| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Rachel Maclean: People can protect themselves better from the cost of living crisis "by taking on more hours or moving to a better job"
https://twitter.com/secrettory12/sta...HBTT7BmlspAt4A
Beyond stupid, what happens if everyone refuses then to work in retail, be cleaners or carers so that they can afford to live.
Can't imagine many people have jobs where they can just add on a couple of hours willy nilly.
This government doesn't care about the average person in the UK and if you voted for this you're a fool.
Easiest thing in the world to do!!! And this precious nugget of wisdom comes from a woman earning at least £175-200k a year and who claimed larger than average expenses of over £216k last year. I wonder if she stays awake at night wrestling with having to choose between heating and eating?Originally Posted by TWGL1
Classic case here in media fuelled misinformation, the result being fury and misunderstanding.
What she is talking about is the cases where people are prevented from earning more even if they move to a higher paid job or work extra hours, because that leads to a corresponding loss in benefits - I know numerous people in this circumstance, who have time spare, but it is not worth them working extra as it impacts on Universal Credit.
My ex partner is in that exact situation. I am in a different but related position, where I have quite a few evenings free without my kids and would happily work extra hours, but I am unsure of the tax implications - things like this could and should be simplified to encourage people to earn a little extra where they can.
Of course, this is why cash in hand work exists, but the point is still valid.
People should stop wilfully misinterpreting what people say. We saw the exact same last week with Lee Anderson MP.
Agreed, please stop willfully misinterpreting what Tory MPs say.
OK mate
You know what I am saying is correct here.
People have dislikes, be it towards ideologies, political parties, races, religions, and the internet is full of people justifying those dislikes by often purposefully misinterpreting what people have said.
You can tolerate it all you like, but you are only fuelling conflict
I absolutely, categorically don't agree with you.
The foodbank nonsense that you said people were misinterpreting wasn't misinterpreted at all, except by you.
Your explanation of what that MP said didn't make any sense. Unless volunteers are going to people's homes to batch cook for them (which doesn't seem likely) they aren't going to be able to prepare food for 30p per meal.
By defending the indefensible you are only fuelling conflict.
I have watched the full interview on sky news 3 times now and I can't for the life of me find a mention of tax or UC implications in relation to the statement about taking on more hours or a better paid job. I didn't hear her mention UC or tax at all in the interview.
Do you have a timestamp of when she talks about loss of benefits?
Interesting developments ongoing where we see the pound up on dollar and Euro unemployment well down , total wages up Total pay jumped 7%, but basic pay only up 4.2% and behind inflation , lots of positives but we do need to get the of cost of living crisis fixed to ensure we benefit from the other market positives .
The bigger dangers are difficulty to predict and manage with Russia and Ukraine controlling so much wheat ,grain , eggs cattle feedstocks and gas for the rest of the world ,we think it might be tough for us just imagine how the supply effects to the horn of Africa and others where starvation can happen very quickly
I'm talking about articles like this, which totally and purposefully misinterpret stories, primarily in the hope that people like you will spread them far and wide (ching ching)
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...brits-26940821
She quite clearly states on two occasions that this isn't applicable for everyone.
See:"Maclean said she was not “suggesting for one moment” that such an option would work for everyone, adding: “It may be right for some people, they may be able to access additional hours, but, of course, it is not going to work for people who are already in three jobs."
The problem is, if you distort what people are saying and what they mean, and choose to present them as monsters for your own satisfaction, then it only encoruages people on the other side to do the same.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/l...lean-fwvkrbzp2
James, I haven't distorted anything. You have gone on a long rant about people deliberately misinterpreting what she is saying whilst doing exactly that yourself. You have decided she is talking about people on benefits, she never said she was. I have listened to the interview and assume she is talking about me...
Single male living alone, in full time work earning roughly the average wage, not on any benefits, could pay his bills comfortably last year and might not be able to by the time the next energy cap increase comes around. Is she talking about me? Is her advice for me to get more hours or get a better job?
People like me don't read The Mirror.
People like me are also just commenting on what the MPs have said, not what we think they've said (without any evidence to suggest that they meant something contrary to what was said).
