|
Post by salopstick on Sept 10, 2024 10:34:28 GMT
They'd be orate if they were still allowed to chuck a few logs or briquettes on the fireplace....š And believe it or not not all old people hate the younger generation. In fact from what I see quite the opposite. Although I am finding younger people are actively being encouraged to treat the boomer generation with distain. Starmer is taking that to new levels... We have the same issue in Ireland were they're trying to cut down on peat usage in winter which lots of people in the countryside use. I'm against that. Nobodies treating them with distain. My net worth would be lucky to be 1% of what some of these pensioners have including assets. They've got an option many of us don't. Pensioner poverty is a real thing and we have one of the lowest state pensions in the western world. I don't think handouts should be going to those who are asset rich. I support increases in state pension and a Winter Fuel Allowance. I just don't support it for those who don't need it. there is no fair or easy way to take the state pension and fuel allowance off wealthy pensioners so we pay to all. Those with a concious like oggy's dad donate it to charity. Good on him
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 10:40:12 GMT
Iām sure their final salary pension can afford to switch the heating on. They could do what my in-laws have done in retirement and what my father just did in retirement and downsize to a more appropriate sized home. Why should they get free money from the state regardless of wealth? I bet you wouldnāt say the same thing about universal income being introduced. Bloody hell Oggy. We get it, you and your family are clearly outsanding awe-inspiring citizens who everyone should thrive to be. Try arguing the issue rather than making personal comments.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 10, 2024 10:40:40 GMT
We are sending 11.5bn overseas on some vanity net zero project or whatever bollox it is. The winter fuel cut saves dip shit starmer 1.5bn. Wonder what we could do š¤ Maybe send 10bn on the vanity project and keep 1.5bn to avoid all those old people dying as Starmer said back in the day when the "scum" tories were considering it. Hundreds of thousands of old people will struggle this winter because of this policy and starmer knows it because he said it in the past. The new admin is just as duplicitous as the last. Yay š Or stop pissing Ā£20 billion a year up the wall fighting a war that was never going to be won and in which that money makes a negligible difference anyway š¤· However, I'm sure there are needier cases than people like my ex MIL when compared with struggling families. She could sell it, buy 2 nice flats, and live a comfortable life in one off her pensions and the rent off the other š And some more kids might get fed š Which reminds me the ex hotel in the town filled with druggie scum wonāt have to worry about sitting in the cold this winter As the council is spending hundreds a week putting a roof over there heads Which of course comes with heating included
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 10, 2024 10:40:41 GMT
The more I watch him at the TUC, the more I realsie he's a duplicitous wanker. Iām shocked itās took you so long I've known for a long time mate, today's speech just endorses it.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 10:52:17 GMT
My dad isnāt poor. He isnāt rich either. And thatās precisely my point. He doesnāt need state benefits. There are many more people in society that do. In my opinion they need to raise the threshold where pensioners can claim the winter fuel allowance payment. Pension credit recipients is too low. What is your view? Do you think Lord Sugar, King Charles, Tony Blair should get winter fuel allowance and bigger increases to state payments than the carers of disabled children? the point is there are a lot of people who dont need universal retirement benefits but the savings to means testing them is lost in the means testing cost this winter fuel allowance is a political not financial decsion Which is precisely why the pension credit threshold is going to be used, because that is already used for something else so the means testing is cheaper. Ironically, labourās policy is likely to cost them money as it means loads of pensioners who didnāt realise they could get pension credit are now applying for it. So surely that is a good thing. I agree it is primarily political and not financial. But almost everything in politics is if we are honest.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 10:53:58 GMT
Or stop pissing Ā£20 billion a year up the wall fighting a war that was never going to be won and in which that money makes a negligible difference anyway š¤· However, I'm sure there are needier cases than people like my ex MIL when compared with struggling families. She could sell it, buy 2 nice flats, and live a comfortable life in one off her pensions and the rent off the other š And some more kids might get fed š Which reminds me the ex hotel in the town filled with druggie scum wonāt have to worry about sitting in the cold this winter As the council is spending hundreds a week putting a roof over there heads Which of course comes with heating included Thatcher sold off our housing stock. Would you prefer them wandering the streets? Causing crime etc? Freezing to death as they are homeless? Or do you only care about vulnerable pensioners?
