I’m reminded of a song I listened many years ago on one of my hobbit journeys recently with some fellow travellers we were having a discussion on various subjects from good friends we had and lost along the way, social mobility, mental health, post war syndrome, food, mobile, gas, electric, and oil price increases and Brexit, the list goes on. Somehow ‘Share Values’ came up and it sums up what our so called shared values in U.K. means in my eyes in a nutshell it’s called a rat race. See lyrics below:
Ah! Ya too rude
Oh what a rat race
Oh what a rat race
This is the rat race
Some a lawful, some a bastard, some a jacket
Oh what a rat race, rat race
Some a gorgan, some a hooligan, some a guine-gog
In this rat race, yeah!
When the cats away
The mice will play
Political voilence fill ya city
Don’t involve Rasta in your say say
Rasta don’t work for no C.I.A.
Rat race, rat race, rat race
When you think is peace and safety
A sudden destruction
Collective security for surety
Don’t forget your history
Know your destiny
In the abundance of water
The fool is thirsty
Rat race, rat race, rat race
Oh it’s a disgrace to see the
Human-race in a rat race, rat race
You got the horse race
You got the dog race
You got the human-race
But this is a rat race, rat race
What a lark and see the hypocrites going along their way as they look down on people who are on state benefits. However there are some arguments that suggest that some people through no fault of their own who happens to be in certain situations which is the root cause of why they have ended up on state benefits such as they lose their jobs and mental health issues which can happen to any one of us at any stage of our lives. To be frank nobody likes to be on state benefits and it’s still shocking some people they view people who are on state benefits are of lower class and dare I say it as a way how parents educate their children to use say to their children to encourage them to use a form of caste discrimination to encourage their children to do better in their education to get a better job. The truth is this is one of the worse way to teach their children to discriminate against people who receive state benefits. Yes we can encourage our children to do better by showing them to study harder and reward them when they get a good grades result in their school report.
Changes to benefit rules coming into force this week could push 200,000 more children into poverty, say campaigners.
From Thursday, payments for some benefits will be limited to the first two children in a family.
The Child Poverty Action Group and Institute for Public Policy Research say some families will be almost £3,000 a year worse off under the new rules.
Ministers say they are determined to tackle the root causes of disadvantage and make work pay.
The changes affect families who claim tax credits and Universal Credit – which is in the process of being rolled out and is due to replace tax credits completely by 2022.
The new rules mean that children born after Thursday 6 April into families where there are already two or more children will no longer be counted in benefit payments to their parents, under either tax credits or Universal Credit.
And from autumn 2018, families making new claims under Universal Credit will only receive payments for their first two children even if they were born before Thursday.
However, children already receiving Universal Credit or tax credit payments will not lose them for as long as their family’s existing claim continues.
And child benefits which are separate will be unaffected.
The latest official figures show that 872,000 families with more than two children were claiming tax credits in 2014-15.
And a similar number of families are likely to lose out under the changes, the researchers suggest.
In 2014-15, two thirds (65%) were working families and 68% had no more than three children, say the researchers.
Based on those figures, the researchers calculate that once the new policy is fully implemented an additional 100,000 adults and 200,000 children could face poverty.
Among those affected will be families with more than two children who are not currently on benefits but who might need to claim in future because of unforeseen redundancy, illness, separation or death, the researchers warn.
They also suggest that the policy could:
- Create an incentive for larger families to split
- Discourage single parents to form new “blended” families
- Penalise children in separated families who switch the parent with whom they live
“It may also leave women who become pregnant with a third child, for example through contraception failure, with a difficult choice between moving into poverty and having an abortion,” they add.
The researchers also criticise a lack of advance publicity about the change on the main universal credit website, particularly if the policy was intended “to inform parents’ choices about having children”.
Child Poverty Action Group’s chief executive Alison Garnham called it a “particularly pernicious cut because it suggests some children matter more than others”.
“It’s also illogical because no parent has a crystal ball,” she added.
