<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Child poverty in Oxford</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/</link>
	<description>Thoughts of Antonia, Labour activist and feminist in Oxford</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:26:09 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Child poverty in Crawley</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-264230</link>
		<dc:creator>Child poverty in Crawley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:18:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-264230</guid>
		<description>[...] The other day Antonia wrote about some statistics released by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, with particular emphasis (obviously) on how they apply to Oxford. Just as obviously I could not resist looking them up to see how the JRF think we are doing in Crawley. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The other day Antonia wrote about some statistics released by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, with particular emphasis (obviously) on how they apply to Oxford. Just as obviously I could not resist looking them up to see how the JRF think we are doing in Crawley. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15659</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:06:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15659</guid>
		<description>heph - poverty.org has comparisons from 2004/5 compared to 1996/7.  It uses a slightly different measure for low income households, where household income is less than 60% of the average household income - this does include people who are in work but still living in poverty.  In 1996/7 there were 4.2 million children living in low income households, in 2004/5 there were 3.4 million - a drop of 0.8 million.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>heph - poverty.org has comparisons from 2004/5 compared to 1996/7.  It uses a slightly different measure for low income households, where household income is less than 60% of the average household income - this does include people who are in work but still living in poverty.  In 1996/7 there were 4.2 million children living in low income households, in 2004/5 there were 3.4 million - a drop of 0.8 million.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Antonia</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15654</link>
		<dc:creator>Antonia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:51:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15654</guid>
		<description>To be honest, heph, I'm not sure that information exists.  I'll have a root around.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be honest, heph, I&#8217;m not sure that information exists.  I&#8217;ll have a root around.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: heph</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15632</link>
		<dc:creator>heph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2006 00:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15632</guid>
		<description>Horrifying statistics. how do they compare with 1997? Have things got better ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Horrifying statistics. how do they compare with 1997? Have things got better ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jdc</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15520</link>
		<dc:creator>jdc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:15:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15520</guid>
		<description>"I’m not sure whether or not it is within the power of the council to do this, though."

Nobody is. There's a right to give a discount for "class or classes of person" - soldiers serving overseas was a recent one. A legal test case nearly happened in 2003-4 when one Council considered a class discount for pensioners, but it backed down in the face of a human rights challenge from other taxpayers. It may have won, actually - the problem is that the Government wouldn't make up the shortfall, and it's hard to see where the cash to maintain services would then come from, given that the increase in regular council tax is fairly tightly capped by the Government at present.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I’m not sure whether or not it is within the power of the council to do this, though.&#8221;</p>
<p>Nobody is. There&#8217;s a right to give a discount for &#8220;class or classes of person&#8221; - soldiers serving overseas was a recent one. A legal test case nearly happened in 2003-4 when one Council considered a class discount for pensioners, but it backed down in the face of a human rights challenge from other taxpayers. It may have won, actually - the problem is that the Government wouldn&#8217;t make up the shortfall, and it&#8217;s hard to see where the cash to maintain services would then come from, given that the increase in regular council tax is fairly tightly capped by the Government at present.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jdc</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15517</link>
		<dc:creator>jdc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15517</guid>
		<description>That's odd. £13 a week is roughly what I pay in Council Tax total, and I live in Central London. Ho hum. It'd be nice to make the tax more income-progressive as well as wealth-progressive, though I fear rents at the lower end of the scale would just go up as the market compensated for a reduction in effective housing costs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s odd. £13 a week is roughly what I pay in Council Tax total, and I live in Central London. Ho hum. It&#8217;d be nice to make the tax more income-progressive as well as wealth-progressive, though I fear rents at the lower end of the scale would just go up as the market compensated for a reduction in effective housing costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15498</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:25:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15498</guid>
		<description>Tam:

You (correctly) point out the huge effective marginal rates of  tax (due to reduction of benefits) that one is faced with as a low-income earner are a strong disincentive to work. 

You suggest the increase in the minimum wage, the reduction of benefits or the reduction of council tax as possible solutions. 

The first isn't necessary, and you give an example of this in your comment. You point out that your husband finds it hard to attract employees at the minimum wage. This tells him that he needs to offer more money if he wants to attract good staff. If it's not worth his while to pay more money for the job, he wouldn't offer the jobs at all if the minimum wage were higher. A minimum wage is a tool that (under the right conditions) can raise the income of those in work, but it won't help at all in this case.

Your second suggestion (reduce benefits) would indeed make working at the minimum wage relatively more attractive. It's not really an action that a party even pretending to be a bit socialist could take, though, is it?

Your third suggestion (extending council tax relief, so that the widthdrawl of council tax benefits was more gradual with increasing income) would decrease the effective marginal rate of taxation at the low end of the income scale a little, and so would act to incentivise work a little. I'm not sure whether or not it is within the power of the council to do this, though.

