Winter Fuel Allowance under discussion by Martin.

BlackKnightMonty

zagfles said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

zagfles said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

zagfles said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

zagfles said:

Grumpy_chap said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Spending less on kids and more on pensioners doesn’t seem right to me. 

Pensioners vote.
Kids can't vote.
Kids' parents, in many cases, don't vote.  Those that do are probably pleased that there is state care provision looking after their elderly parents.

Plus we have a general societal attitude that children are the financial responsibility of their parents but pensioners are not the financial responsibility of their children. Unless that attitude changes it's obvious that state spending on pensioners will be significantly more than spending on children. 

Maybe working age adults should be obliged to support their pensioner parents financially, in the same way as they're obliged to support their children. And for those that refuse, the PSA (pensioner support agency) can chase them and make them pay 

Working age adults already financially support pensioners. It’s called the state pension.

Err...exactly - through the state. Which is why state spending on pensioners is considerably higher than children. 

It’s not about the relative amounts though. It’s the change in spending rate. As previously illustrated spend per child for the last 15 years has fallen; whereas spend per pensioner has substantially risen. The two should track one another. Not enrich one demographic to the damage of another. Remember just last week nearly 40% of kids failed GCSE maths and english…

https://www.ft.com/content/7b186efc-744d-4fae-8501-4e90c272529c

Your previous post illustrated why!! The previous 10 years spending on children increased massively! Over the last 25 years spending on children increased by more than pensioners!

The last 15 years of falling investment in children has washed out a whole generation.

40% gcse fail at maths & english
https://www.ft.com/content/7b186efc-744d-4fae-8501-4e90c272529c

Disgraceful!

Yeah right UK GCSE pass rate 2024 | Statista

Bye

D minus.

Always read the question twice before answering.

Grumpy_chap

BlackKnightMonty said:

40% gcse fail at maths & english
https://www.ft.com/content/7b186efc-744d-4fae-8501-4e90c272529c

That's a paywall article so we are unable to see what it actually says or any context.

hugheskevi

Grumpy_chap said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

40% gcse fail at maths & english
https://www.ft.com/content/7b186efc-744d-4fae-8501-4e90c272529c

That's a paywall article so we are unable to see what it actually says or any context.

Try this link.

MACKEM99

Ibrahim5 said:

I did a similar piece of research comparing state pension with doctors pay over the last 15 years. Every year pensioners under the triple lock always got above inflation pay rises whilst doctors always got below inflation rises which culminated in strikes. It seemed strange government policy to make the pensioners richer and the workers poorer. Coincidence that when the doctors eventually got a rise it coincided with a pensioners cut. Not sure whether the government did that on purpose or not. Ie blame the doctors for you losing WFA.

Percentages are fine but what are the actual amounts.  For example would you rather have 10% of £100 or 5% of £500?

MACKEM99

BlackKnightMonty said:

zagfles said:

Grumpy_chap said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Spending less on kids and more on pensioners doesn’t seem right to me. 

Pensioners vote.
Kids can't vote.
Kids' parents, in many cases, don't vote.  Those that do are probably pleased that there is state care provision looking after their elderly parents.

Plus we have a general societal attitude that children are the financial responsibility of their parents but pensioners are not the financial responsibility of their children. Unless that attitude changes it's obvious that state spending on pensioners will be significantly more than spending on children. 

Maybe working age adults should be obliged to support their pensioner parents financially, in the same way as they're obliged to support their children. And for those that refuse, the PSA (pensioner support agency) can chase them and make them pay 

Working age adults already financially support pensioners. It’s called the state pension.

Like those of us who are pensioners now did whilst we worked.

hugheskevi

MACKEM99 said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

zagfles said:

Grumpy_chap said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Spending less on kids and more on pensioners doesn’t seem right to me. 

Pensioners vote.
Kids can't vote.
Kids' parents, in many cases, don't vote.  Those that do are probably pleased that there is state care provision looking after their elderly parents.

Plus we have a general societal attitude that children are the financial responsibility of their parents but pensioners are not the financial responsibility of their children. Unless that attitude changes it's obvious that state spending on pensioners will be significantly more than spending on children. 

Maybe working age adults should be obliged to support their pensioner parents financially, in the same way as they're obliged to support their children. And for those that refuse, the PSA (pensioner support agency) can chase them and make them pay 

Working age adults already financially support pensioners. It’s called the state pension.

