Tories claims single pensioners are £110 worse off after Budget

ninky_2

Pennywise wrote: »

Which he would have got had he never worked and lived a scroungers life on the dole. That's the problem that needs addressing. There has to be some form of "reward" for working and planning to look after yourself. At the moment, the only rewards are for the idle and !!!!less.

isn't that where the 150k and 3 private pensions comes in? if not, i'm sure the neighbour who was getting his council tax paid would be happy to swap financial circumstances. the neighbout could relieve him of the 'burden' of his earned income and pensions and allow him to take all the unfair 'rewards' of relative poverty. somehow i think he'd rather stick.

Pete111

ninky wrote: »

they are so desperate.

so are the tories suggestion they would raise the tax free allowance for single pensioners? and what would they set it at? and how are they going to pay for it? (certainly not by cutting the national insurance contributions of earners as they have said they will do).

Yeah...It's the party that are 7-10 points ahead in the polls that are desperate. Damn them for laying out some policies. Horrid, nasty Tories.


http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

ninky_2

Pete111 wrote: »

Yeah...It's the party that are 7-10 points ahead in the polls that are desperate. Damn them for laying out some policies. Horrid, nasty Tories.


http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

which policies would they be? i can't see any of their policies being lauded as fantastic (if you can work out what they are). and now they release a nasty childish poster campaign where they've deliberately chosen a picture where gordon brown's eyes are half closed as a result of his visual disability. charming.

Pete111

ninky wrote: »

which policies would they be? i can't see any of their policies being lauded as fantastic (if you can work out what they are). and now they release a nasty childish poster campaign where they've deliberately chosen a picture where gordon brown's eyes are half closed as a result of his visual disability. charming.

Ok sorry, misread the context of the thread there but I think I too would be holding quite tight to my policies until the election is (finally) called. Your lot have developed a nasty habit of well...pinching them.

Oh and re the poster campaign (which I think is a little heavy handed but much better than that awful 'Dave' one) I think you yourself are a little desperate in trying to find some sort of active disability discrimination there.

GB simply looks like he often does these days. Smug.

MoneyMiser

The_White_Horse wrote: »

The point is, many have nothing in old age purely because instead of paying into a pension, they chose to spend 2k a year going down the costa brava. they should be the ones to starve/freeze. If you make the saver pay, then the non-saver should get NOTHING.

That sounds a lot like mass genocide :eek:

MM

MoneyMiser

ninky wrote: »

isn't that where the 150k and 3 private pensions comes in? if not, i'm sure the neighbour who was getting his council tax paid would be happy to swap financial circumstances. the neighbout could relieve him of the 'burden' of his earned income and pensions and allow him to take all the unfair 'rewards' of relative poverty. somehow i think he'd rather stick.

Very good point, which a lot of people on this thread are completely forgetting!!

MM

ninky_2

Pete111 wrote: »

Ok sorry, misread the context of the thread there but I think I too would be holding quite tight to my policies until the election is (finally) called. Your lot have developed a nasty habit of well...pinching them.

Oh and re the poster campaign (which I think is a little heavy handed but much better than that awful 'Dave' one) I think you yourself are a little desperate in trying to find some sort of active disability discrimination there.

GB simply looks like he often does these days. Smug.

even if this were the case then why would this matter if they are the policies they want to see supported? isn't that just a bit like me saying, hey don't vote labour, that was my idea, choose your own party to vote for! if you are talking about 'policies' such as the stamp duty thing then they are hardly original 'ideas' anyway.

nearlynew

ninky wrote: »

isn't that where the 150k and 3 private pensions comes in? if not, i'm sure the neighbour who was getting his council tax paid would be happy to swap financial circumstances. the neighbout could relieve him of the 'burden' of his earned income and pensions and allow him to take all the unfair 'rewards' of relative poverty. somehow i think he'd rather stick.

Exactly.

This is what I don't get (and it is a view prevalent among the HPI cheerleading "house is my pension brigade") - if you have worked hard and saved up for your old age and have all this money to support yourself, why not spend it on supporting yourself?

Pete111

ninky wrote: »

even if this were the case then why would this matter if they are the policies they want to see supported? isn't that just a bit like me saying, hey don't vote labour, that was my idea, choose your own party to vote for! if you are talking about 'policies' such as the stamp duty thing then they are hardly original 'ideas' anyway.

You see this is the problem Ninky.

In so many ways, Labour will have to do exactly what the conservatives would do to get us our of their mess. It's just that when the Tories suggest something it's screeched at as unworkable or bigoted, or favouring old Etonians or something equally inflammatory....then later we find it has been adopted.

Likewise we had the (until recently) cuts vs inverstment argument. I saw Alistair Darling admit on live TV last night that Labour cuts would have to be 'deeper than Thatchers' and yet mere days ago they were trying to completely pillory the Tories up when they made such suggestions.

The argument that 'we got you in this mess and, by doing what our rivals suggest we are best placed to get you out' is not exactly persuasive.....

I guess we only have a few weeks to see if the country agrees! I think I will stay up and watch - anyone else planning to do that BTW?

ninky_2

Pete111 wrote: »

You see this is the problem Ninky.

In so many ways, Labour will have to do exactly what the conservatives would do to get us our of their mess. It's just that when the Tories suggest something it's screeched at as unworkable or bigoted, or favouring old Etonians or something equally inflammatory....then later we find it has been adopted.

example of something being described as unworkable or bigotted or favouring old etonians by the labour party and they being adopted? by which i mean a specific quote of criticism by someone in the cabinet and example of policy they have then adopted please.

Likewise we had the (until recently) cuts vs inverstment argument. I saw Alistair Darling admit on live TV last night that Labour cuts would have to be 'deeper than Thatchers' and yet mere days ago they were trying to completely pillory the Tories up when they made such suggestions.

again - quotes please.

The argument that 'we got you in this mess and, by doing what our rivals suggest we are best placed to get you out' is not exactly persuasive.....


I guess we only have a few weeks to see if the country agrees! I think I will stay up and watch - anyone else planning to do that BTW?

i won't be staying up to watch. i suspect the tories will get in. and i'd rather have a few hours more kip in blissful ignorance.