What's no longer good value for money?



  • dealyboy
    dealyboy Posts: 1,753 Forumite
    First Post Photogenic Name Dropper First Anniversary
    @Exodi said:
    eskbanker said:
    Indout96 said:
    Exodi said:
    2022-2023, pensioners enjoy a 10.1% increase on account of inflation. Workers wages increase in response to inflation in 2023-2024, pensioners enjoy a 8.5% increase on account of worker pay increases, a tasty little double dip 
    My rise last year was 2%. this year 2.5% but I pretty sure my 2.5% is more than 8.5% of the pension.
    I've read that several times and still don't understand what you're trying to say - if the 2.5% is comparable with 8.5% of the pension, what does 2.5% actually represent, i.e. 2.5% of what?
    I may be wrong as it's not clear at all, but I think they are working and claiming the state pension concurrently, and while their wages increased by 2.5% compared to the 8.5% increase received on their state pension, the 2.5% increase in wages works out to be a higher £ amount.

    Which is totally devoid of logic to the point, but nonetheless fitting with my earlier comment to batten down the hatches from retirees rushing to defend the absurd SP increases of the past few years.
    ColdIron said:
    But that's the nature of universal benefits. Perhaps the Govt. should just reduce it for all. Or perhaps they should apply means testing and give the 'spare money' to civil servants and Fujitsu instead. Or maybe there should be a simple opt out option, I wonder how popular it would be
    Or instead of the extremely one sided examples you've listed, how about abandoning the triple lock, or just means testing it without also putting the proceeds up the wall? While we're at it means testing winter fuel payments.

    All the helpless destitute pensioners you reference above shouldn't be affected by that. All the forumites who publicly joke about what bottles they'll be adding to their malt whiskey collection this year might though. Strawman for strawman.
    My first reading was that they are a working (non-pensioner) person whose earnings are far higher (>= 4x) than the standard state pension so that before tax in absolute terms their increase was higher, implying that the state pension is not that generous.

    My own view is that the SP is what it is, funded by the state from taxation. Although the universal nature may seem inequitable, those 'richer' pensioners have in all likelihood paid more tax and would have planned ahead to include the SP, so to means test it in my view would be unfair. I don't think they are the primary target group though. There are many pensioners whose income would be considered to be well below the expenditure for a moderate lifestyle.

    I think we need to bear in mind that inflation rates differ for different socio-economic groups and pensioners traditionally spend a higher proportion of their income on essentials, including food which has increased by 30% in the last two years (ONS). This brings me to my 'what is no longer good value' ... it is 'essential' or 'basics' food items which have borne the brunt of the price increases.

    It was only yesterday that I saw that Stamford Street 100g dark chocolate had gone from 45p to 60p and only a year ago it was 33p.  :)
Meet your Ambassadors


  • All Categories
  • 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173K Life & Family
  • 247.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards