I can’t agree Phaedrus. Not one bit.
There are many people who have earned just enough to get by, and not much else.
Maybe this would surprise you, but as a young man, and one only just married, we had no spare money at all. I kid you not when I say that a tin of cherry pie filling, so we could make a pie was a once a month (sometimes not even that) treat. As a family we used to only ever buy things second hand. And I don’t mean cars - we never had one. I mean cups, saucers, etc.
As we got older, most of the savings we made as adults and we have not ever claimed a penny from the state, have gone on things to do with ageing -
disability aids and so on. If you have those savings, the state insists you use them before it will help.
Yes, you are supposed to support yourselves. The state provides a safety net for the poorest/worse off.
The government provides a state pension. It provides nothing else for us.
Apart from a comprehensive Benefits system.
You can argue it doesn't pay enough.
Oh, and a free at the point of use Health Service for all conditions, except teeth.
But we'll ignore all that and concentrate on £300 a year.
Nothing.
I’ve worked all my life and have nothing but a state pension and a small personal pension. When I say small, I mean around £100 a month. And I can’t have the state pension until I’m 67, which I don’t think my MS will allow me to reach, sadly.
The next thing is that to give a payment for years means people will rely on it to arbitrarily remove it is cruel. Nothing less.
Yes, it is government's fault for paying it for 27 years that people are now used to it.
The y're not arbitrarily removing it. They can't afford it and decided to means test it. Deciding it is unacceptable to pay it to all pensioners, irrespective of income.
So set threshold at Pension credit level, same as free tv licence.
The government could have chosen to remove the allowance from higher rate taxpayers
They are! It's now being effectively means tested at the Pension credit income level.
. Instead it chose to remove it from single people with only a state pension. That, to me, is wicked.
No, it removed it from ALL pensioners above the Pension credit limit. It didn't single out any groups, it targeted all. No matter how much you wish to personalise it for specific groups.
But let’s leave it at that. Shopping tv is why we are here, and it’s a lot more fun than me worrying whether my 94 year old mum will actually freeze this winter.
Actually, shopping tv is relevant, sort of.
Who do you think buys stuff from IW?! Pensioners with disposable income, a lot of them.
And there'd a lot more wealthy pensioners as my stats showed.
We can argue about the threshold to remove £300. But the principle to means test.
The saving would not be big enough for just higher rate tax payer pensioners.
The age limits need to be raised for free prescriptions and many other things, imho. 60? No. 65 at least
The country cannot afford giving out benefits they seem to believe they are all entitled to. Cut them, just not me.
This capitalist system is not perfect, you can decide to tax the rich and give benefits to anyone below some threshold. If you think there is enough tax and money to pay for everything. There isn't.
Imho, the country is insolvent and in an IVA, paying interest on 2 trillion pound debt to stay above the waterline. People don't seem to appreciate the financial crisis the country and much of the western world economy is in. Wait for the crash/alignment/WWIII to reset it.
Let's see what the budget hold.
Presumably they will tax the rich with CGT, IHT, car, alcohol, private healthcare and school tax hikes.
I would like to see a GB bond/investment where those who can afford would voluntarily buy £2k or more bond to donate to the country coffers. Labour mooted it.
what? After all this time now you tell us! I thought this was the ‘Harrods’ of Selly Telly.
