Triple lock

Hear Hear GGMk2

Percentages always sound good and fair but in fact they discriminate against the lower paid and the better paid have a bigger rise. Over time the'real' gap gets wider.
It is disgraceful the low amount that people who have lost their jobs are given. I know they talk about the long term unemployed, and some are a cause for concern, but many of them are not intentionally so but for a variety of reasons are unable to get a job. It must be possible for people's work record to be looked at and habitual non workers are a different kettle of fish to those who come to it from redundancy or when in later life. I am not talking her at all about people with some form of disability.
When the pension goes up maybe the JSA should be increased by the same amount.

Very good point about percentages grannygranby

I agree about % and that it all depend on the base figure. If JSA went up by 2.5% the increase would be about £1.70 a week. if you are an habitual non worker, you wouldn't qualify for contribution based JSA. The reason I called the basic income utopian was not an attack on the idea, far from it, but that I was trying to discuss not the perfect solution if we were designing a benefits system from scratch but what ideas might work within the current benefits paradigm of the current and next government. So it's about tweaking not redesigning because does anyone really think that is going to happen? I still think the fair thing is to increase all benefits by the same % and improve the level at which means tested benefit levels are set. It is surely so wrong that other benefits are frozen? None should be.

I don't think anyone has suggested that basic income would be brought in as a perfect ready made solution to replace everything else Rigby. Indeed it is often suggested that the first step would be to pay everyone of working age the equivalent of JSA. It is the reliability of the unconditional payment that makes the difference.

I read an article by Jeanette Winterson at the weekend.
It was to do with the original May Day Manifesto.
She is an advocate of the basic income.
She would scrap the personal allowance and give everyone a graduated income, starting with £6000 at 18, offsetting higher education bills, rising to £10,000 a year at 21.
High earners still get it, but it attracts tax relief if gift aided in full.
Fund through an income tax levy and higher corporation tax.
Anyone not in paid work will have to do community exchange for a few hours a week contributing to the community. The point would be to make everyone feel a part of society and break the rule of the haves over the have nots.

Interesting Jen. I think most suggested systems gradually do away with the personal allowance as the amount paid in BI is increased Jen but I haven't seen the idea of community exchange. I hope the community gets to say what is worth-while.

She didn't say anything about pensioners, I noticed.
However, lots of pensioners volunteer.

GG What figure have you heard students need? I can't remember exactly how much my DS has had to borrow, but his halls fees alone are £120pw and there's no housing benefit.He certainly doesn't have more than a pensioner.

From the FT about Philip May. I wonder what he thinks about the triple lock.

“He is very much a back-channel to City sentiment,” said one senior executive. “He does understand business in a way that [Theresa May] has not experienced herself. You could say he comes across as a translator for the PM.”

Since 2006, Mr May has stepped back from directly managing money himself, instead working for the limelight-shy asset management behemoth Capital Group to develop the firm’s retirement products.

In a statement published last summer when the Mays moved into Downing Street, his employer said: “His job is to ensure the clients are happy with the service and that we understand their goals.”