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 10, 2024 10:54:18 GMT
the point is there are a lot of people who dont need universal retirement benefits but the savings to means testing them is lost in the means testing cost this winter fuel allowance is a political not financial decsion Which is precisely why the pension credit threshold is going to be used, because that is already used for something else so the means testing is cheaper. Ironically, labourās policy is likely to cost them money as it means loads of pensioners who didnāt realise they could get pension credit are now applying for it. So surely that is a good thing. I agree it is primarily political and not financial. But almost everything in politics is if we are honest. Not when you see the paperwork involved in applying for it chief. The duplicitous twat knows what he's doing..
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 10, 2024 10:55:37 GMT
Which reminds me the ex hotel in the town filled with druggie scum wonāt have to worry about sitting in the cold this winter As the council is spending hundreds a week putting a roof over there heads Which of course comes with heating included Thatcher sold off our housing stock. Would you prefer them wandering the streets? Causing crime etc? Freezing to death as they are homeless? Or do you only care about vulnerable pensioners? I'd prefer them to stop injecting drugs get a job and pay for them fucking selves like most other people do to be fair. And thatcher is dead and left govt 30 years ago. Bloody hell...
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 10:56:29 GMT
Which is precisely why the pension credit threshold is going to be used, because that is already used for something else so the means testing is cheaper. Ironically, labourās policy is likely to cost them money as it means loads of pensioners who didnāt realise they could get pension credit are now applying for it. So surely that is a good thing. I agree it is primarily political and not financial. But almost everything in politics is if we are honest. Not when you see the paperwork involved in applying for it chief. The duplicitous twat knows what he's doing.. Some paperwork shouldnāt put off applicants for benefits. There has to be a way of scrutinising applications for benefits, unless you go for universal income (which I am not against in principle).
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 10, 2024 10:58:09 GMT
If you can't afford to heat the house you live you evidently haven't saved quite enough. So rather than move somewhere affordable you expect everyone else to contribute to the lifestyle you wanted but haven't planned for? š¤£ bit like the child benefit cap . if you can't afford the kids , rather than wear a contraceptiveĀ you expect everyone else to contribute to the lifestyle you want but can't afford . slam dunk What is it with you right wingers and straw men? Is there a sale on somewhere š¤
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 10:58:11 GMT
Thatcher sold off our housing stock. Would you prefer them wandering the streets? Causing crime etc? Freezing to death as they are homeless? Or do you only care about vulnerable pensioners? I'd prefer them to stop injecting drugs get a job and pay for them fucking selves like most other people do to be fair. Wouldnāt we all. They need to cure their addiction first, which costs a fortune for the state. Thatās the only way to do what you want them to do. It isnāt as simple as stopping and applying for a job and getting it Iām afraid. Perhaps all addicts should just be shot. That would solve the issue!
|
|
|
Post by emretezzy on Sept 10, 2024 10:58:55 GMT
Bloody hell Oggy. We get it, you and your family are clearly outsanding awe-inspiring citizens who everyone should thrive to be. Try arguing the issue rather than making personal comments. You made it personal by putting your family on a dreamy pedestal.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 10, 2024 11:00:41 GMT
I'd prefer them to stop injecting drugs get a job and pay for them fucking selves like most other people do to be fair. Wouldnāt we all. They need to cure their addiction first, which costs a fortune for the state. Thatās the only way to do what you want them to do. It isnāt as simple as stopping and applying for a job and getting it Iām afraid. Perhaps all addicts should just be shot. That would solve the issue! Aye we can go round in circles on this one. I'll jump off now š
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 10, 2024 11:01:13 GMT
Or stop pissing Ā£20 billion a year up the wall fighting a war that was never going to be won and in which that money makes a negligible difference anyway š¤· However, I'm sure there are needier cases than people like my ex MIL when compared with struggling families. She could sell it, buy 2 nice flats, and live a comfortable life in one off her pensions and the rent off the other š And some more kids might get fed š Which reminds me the ex hotel in the town filled with druggie scum wonāt have to worry about sitting in the cold this winter As the council is spending hundreds a week putting a roof over there heads Which of course comes with heating included Yup, not surprised it reminds you, a direct result of the war on drugs, glad you mentioned it. It needn't be that way, there are sensible options.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 11:02:22 GMT
Try arguing the issue rather than making personal comments. You made it personal by putting your family on a dreamy pedestal. I gave some examples which back up the points I am making. Nothing ādreamyā about it. No pedestal whatsoever. Thatās all you. I didnāt make personal comments about you. Try arguing the points. Why should someone (like my dad) get extra benefits not available to people in a much needier position than him, just because he is retired?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 11:04:35 GMT
Or stop pissing Ā£20 billion a year up the wall fighting a war that was never going to be won and in which that money makes a negligible difference anyway š¤· However, I'm sure there are needier cases than people like my ex MIL when compared with struggling families. She could sell it, buy 2 nice flats, and live a comfortable life in one off her pensions and the rent off the other š And some more kids might get fed š Which reminds me the ex hotel in the town filled with druggie scum wonāt have to worry about sitting in the cold this winter As the council is spending hundreds a week putting a roof over there heads Which of course comes with heating included If they are old drug addicts (pension age) presumably you would staunchly defend their right to have their heating paid for. An addict who is 65 shouldnāt though!
