were expecting a u-turn prior to last nights vote, and now it appears MPs are being told removing the cap will be part of the budget.
They must have been shocked to wake up this morning and discover that child poverty is a thing, if only someone had mentioned it beforeTheyve said they’re doing some kind of poverty review and actions will come out of that.
It’s too early to say for sure because who knows what will happen between now and 2029. We can probably all agree that after 2019, the probability of a Labour government in 2024 was quite low.Cant see it TBH. Reform and Greens maxed out last election. Greens are already tearing themselves apart and being accused of supporting genocide. Reform will last as long as Farage can be arsed which I doubt will be more than a year or two.
Of course if they don’t deliver anything they were elected on then like the Tories in 2019 they’ll get booted out. Which is why worrying about the optics of shit like this in the first month is moron shit. Get on with delivering, the only people that will remember you using the left as an example will be the left.
Have I missed something? I don't recall Starmer or Reeves saying they weren't removing the cap but were going to spend billions on other measures to help life children out of poverty?
All I've seen is Starmer and Reeves parroting theirs no money to any questions before starting to change their tune, to an extent that people were expecting a u-turn prior to last nights vote, and now it appears MPs are being told removing the cap will be part of the budget.
Care to elaborate Steve?I wasn't talking talking about Starmer/Reeves, it was my personal take that if people want to tackle poverty they’d be better ways to do it than remove the cap
Get yourself on the review committee!I wasn't talking talking about Starmer/Reeves, it was my personal take that if people want to tackle poverty they’d be better ways to do it than remove the cap
Care to elaborate Steve?
Get yourself on the review committee!
As a small aside (and it's an open question as I don't know!), is child benefit as a whole an appropriate means nowadays? Seems crazy you can earn minimum wage or Callum O'Hare's salary and be entitled to the same. Is it cheaper to administer that way? Too costly on a one-off to reform? That and the winter heating payment to pensioners seem to stand out as just handing out cash.Why not try to spend money as efficiently as possible in a targeted way so theres more for the people who need it most ?
YesAs a small aside (and it's an open question as I don't know!), is child benefit as a whole an appropriate means nowadays? Seems crazy you can earn minimum wage or Callum O'Hare's salary and be entitled to the same. Is it cheaper to administer that way? Too costly on a one-off to reform? That and the winter heating payment to pensioners seem to stand out as just handing out cash.
Tried to explain in several posts wingy. You remove the cap and only around 20% of the cost of that policy helps kids in some form of poverty. I’d rather find a way where 100% of the cost/value goes towards reducing poverty, in particular the 1m estimated to live in destitution
That might be increasing UC for certain parents, direct meals, housing etc
It’s too early to say for sure because who knows what will happen between now and 2029. We can probably all agree that after 2019, the probability of a Labour government in 2024 was quite low.
Labour has a massive majority but it is more precarious than you’d expect. As for the lesser parties, I wouldn’t underestimate either the Greens or Reform. Tice still managed to get Reform polling around 11% with virtually no external funding and no party structure
As for the Greens, they will be an alternative party for the traditional Labour left that will feel let down by the current government. Should their agenda be insufficiently left wing.
Let’s settle in for the ride.
I get this but what about the parents who keep having the kids? If they can just keep getting more and more by firing out kids and no intention of working it shouldn't be abused.
If it's somebody who's between jobs or just going through a rough patch and otherwise grafts then of course.
Still remember a few years ago (probably a good 10 years now) a mum of one of my daughter's friends moaning she only had £800 a month after her bills etc and never worked. Miles away from a couple with 2 kids grafting their arses off on minimum wage to get by.
This is where I think there should be some way of differentiating to stop the abuse of it.
Its a really tough one because there’s some mothers out there that do just rinse the system and fuck their kids up, but equally I know single mums with four kids trying their best and living like one step up from being homeless, choosing them or their kids eat, etc.
Need to be a lot stronger on the frauds, not sure how you do this though. Like tax whatever the rules are those who want to get around them seem to always have more info and resources than those stopping them.
Not being harsh, why do they have 4 kids?
I get it if circumstances change but if it's been a struggle from the start then why did they keep having more kids?
Two failed relationships, home maker in both, Dad fucked off and pays nothing in both. She got diagnosed bipolar in her thirties and essentially should be on PIP for MH but can’t get assessed. Shit happens.
CSA should be going after the dads for starters and making sure they pay.
Also, contraception.
I love how you’ve got all the answers for this woman you’ve never met. Why should two people living together for years use contraception when they want kids?
I agree about CSA, and it’s what I’ve said, but one can’t be found and the other doesn’t exactly make his money through PAYE.
The point is she is where she is. What now?
Been told to expect to recruit 1000 staff a year for the next 5 years in hmrc to target evasion and avoidanceIts a really tough one because there’s some mothers out there that do just rinse the system and fuck their kids up, but equally I know single mums with four kids trying their best and living like one step up from being homeless, choosing them or their kids eat, etc.
Need to be a lot stronger on the frauds, not sure how you do this though. Like tax whatever the rules are those who want to get around them seem to always have more info and resources than those stopping them.
They should have been using contraception because clearly they aren't man enough to provide for their kids so don't actually want them! Should be given the snip.
Pisses me off blokes like that, cunts!
Been told to expect to recruit 1000 staff a year for the next 5 years in hmrc to target evasion and avoidance
Same mate. As I’m sure you’re aware those of us who do it right get fucked repeatedly and those who don’t get away with murder.
But at the end of the day, beyond all that, there’s a little girl growing up with limited life chances. And she isn’t to blame for being born.
On a wider note, we have a birth rate crisis right now and everyone is saying they don’t want immigrants. And it isn’t nice middle class stable people who have the kids in reality.
I thought that people on Callum’s salary (well a lot less actually) either pay a tax which eventually negates the child benefit or can avoid the tax by opting not to receive the child benefit.As a small aside (and it's an open question as I don't know!), is child benefit as a whole an appropriate means nowadays? Seems crazy you can earn minimum wage or Callum O'Hare's salary and be entitled to the same. Is it cheaper to administer that way? Too costly on a one-off to reform? That and the winter heating payment to pensioners seem to stand out as just handing out cash.
So racists have the same percentage of the electorate as Labour received?There’s 20% of the vote out there for racists, we’ve known that since UKIP. Reform aren’t ever going above that. They’re a one note party. Greens had lefties with permission to protest vote because the election was won already and a well funded and worldwide Gaza misinformation campaign on their side and still couldn’t make a significant impact outside of a couple of rural Tory NIMBY seats. The maths just doesn’t work out for either of them. We had all this at the last protest election for the EU elections and the same people made the same arguments and things went back to normal once the protest had gone.
So racists have the same percentage of the electorate as Labour received?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?