Well, much of the welfare rights lobby is very concerned about the contributory principle. I'm not sure myself that actual recipients are at all concerned - my feeling is they see support for those in need as a core function of the state rather than as a separated insurance fund. Benefits, education and the NHS being what they pay taxes for, the rest being irrelevant.
---------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bivand
Head of Analysis and Statistics
Direct Line: 020 7840 8335
Inclusion
3rd floor, 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
Tel: 020 7582 7221
Fax: 020 7582 6391
Inclusion website: http://www.cesi.org.uk/
Consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please return the e-mail to the sender and delete from your mailbox.
The Centre for Economic & Social Inclusion is a company limited by guarantee. Registered in England & Wales number 2458694. Registered address: 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
-----Original Message-----
From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Bibby
Sent: 25 March 2011 15:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: The NI tax, Charles Everett, and hegemonic discourse theory. (My God, I never thought I'd find myself writing that post-modernist twaddle!)
One important factoid is that the NI tax is zero for incomes of 40k+. According to my good friend Charles Everett in today's York Press <http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/features/readersletters/8933043.Raising_revenue_in_straitened_times/> , this means that nearly 9 billion UKP p.a. is lost as a result. With this saving we could invade another five dictatorships before Christmas. (I simplify!)
This regressive nature of NI tax will hopefully become more evident now that Osborne has raised the question of whether to/how to merge NI and income tax.
(A small diversion into hegemonic discourse theory: should we start calling it "NI tax" instead of 'NI gcontributions'?)
JOHN BIBBY
On 25 March 2011 14:42, BYRNE D.S. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hi All
Help wanted. I am looking for data on the actual cost of National Insurance benefits i.e. the benefits which fall within the frame of being available in return for contributions on a non-means tested basis and therefore are fundamentally based on pooling of risk or inter-generational transfer.
The figures I can find do not seem to distinguish between the costs of the NI entitlement and related means tested benefits which are social assistance in form so I can't find for example the cost of the basic NI old age pension as opposed to a cost which seems to be both for that and for means tested pension credits etc.
The figures I have, which in my view compound the insurance and means tested elements, are:
Pensions £81.9 billion
Sickness and incapacity benefits £32.3 billion.
Unemployment benefits £5.5 billion.
NI raises £101 billion so with the means tested elements taken out it may actually be making a surplus or I may be wholly wrong here.
Advice and guidance to more detailed figures much appreciated.
Thanks
David Byrne
****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************
****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|