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 10, 2024 11:09:47 GMT
Which reminds me the ex hotel in the town filled with druggie scum wonāt have to worry about sitting in the cold this winter As the council is spending hundreds a week putting a roof over there heads Which of course comes with heating included Thatcher sold off our housing stock. Would you prefer them wandering the streets? Causing crime etc? Freezing to death as they are homeless? Or do you only care about vulnerable pensioners? Iād rather they were in rehab So as to permanently try to solve the problem Rather than letās lob them together in something not much better than a slum making a few very rich and giving temporarily salve to the collective consciousness
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 10, 2024 11:12:37 GMT
Thatcher sold off our housing stock. Would you prefer them wandering the streets? Causing crime etc? Freezing to death as they are homeless? Or do you only care about vulnerable pensioners? Iād rather they were in rehab So as to permanently try to solve the problem Rather than letās lob them together in something not much better than a slum making a few very rich and giving temporarily salve to the collective consciousness Out of interest, what is the success rate of rehab courses?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Sept 10, 2024 11:14:06 GMT
If you can't afford to heat the house you live you evidently haven't saved quite enough. So rather than move somewhere affordable you expect everyone else to contribute to the lifestyle you wanted but haven't planned for? š¤£
bit like the child benefit cap .
if you can't afford the kids , rather than wear a contraceptive you expect everyone else to contribute to the lifestyle you want but can't afford .
slam dunk
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 10, 2024 11:14:10 GMT
Iād rather they were in rehab So as to permanently try to solve the problem Rather than letās lob them together in something not much better than a slum making a few very rich and giving temporarily salve to the collective consciousness Out of interest, what is the success rate of rehab courses? I wouldnāt know but surely itās got to be better than the status quo
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Sept 10, 2024 11:17:59 GMT
Nothing stopping them from selling their home. Only one set of my grandparents owned their home but they downgraded to a flat when they got older and used the money left over to subsidise them with retirement. There are many young people with young families who are also struggling. But none of them have the option of a million pound asset to sell. I have sympathy for pensioners and don't think the winter Fuel payment should be scrapped. But I'm not going to be getting my small violin out for someone with a million pound house who can't afford their heating. The same pensioners are quick to tell young people they can't afford homes due to guacamole and Netflix subscriptions. So it's a bit rich to say you can't heat a home while sitting on a million quid house. I would imagine this million pound home depends on where you live A million pound home in Norfolk and Staffordshire are considerably different to a million pound house in London or the surrounding commuter belt In Norfolk you could sell your million pound house and move into a very pleasant large house and pocket a few hundred grand I suspect thatās not quite the same as London and the Home Counties It does indeed make a difference where you live. But someone buying a 3 bed semi in Teeside in the 70s compared to a 3 bed in London in the 70s will have two homes valued much differently however when purchased I imagine the sum was much closer. So the Londoners get lucky with the postcode asset lottery and maybe have a million pound asset compared to those in the North East with a 200k asset. So the Londonders once again are still in a better position. They can sell up and go to Spain, Scotland wherever they want. Those in areas were property hasn't grown in price so much don't have the same options. At least selling their home will allow them to make use of some of the money too. Because the minute they need round the clock social care the private care homes which pay the staff minimum wage will be first through the door to seize it and take 10k a month off you. Plus if those Londoners in million pound homes are as income poor as said then if/when council tax costs get revalued to be reflective of a homes value. Those londoners have no chance of affording it. If anything they can count themselves lucky that alot of MPs have vested interests in London property which has allowed those home owners to pay significantly less council tax than what they should. Buckingham Palace pay Ā£1,828 a year ffs.
