Are pensioners about to be shafted – again?

Sambella

Just look at the Governments record on austerity. Do they care if they take money off the poor?

Answer: NO

The big difference with pensioners is the grey vote so what they will actually do to save a lot ( has to be a lot) is hard to judge.

Sapphire

Sorry – repeated post. See below if you can be bothered!

marlot

Don't forget that the state pension is taxable, so higher rate taxpayers will be giving 40% of it back to the Government. That's a particularly easy way of targetting it at the people who need it!

Sapphire

I agree, though it's nothing to do with any state pension the parents receive – their wealth is inherited in one case, and in the other case the parents themselves do not have much money. One of the offspring even had a flat bought for him by his father before he died, yet he is renting it out and still living at home!

I do think, though, that it is partly governments, particularly labour ones (as well as the parents), that are to blame, for not providing an education system that instilled a work ethic in children, and for indulging them at every step. When I left school I knew I had to get work and keep on at it, however lowly paid it was – it would have been simply out of the question to lie around all day, or treat life as a permanent gap year. I would have actually felt bad about myself if I'd done so – which is why, presumably, some offspring who are in such a position, with no real purpose in life, have mental health issues. Will they teach their own children similarly, if they have any?

It's not good for a society to become like this – and I often wonder what will happen when automation really takes off. There was a programme on BBC News about artificial intelligence (don't remember what they called the particular aspect they were discussing), during which the automation of things like cars (Uber, etc) was discussed – but no mention was made of what would happen to the people who lost their jobs and the social changes this would bring, like the destruction of the middle class and much-increased poverty for all. This is all something that the labour party, for instance, should be discussing, since it will affect people who were its core voters. Instead they fiddle while Rome burns in some Sixties time-warp, or chase after their personal ideologies, which have nothing to do with what the voters want.

I digress, but it's been on my mind a lot lately…

bigadaj

Sapphire wrote: »

I agree, though it's nothing to do with any state pension the parents receive – their wealth is inherited in one case, and in the other case the parents themselves do not have much money. One of the offspring even had a flat bought for him by his father before he died, yet he is renting it out and still living at home!

I do think, though, that it is partly governments, particularly labour ones (as well as the parents), that are to blame, for not providing an education system that instilled a work ethic in children, and for indulging them at every step. When I left school I knew I had to get work and keep on at it, however lowly paid it was – it would have been simply out of the question to lie around all day, or treat life as a permanent gap year. I would have actually felt bad about myself if I'd done so – which is why, presumably, some offspring who are in such a position, with no real purpose in life, have mental health issues. Will they teach their own children similarly, if they have any?

It's not good for a society to become like this – and I often wonder what will happen when automation really takes off. There was a programme on BBC News about artificial intelligence (don't remember what they called the particular aspect they were discussing), during which the automation of things like cars (Uber, etc) was discussed – but no mention was made of what would happen to the people who lost their jobs and the social changes this would bring, like the destruction of the middle class and much-increased poverty for all. This is all something that the labour party, for instance, should be discussing, since it will affect people who were its core voters. Instead they fiddle while Rome burns in some Sixties time-warp, or chase after their personal ideologies, which have nothing to do with what the voters want.

I digress, but it's been on my mind a lot lately…

Purely the parents problem, no such as a bad dog, just a bad owner.

_CC_

Pensioners have fared far better than other sections of society in recent times.

I think the triple lock should and will go. Probably fairer and more sustainable to peg it to earnings so it stays around 30% of average pay.

Sapphire

_CC_ wrote: »

Pensioners have fared far better than other sections of society in recent times.

I think the triple lock should and will go. Probably fairer and more sustainable to peg it to earnings so it stays around 30% of average pay.

I take it you don't have to exist on a state pension. :rotfl:

Sapphire

bigadaj wrote: »

Purely the parents problem, no such as a bad dog, just a bad owner.

No. It's society's problem. I've seen the same sort of thing happening outside my family, too. Encouraging people to have ambition and drive should be a major function of the education system – it's far more important than indulgences of our time and society such as 'gender diversity' and other snowflakisms, which seem to be the product of the state school system in particular.

rpc

Why doesn't this:

Sapphire wrote: »

Many of these people have worked for 40 years or more, paid in, and planned their futures carefully to ensure that they have enough to live on when they finally stop working.

Apply to these people;

MPs, civil servants and high earners from the business world

?

My father spent a lifetime in public service (and my mother, once she returned to work after children) and you would take their pensions away just because they worked for the government?

Fact is, so few people are in the high rate tax band after retirement that means testing would probably cost more than it would save.

Another fact is that pensioners (through various payments) make up the lions share of the benefits bill so if you want to reduce that bill you have to look at pensioners at some point. Most other benefits have had quite enough attention.

Comparisons with other countries are void unless you look at all retirement benefits - heating allowance, bus pass, council tax, housing, etc. Pension alone doesn't tell you enough.

To save time, the discussion usually goes along the lines of the lefties saying "yah boo, don't give money to rich people it must be means tested" and right winger saying "don't give money to them, they haven't earned it, they need to pay their own way"

Theta101 wrote: »

Theresa May will have to pull something out of her hat pretty soon or she'll be a one term PM (unelected).

Our PM has never been elected by the populace. They are appointed by the Queen.

Sambella

The PM is selected by party members and rubber stamped by the Queen ( she never says no )