Wealthy pensioners asked to donate winter fuel payments

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

It's not that big a stretch. ISTL said that this was a campaign to pull on the heart strings. You disagreed and responded..

(my bold)

i.e. you've dismissed the emotive argument by making one yourself.

Benefits should be targeted towards need. I think we both agree.

It's not emotive at all. It's pure fact.

What have they done for that payment? Hit an age. That is all.

They haven't fulfilled any criteria monetry or otherwise. All they have done is had a set amount of birthdays.

You try to hard sometimes to make something out of nothing. This is one of those cases. Trying to call that emotive is just pettiness beyond belief. It's just fact. People receiving it have done nothing for it, they just get it.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's not emotive at all. It's pure fact.

What have they done for that payment? Hit an age. That is all.

They haven't fulfilled any criteria monetry or otherwise. All they have done is had a set amount of birthdays.

You try to hard sometimes to make something out of nothing. This is one of those cases. It's just fact. People receiving it have done nothing for it, they just get it.

I'm playing devil's advocate here but what have the poorer pensioners done for that payment? They've hit an age that's all - if rich pensioners have done nothing then neither have the poor ones.

The benefit, again, IMO should be targeted at those that need it NOT on the basis of what they've done to 'deserve' it.

That said I'd like to see a government try and work out who are the 'deserving poor' and who aren't. Clearly, that is a nightmare task and ripe for emotive argument so for the time being I think targeting benefits purely on need is appropriate.

proactive

wotsthat wrote: »

I'm playing devil's advocate here but what have the poorer pensioners done for that payment?

frozen to death in their homes in numbers significant enough that something was done to try and stop it happening?

just a guess but i'd take a stab at it being that

chewmylegoff

lilac_lady wrote: »

The last Tory government sold off our gas and electricity businesses. It's hypocritical for this Tory government to ask one section of the public to subsidise another because of their past greed. IMO.

you could have read the link, or the opening post, which would have given you the information that the "tory government" by which i assume you mean the conservative-liberal coalition, has not asked anyone to do anything in this regard. it has decided not to means test winter fuel payments, so it actually appears to be pursuing a policy which is the complete opposite of what you suggest.

i also like how it would be hypocritical for the tories to "ask" the rich to subsidise the poor. presumably you also think that the fact that the rich/poor divide increased significantly under the last administration is evidence of fundamental hypocrisy at the core of the labour party.

wotsthat

proactive wrote: »

frozen to death in their homes in numbers significant enough that something was done to try and stop it happening?

just a guess but i'd take a stab at it being that

Of the pensioners that freeze to death how many do you think are 40% tax payers?

Would there be a rise in the numbers freezing to death if this group didn't get the winter fuel benefit?

Wouldn't it be more cost effective if winter fuel benefit was allocated on need rather than age?

Why after many years of the winter fuel allowance is it still a universal benefit when freezing to death is so much more likely to affect poor pensioners?

proactive

wotsthat wrote: »

Of the pensioners that freeze to death how many do you think are 40% tax payers?

Would there be a rise in the numbers freezing to death if this group didn't get the winter fuel benefit?

Wouldn't it be more cost effective if winter fuel benefit was allocated on need rather than age?

Why after many years of the winter fuel allowance is it still a universal benefit when freezing to death is so much more likely to affect poor pensioners?

why are you giving me barrage of questions?

a poster asked what pensioners have done to deserve winter fuel payments, and i answered that i believe it is due to significant numbers of pensioners freezing to death at home during winter

as far as allocating the winter payment on need, essentially means-testing, i've already stated that i believe the amount of work needed to set up such a system would be high enough to make the whole enterprise redundant.

i think the amount of time, effort and work required to implement it - where do you set cut off point where you are denied the payment and investigating people's finances, sending out forms for people to fill in for assessment, the amount of staff required to run the operation and so on, would end up costing close to what it already costs each year to give payments across the board after a certain age

in short, i think the money saved by stopping giving it to all pensioners would be swallowed up by the cost of implementing the change

wotsthat

proactive wrote: »

why are you giving me barrage of questions?

a poster asked what pensioners have done to deserve winter fuel payments, and i answered that i believe it is due to significant numbers of pensioners freezing to death at home during winter

as far as allocating the winter payment on need, essentially means-testing, i've already stated that i believe the amount of work needed to set up such a system would be high enough to make the whole enterprise redundant.

i think the amount of time, effort and work required to implement it - where do you set cut off point where you are denied the payment and investigating people's finances, sending out forms for people to fill in for assessment, the amount of staff required to run the operation and so on, would end up costing close to what it already costs each year to give payments across the board after a certain age

in short, i think the money saved by stopping giving it to all pensioners would be swallowed up by the cost of implementing the change

You made a glib statement about freezing pensioners as if that somehow gave you the moral high ground. The questions were to highlight that there might be good reason to indicate that the benefit is not properly targeted.

I think it would be very cheap to stop paying the WFB to higher rate taxpayers. It's a rather blunt measure but seemed quite effective when used for child benefit reductions.

Jennifer_Jane

The trouble with means-testing (apart from the cost), is that everything gets related to pension credit limits. So if you are, like me, on the borderline but with savings which are over the £16,000 limit, you get no help whatsoever.

Obviously it's not right that rich people are getting money that they don't need or deserve, but with this initiative, it will perhaps nudge people to help the very poorest - if they so choose.

And I agree that to means-test this would probably be more expensive, and wealthy pensioners over 75 getting over £24,000 per annum already get penalised very heavily in the tax system.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/incometax/personal-allow.htm#1

2010

There would be no need for WFP if the government made the big 6 energy suppliers compete with one another and not operate what is virtually a cartel.

Also think of the drastic fall in the supermarket booze sales if the WFP wasn`t made

gailey_2

A lot of the energy companies offer much cheaper deals online.
They also do discounts for online bills and direct debts.

I reckon if you survey all the pensions on whos got the internet I expect it would be mostly wealthy pensioners and poor would be too poor or technology illiterate.

So advice to shop around not always do-able.

Its also wrong that a lot of poor including pensioners are on meter which costs more!
Dont see many wealthy people on meter!

I do think each energy company should have special team who ring all their custoimers over certain age go through their bill and work out cheapest tarrif for them.

tarrifs should be simplified and poor less penalised.

Do think its wrong wealthier get more
even pensioners in spain claiming!

Lots of benefits anomolys like new child benefit going if 1couple and 1 works earns over £41,000 lose it, but if both work work on 41,000=82,000 a year they keep!

I also wonder do other poor families not pensioners get any energy help?

on news other week said 3000 people die from cold in uk a year more than on roads are they all oaps?