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Sept 10, 2024 11:18:31 GMT
Iām shocked itās took you so long I've known for a long time mate, today's speech just endorses it. At what point do people start thinking that, actually, the Conservatives cocked this all up way more than they'll ever admit to and, moreover, covered it up? It's intriguing how quickly people have started to buy the Tory/right wing press narrative of "we've left a great economic climate"; that "this is all nothing to do with us"; and that "Kier was always going to employ austerity". What is going on is actually insidious from the Conservatives. In case anyone's forgotten: 1. The Conservatives set a huge trap for Labour buy leaving a black hole of around Ā£22 billion as they committed to intergovernmental departmental spending way beyond the government's means by lying to the OBR 2. Anyone remember how the Conservatives legitimately managed the PPE contracts? 3. Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings and Covid, anyone? 4. NHS has been catastrophically mismanaged 5. Child poverty has manifestly increased to ridiculous levels. So far, all Labour have said is that: 1. Winter Fuel Payments will be means tested from now on so that millionaire pensioners don't get to have it too, so as to free up money for other things 2. The state pension is to increase from April next year 3. The budget hasn't been announced yet - the above is all we know of (alongside the probable rise of the minimum wage & living wage are also set to rise next year) 4. Labour DOES plan to increase taxes FOR NON WORKING PEOPLE which means that Corporation Tax and income tax for those on the highest rate will probably increase. Labour has categorically said that there will be no increase in VAT, income tax or National Insurance for working people. 5. Labour desperately wants to address child poverty and needs money for it.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 10, 2024 11:18:57 GMT
Iād rather they were in rehab So as to permanently try to solve the problem Rather than letās lob them together in something not much better than a slum making a few very rich and giving temporarily salve to the collective consciousness Out of interest, what is the success rate of rehab courses? Probably quite low sadly. But as you well know the trick is education from a young age. And ridding ourselves of an uncontrollable black market for drugs. But that's for the other thread...
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 10, 2024 11:19:41 GMT
I've known for a long time mate, today's speech just endorses it. At what point do people start thinking that, actually, the Conservatives cocked this all up way more than they'll ever admit to and, moreover, covered it up? It's intriguing how quickly people have started to buy the Tory/right wing press narrative of "we've left a great economic climate"; that "this is all nothing to do with us"; and that "Kier was always going to employ austerity". What is going on is actually insidious from the Conservatives. In case anyone's forgotten: 1. The Conservatives set a huge trap for Labour buy leaving a black hole of around Ā£22 billion as they committed to intergovernmental departmental spending way beyond the government's means by lying to the OBR 2. Anyone remember how the Conservatives legitimately managed the PPE contracts? 3. Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings and Covid, anyone? 4. NHS has been catastrophically mismanaged 5. Child poverty has manifestly increased to ridiculous levels. So far, all Labour have said is that: 1. Winter Fuel Payments will be means tested from now on so that millionaire pensioners don't get to have it too, so as to free up money for other things 2. The state pension is to increase from April next year 3. The budget hasn't been announced yet - the above is all we know of (alongside the probable rise of the minimum wage & living wage are also set to rise next year) 4. Labour DOES plan to increase taxes FOR NON WORKING PEOPLE which means that Corporation Tax and income tax for those on the highest rate will probably increase. Labour has categorically said that there will be no increase in VAT, income tax or National Insurance for working people. 5. Labour desperately wants to address child poverty and needs money for it. I'm a democratic Socialist mate, Starmer clearly isn't.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 10, 2024 11:21:22 GMT
Out of interest, what is the success rate of rehab courses? I wouldnāt know but surely itās got to be better than the status quo Surely there has to be a measure of success rates otherwise how do we know if it's worthwhile? If it keeps say 80% off drugs and contributing to society it's a worthwhile venture. If that figure is much lower then how low does it have to be before it's a comparative waste of money? For an extreme example, let's say only 2% actually stayed off drugs, would you consider that worthwhile?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 10, 2024 11:22:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by emretezzy on Sept 10, 2024 11:25:40 GMT
You made it personal by putting your family on a dreamy pedestal. I gave some examples which back up the points I am making. Nothing ādreamyā about it. No pedestal whatsoever. Thatās all you. I didnāt make personal comments about you. Try arguing the points. Why should someone (like my dad) get extra benefits not available to people in a much needier position than him, just because he is retired? Imagine the conservatives taking Ā£300 off old people you'd be paralytic with rage.