Like those of us who are pensioners now did whilst we worked.

Pensioners back in old days were a lot less demanding bunch.

Price increased State Pension all through the 80s and 90s, with the only above inflation increase being 50p a week to compensate for the introduction of VAT on fuel in 1994. No double-lock, let alone a Triple Lock.

Minimal second tier pension, as Graduated Retirement Pension (the forerunner of SERPS) was frozen in cash terms so never added up to much, and SERPS had only been around since 1978.

No Winter Fuel Payments, free TV licences, over 65 payments, over 70s payments, free eye tests, and such like.

The means-tested system of income support had higher rates for older pensioners but much lower rates for younger pensioners. It wasn't until the Minimum Income Guarantee in the late 1990s that rates were levelled up to the same amount for all pensioners, based on the amount older pensioners were eligible for.

If today's pensioners acted like those of the 1980s and 1990s there would be a much stronger fiscal position  

6022tivo

It's a joke to be honest. The chancellor said it's to save costs for Government. 

However they are now pushing all the proud and pensioners who don't bother claiming Pension Credit to start a claim. 

So we have gone from a potential (Depending on weather) a single £100-£300 payment saved to paying thousands for additional pension credit per qualifying person. 


The NET cost of this stunt from the government will cost the tax payer Millions.... 

hugheskevi

6022tivo said:

It's a joke to be honest. The chancellor said it's to save costs for Government. 

However they are now pushing all the proud and pensioners who don't bother claiming Pension Credit to start a claim. 

So we have gone from a potential (Depending on weather) a single £100-£300 payment saved to paying thousands for additional pension credit per qualifying person. 


The NET cost of this stunt from Labour will cost the tax payer Millions.... 

Typical Labour, act before thinking about our public finances. 

The cost of Pension Credit is £5.8bn, paid to around 1.4m claimants

The cost of Winter Fuel Payments is £1.89bn, paid to around 11.4 million

If 100% of the eligible non-recipients of Pension Credit claimed, as long as the cost per claim was below about £37 per week, there would be savings from the Winter Fuel payment change.

Past analysis has shown that those who don't claim Pension Credit are mostly entitled to peanuts under it, eg, less than £10 per week. Most of the value is in the passported benefits, and now those include Winter Fuel Payments and all the associated publicity there may well be an uptick in claims. But it seems highly unlikely the additional costs would outweigh the savings from restricting Pension Credit.

Exodi

6022tivo said:

It's a joke to be honest. The chancellor said it's to save costs for Government. 

However they are now pushing all the proud and pensioners who don't bother claiming Pension Credit to start a claim. 

So we have gone from a potential (Depending on weather) a single £100-£300 payment saved to paying thousands for additional pension credit per qualifying person. 

The NET cost of this stunt from the government will cost the tax payer Millions.... 

I'd appreciate if you could share the data backing up your assertion that this will be a net loss for the treasury. I'd hope that the government economists might have a more informed view than armchair economists on Facebook, but I could be wrong.

WFP is also not dependent on the weather, I think you're confusing this with the Cold Weather Payment, which is paid on top. 

Comparing the loss on a per person basis is obviously disingenuous because there is (as you plainly know) less people suspected of being eligible for pension credit but not claiming (c880k) than had WFP withdrawn (c9.9M). It also tilts the mix of recipients towards those with lower income.

EDIT: I just saw @hugheskevi beat me to it!

Grumpy_chap

hugheskevi said:

Grumpy_chap said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

40% gcse fail at maths & english
https://www.ft.com/content/7b186efc-744d-4fae-8501-4e90c272529c

That's a paywall article so we are unable to see what it actually says or any context.

Try this link.

Thank you.
So, the article really says the fail rate at age 16 is around 30% - not the headline 40% mentioned.
The 40% is only achieved by including those over 16 that are taking the exam a second (or more) time.  Perhaps there are some that simply cannot understand the subject matter but persevere regardless to work on improving.

hugheskevi said:

The cost of Pension Credit is £5.8bn, paid to around 1.4m claimants

The cost of Winter Fuel Payments is £1.89bn, paid to around 11.4 million

If 100% of the eligible non-recipients of Pension Credit claimed, as long as the cost per claim was below about £37 per week, there would be savings from the Winter Fuel payment change.

It is perfectly reasonable to argue that, even if the nett saving is zero, the outlay to those that were eligible for but did not claim PC is more focused on those that really need the financial support.