“Families that can comfortably support a third child today could struggle tomorrow and have to claim Universal Credit because, sadly, health, jobs and relationships can fail.
“Surely children should not have their life chances damaged because of the number of siblings they have.”
It is claimed disabled people in the U.K. are ‘left behind in society’ and have ‘very poor’ life chances a report has found.
This report by The Equality and Human Rights Commission said progress towards equality in the past 20 years was ‘littered with missed opportunities’.
It is reported on 25 June 2015 that the number of UK children classed as living in relative poverty remains 2.3 million, government figures suggest.
It’s been purported that the Department of Works and Pension annual estimate shows the proportion affected – almost one in six – was unchanged from 2011-12 to 2013-14.
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said UK poverty levels were the “lowest since the mid-1980s” and showed government reforms were working.
But charities said proposed welfare changes would leave families worse off.
A child is defined as being in poverty when living in a household with an income below 60% of the UK’s average.
Average household income in 2013-14 – before housing costs – remained unchanged from 2012-13, at £453 a week – making the poverty line £272 a week.
Mr Duncan Smith told the Commons that government reforms of the welfare system were focused on “making work pay” and getting people into employment.
He said he remained “committed” to dealing with the “root causes” of poverty, saying employment was up by more than two million since 2010.
Shadow chancellor Chris Leslie accused the government of failing to make progress in cutting child poverty and raising incomes.
The figures represented a “depressing slow-down in the progress we should be making as a country”, he said.
Javed Khan, chief executive of children’s charity Barnardo’s, said every child living in poverty was a child that was being “let down”.
He said: “Government plans to cut struggling families’ incomes further by changing tax credits is deeply concerning… this government must ensure that change to the benefits system makes work pay for those on low incomes.”
Matthew Reed, chief executive of the Children’s Society, said there has been a “steady rise” over the last five years in the numbers of children living in poverty in households where parents work.
He said 200,000 more children have been pushed deeper into poverty over the past year.
Alison Garnham, chief executive of the Child Poverty Action Group, said the figures made “grim reading”, adding: “The government is not going to meet the child poverty targets.”
It comes as the government has said it wants to change the way child poverty is measuredas it believes the current measurement is inadequate.
David Cameron’s official spokeswoman said the prime minister “remains committed to doing more work to eliminate child poverty and that is precisely why the government wants to look at having an approach that is focused more on tackling the root causes of poverty than treating the symptoms.”
It’s a sad day to every corner we turn we witness Junk Food Projects, Food Banks, Soup Kitchens and most of all the increase of homelessness, rough sleepers, mental health, learning disabilities, low income families depends on those new voluntary services to provide a service which in some cases lack funding and left to fend for themselves to raise the funding for a level playing field against big charities that receive the bulk of the funding from some councils.
What’s more disturbing is the government gives the talk but refuse to take action. It’s no wonder why some people who can use their votes refuse to hold both the government and the official opposition to account because of this, politicians are let off the hook and they are the ones who moan the most. To put it in a nutshell if you don’t vote, you don’t have a say.
There is a saying “People shouldn’t be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.‘
I will continue to defend Labour Government record during 1997-2010:
- Created the Future Jobs Fund, creating over 100,000 new job starts for young people, reducing youth unemployment.
- Introduced Connections, a service for young people which gave advice and information on jobs, careers, learning and training.
- Created the New Deal, which helped the long-term unemployed to find work.
- Introduced the National Wage(NMW), now fighting for real Living Wage.
- Introduced the right to 28 days of paid leave.
- Equally of rights between full and part-time workers.
- Increased paid maternity leave from 14 to 39 weeks, introduced 2 weeks of paid paternity leave.
- 70% reduction in the number of people in the number of people sleeping rough.
- 94% decrease in the number of families being placed into inadequate bed and breakfast accommodation.
- Repaired and improved 1 Million council houses to meet the Decent Homes Standard for council houses.
Isn’t ironic Just over half of the people who have received taxpayers’ money to help them buy a home under a government scheme did not need it, according to research.