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Sept 10, 2024 11:26:01 GMT
At what point do people start thinking that, actually, the Conservatives cocked this all up way more than they'll ever admit to and, moreover, covered it up? It's intriguing how quickly people have started to buy the Tory/right wing press narrative of "we've left a great economic climate"; that "this is all nothing to do with us"; and that "Kier was always going to employ austerity". What is going on is actually insidious from the Conservatives. In case anyone's forgotten: 1. The Conservatives set a huge trap for Labour buy leaving a black hole of around Ā£22 billion as they committed to intergovernmental departmental spending way beyond the government's means by lying to the OBR 2. Anyone remember how the Conservatives legitimately managed the PPE contracts? 3. Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings and Covid, anyone? 4. NHS has been catastrophically mismanaged 5. Child poverty has manifestly increased to ridiculous levels. So far, all Labour have said is that: 1. Winter Fuel Payments will be means tested from now on so that millionaire pensioners don't get to have it too, so as to free up money for other things 2. The state pension is to increase from April next year 3. The budget hasn't been announced yet - the above is all we know of (alongside the probable rise of the minimum wage & living wage are also set to rise next year) 4. Labour DOES plan to increase taxes FOR NON WORKING PEOPLE which means that Corporation Tax and income tax for those on the highest rate will probably increase. Labour has categorically said that there will be no increase in VAT, income tax or National Insurance for working people. 5. Labour desperately wants to address child poverty and needs money for it. I'm a democratic Socialist mate, Starmer clearly isn't. It's difficult to know precisely what you're basing that assumption on given the budget hasn't happened yet and we only know about means testing a winter fuel benefit and that working people won't pay extra tax. Somewhat short of giving free money away during lockdown, it's almost as though it's easier for some (presumably yourself from your view of Starmer's social democratic credentials) to accept the Conservative press narrative than it is to face up to the fact that those same Conservatives lied to the OBR about the state of the economy when setting those departmental spending limits which have subsequently scuppered any immediate plans Labour had.
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Sept 10, 2024 11:27:54 GMT
I gave some examples which back up the points I am making. Nothing ādreamyā about it. No pedestal whatsoever. Thatās all you. I didnāt make personal comments about you. Try arguing the points. Why should someone (like my dad) get extra benefits not available to people in a much needier position than him, just because he is retired? Imagine the conservatives taking Ā£300 off old people you'd be paralytic with rage. That does not answer the question asked of you: "Why should someone get extra benefits not available to people in a much needier position just because (they are) retired?"
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Sept 10, 2024 11:28:22 GMT
Wouldnāt we all. They need to cure their addiction first, which costs a fortune for the state. Thatās the only way to do what you want them to do. It isnāt as simple as stopping and applying for a job and getting it Iām afraid. Perhaps all addicts should just be shot. That would solve the issue! Aye we can go round in circles on this one. I'll jump off now š At the risk of being told I'm on the wrong thread, I try hard not to enter these interminable threads on how the cake should be divided up. I hopeful that Starmer is setting off on a path to make the cake bigger for everyone. The first step has to be getting the government's finances in order. I am not privy to what the country can and cannot afford (neither was the OBR apparently!) What I do know is the future is dependant on investment today and for decades this country has not invested in the future. One example is: this country is an island or coal, in a sea of oil, with more wind power and wave power potential than any country in the world for our size, and yet successive governments have led us to a situation where we import more electricity* than any country in the world. It really beggars belief where the politicians have led this country for decades. I just hope Starmer gets it right for a real change and makes investment the number one priority. That can include investing in health to get the sick back to work. *FYI: www.energylivenews.com/2024/09/09/record-imports-push-uk-electricity-bill-to-250m-a-month/
|
|