“Scroungers” are in the majority

[ALB]

Interesting figures just released by the Office for National Statistics which show, in the words of the headlines into today's papers that "51% TAKE MORE IN BENEFITS THAN THEY PAY IN TAXES":

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/11706143/Half-of-households-receive-more-in-benefits-than-they-pay-in-taxes.html

We know of course that taxation is not in the end a burden on the working class but the tax and benefits system does redistribute income from employment amongst the working class, the "redistribution of poverty" that we analysed the "Welfare state" as being as well as the state taking responsibility for providing an educated and healthy workforce. In fact on average the taxes that are actually or nominally paid by workers correspond more or less to the benefits they receive:

Quote:

The average household pays £13,402 in taxes and receives £12,940 in benefits, which include both cash payments such as tax credits and benefits-in-kind such as the cost of education and the health service.

But

Quote:

The poorest fifth of households receive £14,868 in benefits but pay just £4,886 in tax.

It is the benefits of the poorest fifth that Osborne wants to slash of course.

[Young Master Smeet]

This is kind of the key:

Quote:

Their incomes have been boosted significantly by a series of government policies aimed at helping the lowest paid, including Mr Osborne's decision to raise the personal allowance to £10,600.

Having cut the taxes we pay, of course the ratio of tax to benefit has fallen.Here's the ONS report which, curiously, the Torygraph doesn't link to:http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/household-income/the-effects-of-taxes-and-benefits-on-household-income/2013-2014/etb-stats-bulletin-2013-14.html

Quote:

Before taxes and benefits the richest fifth of households had an average income of £80,800 in 2013/14, 15 times greater than the poorest fifth who had an average income of £5,500.Overall, taxes and benefits lead to income being shared more equally between households. After all taxes and benefits are taken into account the ratio between the average incomes of the top and the bottom fifth of households (£60,000 and £15,500 per year respectively) is reduced to four-to-one.

Also, note, that the trend is downwards, but the Torygraph report it as up since 1997. And, teh killer line for the left:

Quote:

The richest fifth of households paid £29,200 in taxes (direct and indirect) compared with £4,900 for the poorest fifth, though both groups paid a broadly similar proportion of their gross income (34.8% and 37.8% respectively).

Final one:

Quote:

Cash benefits made up 57.2% of the gross income of the poorest fifth of households (£7,400), compared with 3.5% (£2,900) of the income of the richest fifth.

[Young Master Smeet]

Some detail from the report:

Quote:

The amount of indirect tax (such as Value Added Tax (VAT), and duties on alcohol and fuel) each household pays is determined by their expenditure rather than their income. The richest fifth of households paid just over two and a half times as much indirect tax as the poorest fifth (£9,500 and £3,600 per year, respectively). This reflects greater expenditure on goods and services subject to these taxes by higher income households. However, although richer households pay more in indirect taxes than poorer ones, they pay less as a proportion of their income. This means that indirect taxes increase inequality of income. In 2013/14, the richest fifth of households paid 15% of their disposable income in indirect taxes, while the bottom fifth of households paid the equivalent of 31% of their disposable income.

It is the Tories who have constently privileged VAT and indirect taxes.Another small point is that by using quintiles, they are disguising real inequality: given we know the real income of the top 1 and 10 percents dwarves all the rest, really, by looking at quintiles what we are seeing is inequality within the working class, of aboput four to one, the capitalists are off that scale.

[Author]

Posts