I’ve just been picking through the personal tax statement
as sent out to 24 million tax payers. With any new system there will be teething problems of course, but it
seems that most of these are not technical issues, more political decisions or
lies as I prefer to call them.
This tax bill is an example. It only shows income tax and
misses out VAT, fuel duty, council tax, etc. It was politically important that welfare was the biggest figure, so welfare was redefined to ensure this. Notice the big orange bit, designed to stand out.
The welfare
figure comes from total spending on “social protection” less state
pensions. That’s about 24% of total
government spending, or £168 billion in 2013/14. Some of the pundits have
investigated.
Of the £168 billion only about 1.6% is unemployment benefit,
that’s less than £3 billion. £28 billion
is spent on long term care for children, the elderly, the sick and the
disabled. Well I think we need that.
£20 billion is spent on “other pensions”. These include public
sector workers like soldiers, police, teachers, politicians & nurses. Why are
pensions included in welfare. Well this is seven times more than unemployment
benefit inflating the orange blob nicely. Well now we know who the scroungers are, or at least who our coalition
government think the scroungers are.
Should the £28 billion spent on pension related benefits
pension credits (a means tested top up for those over reliant on state pension)
be included here? Surely its better to put this in the state pensions total? I
expect that George Osborne’s new pensioner bonds paying 4% for a 3 year term will be
added to this welfare total in future.
Why am I as a taxpayer paying for this party political
propaganda? If we are being softened up for more cuts, then what about cutting MP’s pensions first?
Side issue – I started
my working career behind the counter in an Unemployment Benefit Office. At the
time Job Centres were just being rolled out. The argument was to get away from
the demeaning benefit environment which reinforces feelings of failure and
shame by putting an emphasis on new jobs, new starts for people and training
opportunities. For the state, the unemployment safety net was a natural part of
labour market flexibility. As old industries died, workers should be encouraged
to seek new skills and new opportunities. The welfare state added a necessary liquidity
to the labour market. Okay about 30 – 40% of claimants were hardcore unemployed
who knew all the tricks and exploited them for a quiet if not particularly
rewarding life. But most people were not scroungers and the welfare state could
help support them when they were down, and reintegrate them into a fulfilling economically
active workforce. The coalition government strategy of bullying those in need
has no impact on the 30-40% who have thick skins and are used to an
impoverished lifestyle. It’s the 60%, decent people who are temporary victims
of economic renewal and feel the shame of unemployment who suffer from the
coalition’s vindictive streak.
More:
No comments:
Post a Comment