People earning 45K plus to receive Energy help

I think that the energy sector needs a good kick up the arse

Nobody should be expected to pay the extortionate prices to heat their homes, cook their food etc., and that applies to the poorest in society up to the richest, just because some can afford to pay, doesn’t mean they should.

SMEs, schools, hospitals, charities etc are not subject to the price cap which I feel is more of a price trap

I am not convinced that either contender for our next PM will do what is needed, but I can only hope.

just because some can afford to pay, doesn't mean they should I agree GrannyGravy also it's not as simplistic as someone earning 45K.

There may be one wage earner in a household with dependants earning that amount. In another, there could be two wage earners on say £35K each, making a total income of £70K.

for a normal 3 bed semi here with a small garden it is 1.5k in rent and @ 400 pm in council tax so that is £1.9k accounted for out of your £2.8k monthly wage already. If you have 2 children and your partner only works part time because of child care issues, it is surely simple economics to think people may struggle to meet bills for energy, transport to work and food costs. Not sure why anything about this has to do with credit cards and excessive copulation.

I'm really worried about people's mental health including my own and cannot believe where we're at with this mess/crisis Agree [GrannyGravy13] you feel you want to physically do something as seem to be swearing a lot at the TV

It's another way to turn people against one another. JV is very good at that.

I think the energy companies should have to cut their profits and cut prices for everyone. Means testing is always a race to the bottom, and should be a last resort.

Also, how do those suggesting that there should be a cut-off for getting help think that it will work? Who knows how much money is coming into a household, unless we all have to apply for money, a bit like for a student grant? The tax system is based on individual earnings, and AFAIK there is no record of household incomes unless by application.

When we filled in student finance forms they were a pain, as we both had to complete separately, even though most of our finances are joint. I really don't think it is possible for electricity companies or the government to work out household incomes.

As for the 'morality' of it all - I don't think that it comes down to that. There should be help in the form of lower bills (not payments that could be swallowed up in other things, eg debt) and it should go to everyone, and be 'paid for' by the companies. They wouldn't even be paying anything out, just accepting lower profits.

(I think they should be renationalised, but that can't happen in time for winter).

Smileless2012

^just because some can afford to pay, doesn't mean they should^ I agree GrannyGravy also it's not as simplistic as someone earning 45K.

There may be one wage earner in a household with dependants earning that amount. In another, there could be two wage earners on say £35K each, making a total income of £70K.

I have to pick up on this. Yes, there could be two £35k earners, but remember that they pay 2 lots of tax and NI, potentially also childcare so that they can both work, and 2 lots of commuting and other work-related costs. The single-earner household pays one lot of tax and for one commute, and the SAH partner can save money on all sorts of things because of having time at home. Childcare is the obvious one, but also cleaning and many other things that dual earners often outsource.

IMO, a household with 2 people who work should have more income than one with one person. Why else would the second one (and who decides who that should be?) bother to work at all? To remove their salary by means test is State interference in lifestyle choices, and would, IMO be wrong.

Single person households are a different matter, and are another reason why household-based means tests are insidious.

Yes I agree Doodledog. The point I was trying to make is that talking about whether or not someone who earns £45K should receive financial assistance for energy bills is too simplistic.

I wasn't suggesting that in a household where there are two wage earners whose joint income is above £45K that they should not receive financial assistance.

Single people already spend a far higher proportion of their income on basics such as fuel/utilities/rent/mortgage/council tax etc and the only thing they save on is food. Rooms still have to be heated and lit regardless of how many people are using them - whether one or four.

Another example of why how much someone earns is too simplistic biglouis.

I hate the Jeremy Vine show, turn it off if it comes on in the car. He is divisive, stirs up discontent and to me it is like listening to a Daily Mail editorial, and the callers show about as much compassion and understanding as DM readers. £45k is certainly not a huge income, and we must not let this nasty divisiveness distract us from the reality. I am feeling very angry about these fuel increases; not just because of the impact on me, on small business, on others, but because we are being manipulated to fight each other.

Smileless2012

Yes I agree Doodledog. The point I was trying to make is that talking about whether or not someone who earns £45K should receive financial assistance for energy bills is too simplistic.

I wasn't suggesting that in a household where there are two wage earners whose joint income is above £45K that they should not receive financial assistance.

No worries - means testing is just a red rag to me .

My fault for not expressing myself clearly .

Rooms still have to be heated and lit regardless of how many people are using them - whether one or four.

But perhaps fewer rooms need to be heated, which must make some difference.

In the case of both sets of my grandparents, only one room was generally heated ever.

I would far rather the same financial assistance is offered to every household regardless of income because any other system will be imperfect and some people will fall through the net, and it will require armies of staff to administer to ensue it goes to the right people. The worst possible solution seems to be what Liz Truss is suggesting, to cut VAT by 5%, because essential items aren’t subject to VAT anyway, so the poorest households wouldn’t benefit at all.

I was with you until the whole bit about people living beyond their means and having too many children that are supported by the state...

That's quite judgemental and off putting, these children are future tax payers and an investment if we can persuade the government to fund education better

I wouldn't mind if people earning 45,000 a year got it if they needed it. I don't know their finances and mortgages or student debt could leave them feeling pinched too.

I'm happy for my taxes to go to whoever needs it

Taking the vat off wont even be a drop in the ocean and neither will her idea of tax cuts. The estimated price cap that comes into force in April is £7,700. So getting rid of vat on that amount would be a saving of about £380.

Tax cuts wont help anyone who pays very little tax or no tax at all.

Baggs

*Rooms still have to be heated and lit regardless of how many people are using them - whether one or four.*

But perhaps fewer rooms need to be heated, which must make some difference.

In the case of both sets of my grandparents, only one room was generally heated ever.

That's true, but someone living alone still has the outgoings of a couple - rent/mortgage etc are the same - but on one salary instead of two. The only 'perk' they get is a reduction in council tax. It costs much the same to cook a casserole for four as for one, and buying in bulk is often not a viable option.

There are so many variables with all of this that it makes far more sense to just reduce the bills and let the suppliers take the hit.

reduce the bills and let the suppliers take the hit spot on Doodledog; if only.

£45,000 pa might go a lot further in some areas of the country than others but fuel prices are similar throughout.

I think that the energy sector needs a good kick up the arse
I agree and the government needs to do the kicking.

Nobody should be expected to pay the extortionate prices to heat their homes, cook their food etc., and that applies to the poorest in society up to the richest, just because some can afford to pay, doesn’t mean they should

That too, just to fill the coffers of the fuel companies and their shareholders.

It's us poor sods I feel for ! My Husband and I still work full time, have never claimed a penny in benefits but have paid in to the system to support the benefit state and NHS for years. We, as tax payers, are the one's supporting the whole Country and yet still worrying about how we are going to manage ! Meanwhile some that have never paid a penny in to the system are going to be warm, cosy and well fed in 4* hotels !!! It makes my blood boil !!

Ah, I see all the blame is going to the wrong places a usual

Meanwhile some that have never paid a penny in to the system are going to be warm, cosy and well fed in 4 hotels !!! It makes my blood boil !!*

Can you explain who these people are please?

Most people pay tax, logically the more you earn, the more you pay.

It's not the higher taxpayer who should be subsidising the rich energy companies, surely?

Do you know what makes my blood boil Kazzerb? Your post, which is ignorant ill informed. Perhaps you would like to explain to the rest of us just how we can be warm, cosy and well fed in 4* hotels?