Current Affairs The Labour Party

[coollino]

Can someone explain to me who effected mostly by the two child benefit cap?

Legit question as I can see something like 38% of Universal credit calimaints are in work. Where I'm struggling is to see what they claim and if and how this effects them. Is it single parent households mostly? The unemployed?

I ask as I was messing about with the benefit entitlement calculator the Gov.uk UC page links out too. Inputted for two adults on full time minimum wage jobs with 2 and 3 kids. It's not the easiest or most intuitive site, bit it seemed to indicate any benefits would be for childcare and child benefit, both went up from 2 to 3 kids.

Where I'm going here is trying to get to the heart of who is effected, numbers of people and what other policies/approaches could work. On the latter I've never been a fan of the state propping up low salaries rather than addressing the issue of low pay directly. New Labour in particular were guilty here, despite the introduction of the minimum wage. So vulnerable to slashing exercises by the Tories, for one (thinking working tax credits here where friends got fisted in 2010).

Unexpectedly, Spiked explain it pretty well

The inhumanity of the two-child benefit cap

Labour’s refusal to scrap this cruel policy sends the message that children are a burden.

www.spiked-online.com

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Unexpectedly, Spiked explain it pretty well

The inhumanity of the two-child benefit cap

Labour’s refusal to scrap this cruel policy sends the message that children are a burden.

www.spiked-online.com

I'm conflicted by this. For decades now, to adopt a child you have to show you have the financial means to do so, along with a suitable home and various other things. So there seems to be a consensus that these things are important in one area of society, yet when it comes to biological births (maybe including by those who end up giving their child up for adoption) there is a sense that these considerations are meaningless and it's the state's responsibility.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

Unexpectedly, Spiked explain it pretty well

The inhumanity of the two-child benefit cap

Labour’s refusal to scrap this cruel policy sends the message that children are a burden.

www.spiked-online.com

I'm conflicted by this. For decades now, to adopt a child you have to show you have the financial means to do so, along with a suitable home and various other things. So there seems to be a consensus that these things are important in one area of society, yet when it comes to biological births (maybe including by those who end up giving their child up for adoption) there is a sense that these considerations are meaningless and it's the state's responsibility.

I mean, it's fairly obvious it was a Tory attack on the poor, safe terrain for them to go after 'scroungers'.

I was just genuinely curious as to the breakdown. I'm not for one minute advocating a situation where people can't make ends meet, it's one of those where looking at reasons for poverty and/or the need to supplement wages makes sense to me than blanket benefits. I.e. if work payed properly or national childcare infrastructure was there would we need to top up people's pay? Might infrastructure get people into work full time etc? It's not just pay, being in work has been shown to improve health etc too.

Grim either way - it's a policy which punishes children and frankly perpetuates the chances of low social mobility, inequalities and poorer life chances. So much of your future health, wellbeing and general prosperity is dictated by what happens in childhood.

 

[toffee83]

 

[Blue 1]

Glad to see the ridiculous Rwanda gimmick dropped and the Bibby Stockholm done away with.

Last night's events were pretty unedifying, though. Both the rebellion and the ridiculously heavy-handed response to it. The 2 child cap will be lifted at some point in the not too distant future, I should think.

 

[Rob17896]

Glad to see the ridiculous Rwanda gimmick dropped and the Bibby Stockholm done away with.

Last night's events were pretty unedifying, though. Both the rebellion and the ridiculously heavy-handed response to it. The 2 child cap will be lifted at some point in the not too distant future, I should think.

I would think they will lift it as soon as they can, who would not want to do that and be in the Labour Party? However, as laudable as their programme appears to be I think it is weak.

If we do not organise a more reasonable distribution of the wealth we all create from this country and if we do not make a decision on our manageable population size then people will continually become worse off as they have been doing for years and we will continue to concrete greater parts of the landscape until there is none left. Neither of these things can go on if we aim at a decent society from a financial, ethical and sustainable perspective. Everything else is tinkering around the edge.

I have heard the party say that AI can help solve our productivity problem. Fantastic for the owners of the technology and the owners able to invest in and deploy it. The result will be an even greater concentration of wealth with the wealthy. Most people will become worse off and the only markets left for the super rich will be themselves.

Only the Greens to an extent addressed any of these big questions with their proposed wealth tax but even that was just a nod in the direction of the problem. I really do not think The Labour Party or anybody else is facing the real issues that tell us if we will have a cohesive society or if it will continue to degenerate.

 

[Rita_Poon]

GB energy.

The first thing these needed to say was, any stake held by the state will remains so, we have built into law that the tax payer money invested into GB energy will not be ransomed or given away by ANY future government.

 

[davek]

GB energy.

The first thing these needed to say was, any stake held by the state will remains so, we have built into law that the tax payer money invested into GB energy will not be ransomed or given away by ANY future government.

The Starmer Gang's GB Energy is going into partnership with Crown Estates, so wind power projects can be rolled out into sea bed they 'own'. The Royal Family 'own' almost all land up to 12 miles off the coast of Britain and therefore will have a monopoly on land provision for wind renewable energy.

They'll get profits from all the wind power projects.

It's a good job we got the Tories out isn't it?

 

[Rita_Poon]

The Starmer Gang's GB Energy is going into partnership with Crown Estates, so wind power projects can be rolled out into sea bed they 'own'. The Royal Family 'own' almost all land up to 12 miles off the coast of Britain and therefore will have a monopoly on land provision for wind renewable energy.

They'll get profits from all the wind power projects.

It's a good job we got the Tories out isn't it?

The crown estate get's it's cut of all it can get. Miliband was on just to explain the tax payer cash will not directly or indirectly go into the pockets of the crown estate, only from energy generated and then sold can profit be realised. He tried to compare it to EDF, but that's a stretch.

 

[Goat]

It's a good job we got the Tories out isn't it?

God yes.

 

[davek]

The crown estate get's it's cut of all it can get. Miliband was on just to explain the tax payer cash will not directly or indirectly go into the pockets of the crown estate, only from energy generated and then sold can profit be realised. He tried to compare it to EDF, but that's a stretch.

But it will indirectly wont it? This is all about the UK government de-risking investment for private developers - such as Crown Estates - comes about through UK Government using tax payer cash.

 

[davek]

God yes.

11 million kids kept in poverty while they dole out billions of public cash to private investors (like your King) to speculate and make massive profits.

Well done you!

 

[Rita_Poon]

But it will indirectly wont it? This is all about the UK government de-risking investment for private developers - such as Crown Estates - comes about through UK Government using tax payer cash.

A cut of what it earns is all. Like everything else under that remit.

I'd bin em off in a heartbeat, but, some like serfdom. feck them to!

 

[Goat]

11 million kids kept in poverty while they dole out billions of public cash to private investors (like your King) to speculate and make massive profits.

Well done you!

How's that neo socialist unicorn party getting on?

 

[davek]

How's that neo socialist unicorn party getting on?

It's coming along nicely. Transform it's called. And Starmer's dictatorial leadership has just held out the prospect of a new party with 7 seats in parliamant.

I think that's how it'll manifest itself in the end.

The Labour Party was born out of the Liberal Party and so too will 'Labour's' gravedigger come from within.