On this forum, only you have misinterpreted the words of two Tory MPs in the last week and yet have the audacity to accuse others of doing exactly that.
What has Guido Fawkes said about it?
No, she isn't.
I know you aren't okay with MP's comments being spun and distorted, but the reality is, you are happy with it in these cases as it suits an agenda and you can present the false reality of disney politics, and good and evil.
I'm not happy in any cases but you're the only one distorting the comments on here about these cases
If you, hand on heart, believe you're not misinterpreting the two MP's comments then that's fair enough but you have to realise that we're not doing that either.
We're using their exact words to condemn them; not making up things that they've said. Only you are creating a narrative based on what you "think" they are saying.
You won't agree with that assessment either so I'll go and make my dinner instead of arguing with you.
(Please don't misinterpret that as me going for a walk/wank or something).
Just a point of interest please avoid walking and wanking in and around Nth Cardiff , as there's a 20mph speed limit and ones getaway is somewhat restricted.I'm not happy in any cases but you're the only one distorting the comments on here about these cases
If you, hand on heart, believe you're not misinterpreting the two MP's comments then that's fair enough but you have to realise that we're not doing that either.
We're using their exact words to condemn them; not making up things that they've said. Only you are creating a narrative based on what you "think" they are saying.
You won't agree with that assessment either so I'll go and make my dinner instead of arguing with you.
(Please don't misinterpret that as me going for a walk/wank or something).
How does one W&W? Surely you'd trip over your own trousers?
The Sky News story linked below had me pondering what I could reduce or forego completely should inflation necessitate some serious belt-tightening. Socialising would be atop the list, followed by scoffing less.
One in four people skipping meals over rising cost of living worries, poll for Sky News suggests https://news.sky.com/story/more-than...gests-12614622
UK inflation up to 9 per cent from 7 per cent.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61483175
CPI at 9%, RPI, a truer measure and what MPs ensure they bag each year so as not to become poorer in real terms, is at 11%.
It won't take many more month's like April's jump for it to reach 20%. The poorest will suffer most of course, especially those on a fixed income, and vast numbers of those are State Pension recipients. The Tories broke their 2019 triple lock manifesto commitment for that payment and compounded it by diddling them out of an 8% increase this year. Instead they had 2.5%.
It says it's only a temporary triple lock suspension. Few would believe them.
Interesting read :
https://ifs.org.uk/publications/1605...217d0d0660706e
This morning the ONS announced that CPI inflation rose to 9% in the year to April, a level not seen since 1982, and significantly higher than the 7% rate in March. A key driver of inflation is the increased cost of energy; Ofgem’s updated energy tariff cap came into effect in April, raising the cap on average household bills on gas and electricity by 54% from the previous month, meaning a 70% year-on-year increase. In addition to the dramatic rise in the cost of gas and electricity, other factors such as the continuation of the war in Ukraine further increased prices of items such as petrol and food as well. The expiration of the temporary VAT cut for the hospitality industry also meant the tax on meals out and hotel stays increased from a rate of 12.5% back to 20% this month, while it was just 5% in April of last year.
Until this point, IFS work has shown that households across all income groups have faced similar rates of inflation. However, as poorest households spend more of their total budget on gas and electricity, we now see inflation hitting the poorest households harder. In April, the bottom 10% of the population in terms of income faced a rate of inflation rate of 10.9%, which was 3 percentage points higher than the inflation rate of the richest 10%. Most of this difference comes from the fact that the poorest households spend 11% of their total household budget on gas and electricity, compared to 4% for the richest households.
"Inflation hit 9% in April. Because so much of the increase was driven by the increase in the gas and electricity tariff cap, poorer households who spend more of their budgets on gas and electricity, faced an even higher rate of inflation. We estimate that the poorest 10% of households faced an inflation rate of 10.9%. State benefits only increased by 3.1% in April. This means big real terms cuts to the living standards of many of the poorest households.
"Continuing pressures, such as the war in Ukraine, are likely to push Ofgem’s October tariff cap, as well as other prices including food prices, even higher later this year. We are likely to be in a prolonged period during which poorer households are facing rates of inflation even higher than the headline figures would suggest."
It's almost as though they knew what was coming.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
