General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Did I just hear that right?

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Rambling

Rambling Report 14 Mar 2016 13:10

The Govt says ( for people on benefits/low income) 'if you have £1000 pounds in the bank you are less likely to get into debt'....duh, would never have thought of that :-0

+++DetEcTive+++

+++DetEcTive+++ Report 14 Mar 2016 13:53

Would that have been part of the new initiative? You save up to £50 pm and we'll add to it.

If it encourages the low paid to save, why not? If you've managed to put a bit aside you're more likely to be careful how you spend. It might help a few people to budget more carefully + the saved money is there in a time of need.

Rambling

Rambling Report 14 Mar 2016 14:01

I heard the rest of it afterwards DET,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35799404

Sharron

Sharron Report 14 Mar 2016 15:01

It is not a bad habit to acquire.

Rambling

Rambling Report 14 Mar 2016 16:09



I am certainly not saying it's a bad idea to encourage saving, but if you are already spending every penny you earn on rent/mortgage/heating/food/council tax ( going up) how are you to find that extra to save?

It's yet another little smoke screen imo, ie 'aren't we good we are going to give the workers something'... and with the OTHER hand.......

Just call me a cynic!

Sharron

Sharron Report 14 Mar 2016 16:22

It is the Labour scheme that they scrapped for being uneconomical.

Rambling

Rambling Report 14 Mar 2016 16:47

It's perhaps a pity that those under 25 are excluded, because that would perhaps be an incentive not only to get into the habit of saving, but they will also need to have more savings in the pot as they will be working much longer before receiving a state pension ( assuming there is one by then!).

Guinevere

Guinevere Report 14 Mar 2016 16:58

I can't wait for their wonderful ideas on Wednesday. :-0

Rambling

Rambling Report 14 Mar 2016 17:17

Guinevere, I have just about resigned myself to the impending doom, the Tories doing their worst indefinitely, and Trump as US president. :-0

Annx

Annx Report 14 Mar 2016 18:14

Someone's going to ask if benefits are already too high if it's thought people can afford to save out of them. It will just create another big cost in staffing in dealing with operating it.

Chris in Sussex

Chris in Sussex Report 14 Mar 2016 18:56

That was my thought Annx

Probably they will make the revenue to pay for it by hitting the sick and disabled once again :-(

Chris

+++DetEcTive+++

+++DetEcTive+++ Report 14 Mar 2016 20:13

My thoughts are that they'll change the level of savings taken into consideration when calculating in-work benefits.

There's some muttering about disablility payments - the rise would be less than hoped for, so not exactly a cut if it hasn't yet been introduced/paid.

Rambling

Rambling Report 14 Mar 2016 20:45

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/iain-duncan-smith-claims-personal-7555443