Tories target the vulnerable, again.

bendix

Davesnave wrote: »

I know it's no 'elp at all guvnor, but I got it first time around, and I'm in me dotage! :rotfl:

Three more years to go till I get my hands on all that luvverly pension.....if I make it, that is...(cue amcluescent)

FACT: You won't make it. We're all going to die in the industrial wasteland and civil wars that break out shortly.

(apologies to amclueless)

Rainmaker_uk

On the surface this looks like an excellent proposal and it is hard to see the downside.

Could it be a political/economic win/win???

On the other hand you may not want to emigrate as I think you would lose your entitlement.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Rainmaker_uk wrote: »

On the surface this looks like an excellent proposal and it is hard to see the downside.

Could it be a political/economic win/win???

On the other hand you may not want to emigrate as I think you would lose your entitlement.

The money will be shoved in a bank or stuffed under a bed until they keel over.


Who would of thought the Tories doing something for pensioners eh? (er, me on here over a year ago)


Increase in pension age, billions of cuts all around, no carrier, no planes for carriers, flog off everything even the kitchen sinks but all of a sudden we have an addition £40 per week for millions that we can just hand out?


The mind boggles. Me thinks its all a little too convenient.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Move to another thread, or news column and it's just continual bashing of the coalition, trying to clean up labour mistakes and wastage.

This, IMO, is one of the best proposals put forward so far. Doesn't cost the taxpayer any extra to what they are paying currently, but puts extra money in pensioners pockets, of which, they can spend in the wider economy, and will certainly go a long way to helping the real vulnerable pensioners out there.

Pension age may have risen, but if this it what can be done as part of that process, it's all good in my view.

This seems a policy to appeal to the middle class Tory voters can't see what the very poor are getting out of it apart from no means test. BTW I know you are not an accountant but those proposals will not be self financing, here are the bureaucracy stats.

Administering the means-tested pension credit which 50 per cent of pensioners are entitled to costs £54 per person each year, while the basic element of the state pension costs just £5.40.

Not to mention.

Mr Cable also said the aim of the proposals was to "ensure that fewer and fewer pensioners are dragged into the means-tested system and they have a decent state pension that they continue to rely on. But... this depends on the state of the public finances as to when this is phased in."

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

This seems a policy to appeal to the middle class Tory voters can't see what the very poor are getting out of it apart from no means test. BTW I know you are not an accountant but those proposals will not be self financing, here are the bureaucracy stats.

Not to mention.

They had the head of Saga (some head of a department there, pensions I believe) on the radio earlier. She could not find fault with the scheme, and having done the sums herself (used to advise the government) said it would be self financing.

I know it's partly a tory policy, and you are a labour man, but seriously, whats not to like about this?

You talk about the pension credit. Let me introduce serps, pension credit, basic state pension, and a means test. Let me introduce that to someone a little more elderly, that has no one to fill in all the forms.

Easier to just roll it all into one payment isn't it? Everyone knows where they stand.

Malcolm.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

They had the head of Saga (some head of a department there, pensions I believe) on the radio earlier. She could not find fault with the scheme, and having done the sums herself (used to advise the government) said it would be self financing.

I know it's partly a tory policy, and you are a labour man, but seriously, whats not to like about this?

That (1) it's not possible to fund purely based upon bureacracy savings. (2) it represents a transfer of money from young peeps to the old.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

They had the head of Saga (some head of a department there, pensions I believe) on the radio earlier. She could not find fault with the scheme, and having done the sums herself (used to advise the government) said it would be self financing.

I know it's partly a tory policy, and you are a labour man, but seriously, whats not to like about this?

You talk about the pension credit. Let me introduce serps, pension credit, basic state pension, and a means test. Let me introduce that to someone a little more elderly, that has no one to fill in all the forms.

Easier to just roll it all into one payment isn't it? Everyone knows where they stand.

I have given you the facts plus a comment from your Vince, it may be easier but the proposal is certainly not cheaper than the current system, as for SAGA to quote MRD 'well they would wouldn't they?'

It is only Koletsky but he is correct this time.

But Anatole Koletsky, principal economic commentator at The Times, said the proposed pension changes were not affordable.
"The sums simply do not add up. If something sounds too good to be true it usually is. There is no way that this system can pay for itself."
Despite claims about savings in administration costs, he told BBC Radio 4's The World at One: "It is arithmetically impossible to make everybody better off".

ukcarper

Let’s say there are 1 million pensioners, the cost of admin would be £54million if Stevej figures are right.

The difference between basic state pension and £140 is about £42 week = £2184 per year so 500,000 get extra = £1092 million so how is that self financing

StevieJ

ukcarper wrote: »

Let’s say there are 1 million pensioners, the cost of admin would be £54million if Stevej figures are right.

The difference between basic state pension and £140 is about £42 week = £2184 per year so 500,000 get extra = £1092 million so how is that self financing

The link to those stats.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/8084737/140-a-week-for-all-pensioners.html

1984ReturnsForReal_2

ukcarper wrote: »

Let’s say there are 1 million pensioners, the cost of admin would be £54million if Stevej figures are right.

The difference between basic state pension and £140 is about £42 week = £2184 per year so 500,000 get extra = £1092 million so how is that self financing

Try 10.5 million pensioners