DLA or WTC may go !!

Murphybear

Not every elderly person actually has relatives who can care for them.

Neither my partner nor myself ever had children. He is an only child and I have 2 older brothers so by the time I get "elderly" I will probably need some state help but as I have a life limiting health issue I probably won't make it to very "elderly".

As a wind up to our latest wind up merchant I would like to suggest that those pensioners who are unlikely to live as long as others due to aforementioned life limiting illnesses be given an enhanced state pension:D












Ps just joking

pebbles88

I'm not that up to date on this but isn't Benniebert one of Andy & Flo's reincarnations?

Londonsu

fed_up_and_stressed wrote: »

Yes im sure employers would be delighted to employ someone who is say recently diagnosised with the fatal disease Huntingdons Chorea mid life or the severely disabling Primary Progressive MS again (average age of diagnosis roughly 30's /40's). These people likely have families so rely on contribution based Esa if they have partners who do manage to work. (As would not be eligible for income based if partner does work)

These people can't "just" go and find work if say ESA(c) is pulled as the tories are bandying about.

Then that person would surely be in the support group and not be expected to look for work, therefore they would get the income based element once CB is finished (if they meet the criteria) people on the work related group are expected to look for some sort of work or apply to go onto the support group

ohreally

50Twuncle wrote: »

Why don't the government look instead at making (non disabled persons) WTC harder to get ?

Why not campaign for the abolition of WTC as its simply a mechanism to prop up a low pay employers business model from the public tax dollar.

Cyberman60

benniebert wrote: »

Of course there are others.


You can get 6 months of contributory JSA and 12 months of contributory ESA.
Why then should the State Pension pay out for life?

JSA is only temporary and a safety net for unemployment. Some people therefore never claim. ESA is like insurance I believe and again a safety net.

The state pension, we rightfully all expect as we make contributions for all of our working lives based on a contract with the state. The state pension is actually reduced for those that contract out of SERPS, and for those that contribute for fewer years.

Cyberman60

ohreally wrote: »

Why not campaign for the abolition of WTC as its simply a mechanism to prop up a low pay employers business model from the public tax dollar.

They have it in the USA ?

benniebert

Squabble_fixer wrote: »

message to benniebert
honestly, we have just about had enough of your b******.

In spite of being a newbie you have made over 500 posts whinging and complaining about other people especially legitimately claiming benefits and pensions. Who cares if you feel guilty, you are full of sanctimonious claptrap. There are lots of nice people on this forum, you are not one of them. I can't believe you've made it to retirement age you should have been strangled at birth:(

Noted, you are entitled to your views.


But are you actually being serious that others in this country and on this forum don't have the same opinion about the unaffordable State Pension? Or are you so blinkered as to think that there is enough money being collected by the Treasury to continue to pay the State Pension in its present and forthcoming way? We are now approaching the middle of an ever expanding period where the State Pension payments for now and for the next 20 years will drain this country dry if nothing is seriously done about it.


Making it means tested is radical I admit, but it will make it affordable.

benniebert

Murphybear wrote: »

If you feel guilty then give it to charity. And why should anyone feel guilty for getting a pension?

Maybe because it is fast becoming a National disaster waiting to happen? Maybe the bubble will burst at sometime in the future and no one will get any pension payments. you only have to look to what happened in Greece when they cut and suspended their State Pension provision.

benniebert

fed_up_and_stressed wrote: »

Yes im sure employers would be delighted to employ someone who is say recently diagnosised with the fatal disease Huntingdons Chorea mid life or the severely disabling Primary Progressive MS again (average age of diagnosis roughly 30's /40's). These people likely have families so rely on contribution based Esa if they have partners who do manage to work. (As would not be eligible for income based if partner does work)

These people can't "just" go and find work if say ESA(c) is pulled as the tories are bandying about.

But they won't be in the 'workhouse' either.


All benefits should be means tested. If the household income is high enough to support themselves, why should the State pay more into their bank account?

benniebert

Murphybear wrote: »

Not every elderly person actually has relatives who can care for them.

Neither my partner nor myself ever had children. He is an only child and I have 2 older brothers so by the time I get "elderly" I will probably need some state help but as I have a life limiting health issue I probably won't make it to very "elderly".

As a wind up to our latest wind up merchant I would like to suggest that those pensioners who are unlikely to live as long as others due to aforementioned life limiting illnesses be given an enhanced state pension:D


Ps just joking

Joking or not, in a way I agree with that comment much like how an annuity works.
However to get that level of financial support someone somewhere is going to have to put a lot more money into the system via increased NIC to fund it.


Then we hear the screams from the employers and the employees about how high the payments/deductions are.