Official figures to December 2016 show more than 20,000 households who are not first-time buyers have been helped.
The initiative, which started in April 2013, aims to make buying a home more affordable.
It is suggested that research for the Government found 57% of those who signed up to it said they could have afforded to buy without access to the scheme.
Help to Buy was launched by then Chancellor George Osborne to attempt to encourage more housebuilding.
The government offers a 20% equity loan to buyers of newly-built properties and 40% in London, on properties worth up to £600,000.
The buyers have to put down a 5% deposit and, when the property is sold, the government reclaims its loan.
This means if the value of the home goes up, the government will make a profit.
Similar schemes were set up and have now ended in Scotland and Wales.
Gavin Barwell, the housing and planning minister, said: “We’re committed to helping more people find a home of their own with the support of a range of low-cost home ownership products.
“Our Help to Buy Equity Loan scheme continues to make home ownership a reality for thousands of people, especially first-time buyers right across the country.”
The government said it had committed £8.6 billion for the Help to Buy Equity Loan scheme to allow it to run in England until 2021.
Labour’s shadow housing secretary John Healey said: “While the number of younger people who own a first home is in freefall, the number of government-backed affordable homes to buy has fallen by two-thirds since 2010 and badly targeted schemes like Help to Buy are not focused on those who most need a hand up.
“Labour would change that and make helping first-time buyers on ordinary incomes the priority for Help to Buy.”
George Osborne faced a Tory rebellion on Thursday night which could block his plans to cut benefits to thousands of disabled people.
Scores of Conservative MPs warned the Chancellor that they will force him to roll back on controversial Government plans to cut the welfare claims of 640,000 disabled people to save £1.3 billion.
One prominent backbencher warned that Mr Osborne has “zero chance” of getting the measure through Parliament.
The rebellion is a blow to Mr Osborne’s authority and came as MPs also vowed to oppose the Government next week over European Union taxes on tampons, solar panels and home insulation.
George Osborne’s budget will disproportionately benefit the rich, with little if any help given to the poor, according to a review by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
The richest 10% of Brits will benefit to the tune of £250 a year each from yesterday’s announcements alone.
And there was little or no benefit from yesterday’s tax and benefits announcements to the lowest 50% of earners – who will already be up to £1,500 a year worse off after tax and benefit changes introduced since May’s general election.
According to the IFS, some 43% of the population now don’t earn enough to pay income tax, and so will see no benefit from the Chancellor’s increase in the tax-free personal allowance.
But Mr Osborne tossed high earners a bung in the budget, by bumping the threshold for the higher rate of tax up to £45,000 a year.
Rich non-doms were given a year in which to sell or dispose of their UK based houses and assets before they have to pay tax on them.
Capital gains tax saw another cut, as did corporation tax which remains the lowest of any G20 country.
Those that can afford to save were given huge incentives to put money aside – with the Lifetime ISA offering a £1 bonus for every £4 saved up to £4,000 a year, and the upper annual limit on tax-free ISA savings lifted to a whopping £20,000.
And people living in social housing who have ‘spare rooms’ are still hit with the Bedroom Tax, owners of swanky second homes were told they could earn £1,000 tax-free by renting them out through AirBNB.
Child Poverty Action Group Chief Executive Alison Garnham said: “Yet again the independent evidence shows hard-up households are losing most while the better off gain from tax cuts paid for by all of us.
“And in the pipeline there are cuts to universal credit which will further clobber low-earners just as the cancelled tax credits would have.
“If it wants to be the party of working people, the Government needs to deliver a real living wage and help with high housing and childcare costs.”
And today it emerged that some 290,000 sick, vulnerable and disabled people will lose £4,100 a year.
To put this all into prospective it’s no wonder why that Phillip Hammond and other senior Tory MPs were hoping that Ice Queen Theresa May would call for early general elections that was never to be. This is why George Osborne is having the last laugh at disabled people and people who are on state benefits.