Should automatic benefits be cut for those who "don't need them"?

grizzly1911

Tax the benefits?

If they are to be means tested the savings threshold need to be increased to a meaningful figure, in the six figure mark (to acknowledge prudence) and the income threshold before removal increased to basic pension x 2 for example.

There are other benefits to society such as removing more , less able drivers from the road who would stay on the road. In addition bus passes for those in remote neighbour hoods are a lifeline both for necessaries and some social activity.

P.S. not all mediocre pensioners spend their winter fuel benefit on the grandchildren or heating the swimming pool, many depend on it. With the recent massive annual hikes in energy prices it only reflects the fact that a lot of pensioners require more than RPI/CPI increases in pensions to stay out of fuel poverty.

There is an argument to say the winter fuel benefit should have been added to pensions and be done with it. I guess sthat would not be politically acceptable from a though.

staffie1

Automatic benefits should only go to those people in real need of them. However I suspect that it would cost a lot more to manage this properly than it costs to pay them.
To save another £10bn, easier, much cheaper ways of bringing in more revenue / reducing the burden must be found - and at the same time reducing taxation to increase the incentive to work hard and stimulate growth.

McKneff

They are saving a fortune anyway, they moved the goalposts for state pension and with it the bus passes. So they are getting a double whammy.

I get fed up of being bashed because Im a pensioner, bashed cos Im a smoker.

You young ones will get your turn at the benefit/pension system later on in your life, (hopefully, we all know what the alternative is) so leave us alone, we'll all be dead in a few years anyway lol.

MrRee_2

grizzly1911 wrote: »

P.S. not all mediocre pensioners spend their winter fuel benefit on the grandchildren or heating the swimming pool, many depend on it.

On the contrary, I DO depend upon it to heat my swimming pool ..... I had the pool BEFORE I was collecting my pension - so, I need to still heat it now.

I also work on a consultancy basis, of course, but I pay some tax on that anyway.

Graham_Devon

grizzly1911 wrote: »

P.S. not all mediocre pensioners spend their winter fuel benefit on the grandchildren or heating the swimming pool, many depend on it. With the recent massive annual hikes in energy prices it only reflects the fact that a lot of pensioners require more than RPI/CPI increases in pensions to stay out of fuel poverty.

This is true, but does leave the question... "What about the young in fuel poverty"?

Were only talking about removing it from those who don't need it here. Not removal altogether.

The definition of need though, as others have pointed out, is the tricky bit.

McKneff

Graham_Devon wrote: »

This is true, but does leave the question... "What about the young in fuel poverty"?

They have 3 choices.

Get a 2nd job to earn more money to pay for the fuel.

Put another sweater on and long johns

I forgot the third, that's because Im a pensioner and losing me marbles:D

Graham_Devon

McKneff wrote: »

You young ones will get your turn at the benefit/pension system later on in your life, (hopefully, we all know what the alternative is) so leave us alone, we'll all be dead in a few years anyway lol.

We might not. Infact, it's highly likely we won't. This actually happened with free education.

Worth remembering that the winter fuel allowance is a relatively recent thing too, and something which has turned into a right fairly quickly.

Only been going since labour took power in 1997. It was extended to all in 2001.

So this "right" has only been in place for 10 years.

Rupert_Bear

TBH the amount of money we are talking is so small I'm not really bothered if these benefits are stopped. As for the bus pass I never use it because I am very fit. I cycle, walk and if desperate get my car out.

I do think relying on a bus pass is a bad thing anyway. Makes a lot of people just lazy.

Murphymycat

Pensioners are means tested, it's calledPension Credit. perhaps we should only give fuel payments to them.

Whole issue is contentious though and whatever this or any other Govt do at least one section of the community will complain. It's like the £10 Christmas bonus,do you know how long it has stayed at £10? That really is a joke.

I'm looking forward to retiring, if the Govt hadn't raised the retirement age for women (now if you really want a contentious issue) it would be in 13 weeks.

drc

Murphymycat wrote: »

Pensioners are means tested, it's calledPension Credit. perhaps we should only give fuel payments to them.

Whole issue is contentious though and whatever this or any other Govt do at least one section of the community will complain. It's like the £10 Christmas bonus,do you know how long it has stayed at £10? That really is a joke.

I'm looking forward to retiring, if the Govt hadn't raised the retirement age for women (now if you really want a contentious issue) it would be in 13 weeks.

But say you have two pensioners, one who has worked hard all his life and saved and now has a nice pot of savings. The other has spent all their money as soon as they have got it, relied on benefits for a lot of their life and generally not taken any responsibility. Why should pensioner one be penalised for being prudent and why should pensioner two be rewarded for being reckless. Doesn't send a good message to the young to be saving and that is exactly what the government should be telling young people to do, rather than rely on a rapidly diminishing safety net.