Boomers Pension Gravy Train Finally To Be Derailed

antrobus

Linton wrote: »

Obviously you can choose your dates to optimise your case, but lets look at a relatively authoritative source....
....

No, it isn't.:)

Wikipedia is not considered a credible source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use

At least, that's what Wikipedia says.

westernpromise

BobQ wrote: »

Personally, I favour a death tax meaning that anyone without a dependent or a surviving spouce who died automatically pays a % of their estate to a fund.

Any such fund would last for one nanosecond after the election of a Labour government, which would squander the lot. This would be presented as "fairness". The percentage taken would still rise of course. This would also be in the interests of fairness, because now that there's no fund left, obviously it needs to be rebuilt, doesn't it?

You cannot have a big pile of anything valuable sitting around without the Labour Party wanting to spend it. Whether it's gold reserves or the supposed National Insurance "fund", it's there to be blown on current spending, which Gordon Brown was unable to distinguish from capital spending.

westernpromise

BobQ wrote: »

My usual answer is : should we give out vouchers to middle class parents to stop them saving their child benefits in a savings account so that they can build an extension or something else which child benefit is not expected to fund.

Why the hell shouldn't they spend that on anything they damn well like, given that paid for their own and everybody else's benefits as it is?

Is it OK for underclass parents to spend their child benefit on Special Brew as long as they aren't filthy and disgusting middle class parents spending it on an extension? Is class the determinant of whether a certain type of spending is OK or not?

Cornucopia

I wouldn't worry too much about the morality of voucher-based welfare, because all the information on practicality shows that it cannot and does not achieve policy objectives.

Even an ID-based scheme is still subject to the possibility that the recipient will sell/swap/give away the goods that they were supposed to use for the benefit of their family.

MPD

I thought vouchers could play well to the Daily Mail crowd. The special brew drinkers could sell theirs on to the conservatory buyers for a market decided discount. The special brew drinkers end up with less special brew so reduce their intake accordingly and the conservatory buyers reduce their spend on essentials they would be buying anyway and hence buy their conservatory sooner.

Less special brew imbibed - win
New conservatory - win
More bureaucracy so more public sector workers - lose

A win overall and another chance to moan about the bloated public sector!

BobQ

borkid wrote: »

Only if everyone takes the vouchers. Mine went on my childrens music lessons both at school and privately because it was something the education system didn't provide unless you paid for it. Surely if they were provided as food or clothing vouchers then the parents would reduce their bills and save the money as they liked so really no difference to the family receiving the CB.

The only way vouchers could help is if they were the only source of income to the family and even then they could be sold on to a 3rd party unless ID were brought in.

So poor people who rely on benefits can use vouchers but middle class people like you should not have vouchers?

BobQ

westernpromise wrote: »

Any such fund would last for one nanosecond after the election of a Labour government, which would squander the lot. This would be presented as "fairness". The percentage taken would still rise of course. This would also be in the interests of fairness, because now that there's no fund left, obviously it needs to be rebuilt, doesn't it?

You cannot have a big pile of anything valuable sitting around without the Labour Party wanting to spend it. Whether it's gold reserves or the supposed National Insurance "fund", it's there to be blown on current spending, which Gordon Brown was unable to distinguish from capital spending.

Your obsession with the Labour Party would matter if they were ever likely to be electable. I see no reason why we could not do this and ally it with a spending the money on things that would benefit the younger generation.

The reason why such a would not happen is of course due to those being most affected by it would those who made the gains from property. I am simply proposing a solution that would be redistributive over time. You are explaining why property owners who have made these gains would object. Except you choose to do this by criticising what a non-electable party will never do.

ruggedtoast

westernpromise wrote: »

Why the hell shouldn't they spend that on anything they damn well like, given that paid for their own and everybody else's benefits as it is?

Is it OK for underclass parents to spend their child benefit on Special Brew as long as they aren't filthy and disgusting middle class parents spending it on an extension? Is class the determinant of whether a certain type of spending is OK or not?

Do you ever worry that use of pejorative terminology like "underclass" to invigorate your objectionable stereotypes about poor people might make you look like, well, a bit of a pr1ck?

No? Oh well, carry on then.

BobQ

westernpromise wrote: »

Why the hell shouldn't they spend that on anything they damn well like, given that paid for their own and everybody else's benefits as it is?

Is it OK for underclass parents to spend their child benefit on Special Brew as long as they aren't filthy and disgusting middle class parents spending it on an extension? Is class the determinant of whether a certain type of spending is OK or not?

I agree, my comment was made to someone who said this should happen

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Do you ever worry that use of pejorative terminology like "underclass" to invigorate your objectionable stereotypes about poor people might make you look like, well, a bit of a pr1ck?

No? Oh well, carry on then.

underclass doesn't mean poor people
sadly the inability of the left to understand the undrclass, means they can never help them