You are right that the large marginal rate of tax faced by the working poor is a problem (a problem that the Labour government doesn't seem interested in solving). The difficulty is that all the good solutions require national legislation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tam:</p>
<p>You (correctly) point out the huge effective marginal rates of  tax (due to reduction of benefits) that one is faced with as a low-income earner are a strong disincentive to work. </p>
<p>You suggest the increase in the minimum wage, the reduction of benefits or the reduction of council tax as possible solutions. </p>
<p>The first isn&#8217;t necessary, and you give an example of this in your comment. You point out that your husband finds it hard to attract employees at the minimum wage. This tells him that he needs to offer more money if he wants to attract good staff. If it&#8217;s not worth his while to pay more money for the job, he wouldn&#8217;t offer the jobs at all if the minimum wage were higher. A minimum wage is a tool that (under the right conditions) can raise the income of those in work, but it won&#8217;t help at all in this case.</p>
<p>Your second suggestion (reduce benefits) would indeed make working at the minimum wage relatively more attractive. It&#8217;s not really an action that a party even pretending to be a bit socialist could take, though, is it?</p>
<p>Your third suggestion (extending council tax relief, so that the widthdrawl of council tax benefits was more gradual with increasing income) would decrease the effective marginal rate of taxation at the low end of the income scale a little, and so would act to incentivise work a little. I&#8217;m not sure whether or not it is within the power of the council to do this, though.</p>
<p>You are right that the large marginal rate of tax faced by the working poor is a problem (a problem that the Labour government doesn&#8217;t seem interested in solving). The difficulty is that all the good solutions require national legislation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tam</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15484</link>
		<dc:creator>Tam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15484</guid>
		<description>I think that unemployment could be helped by a SIGNIFICANT reduction of the council tax - or scrapping it altogether - for those on minimum wage.  The current reduction just doesn't cut the mustard; my sister is on minimum wage, and she gets about £13 a week back from the whopping council tax she has to pay.

My husband is a manager of an Oxford business down Cowley Centre way, and he has had a few interested applicants ring up in response to job advertisements.  When they find that the job only pays minimum wage, they are not interested - currently, one gets more cash in hand on benefits with council tax exemption than one does working minimum wage with minimal council tax exemption.  It's ridiculous - these are people who would like to work, for pity's sake, but they don't want to see a drop in their income if they do so.

I suppose one could argue that the minimum wage should go up - or that benefits should go down.  I would prefer to argue that council taxes for the working classes should be realistically re-appraised given Oxford's ridiculous property values.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that unemployment could be helped by a SIGNIFICANT reduction of the council tax - or scrapping it altogether - for those on minimum wage.  The current reduction just doesn&#8217;t cut the mustard; my sister is on minimum wage, and she gets about £13 a week back from the whopping council tax she has to pay.</p>
<p>My husband is a manager of an Oxford business down Cowley Centre way, and he has had a few interested applicants ring up in response to job advertisements.  When they find that the job only pays minimum wage, they are not interested - currently, one gets more cash in hand on benefits with council tax exemption than one does working minimum wage with minimal council tax exemption.  It&#8217;s ridiculous - these are people who would like to work, for pity&#8217;s sake, but they don&#8217;t want to see a drop in their income if they do so.</p>
<p>I suppose one could argue that the minimum wage should go up - or that benefits should go down.  I would prefer to argue that council taxes for the working classes should be realistically re-appraised given Oxford&#8217;s ridiculous property values.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Little Legends Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Child poverty in the UK</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15477</link>
		<dc:creator>Little Legends Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Child poverty in the UK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:42:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15477</guid>
		<description>[...] This makes for stark reading. [Thanks to Antonia for the link] [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This makes for stark reading. [Thanks to Antonia for the link] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Skuds</title>
		<link>http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15429</link>
		<dc:creator>Skuds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:48:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2006/08/11/child-poverty-in-oxford/#comment-15429</guid>
		<description>How do you measure poverty? This survey is quite upfront about what it is doing - it is measuring something which can be measured and which has a high statistical chance of being positively correlated with poverty.

If anything it could understate the problem. As Antonia rightly points out it is possible to be working and poor but it is also possible to be inelligible for benefits or not claiming for other reasons.

In many cases there is only one parent for whom the very presence of the children makes them unable to work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How do you measure poverty? This survey is quite upfront about what it is doing - it is measuring something which can be measured and which has a high statistical chance of being positively correlated with poverty.</p>
<p>If anything it could understate the problem. As Antonia rightly points out it is possible to be working and poor but it is also possible to be inelligible for benefits or not claiming for other reasons.</p>
<p>In many cases there is only one parent for whom the very presence of the children makes them unable to work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
