You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Pensioners up next on the Government hit list?
March 29 2024 1.17am

Pensioners up next on the Government hit list?

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 4 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

 

View silvertop's Profile silvertop Flag Portishead 05 Oct 15 11.24am Send a Private Message to silvertop Add silvertop as a friend

Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am

Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am

Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am

Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am

Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am

[Link]

1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote."

2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them"

What a delightful group.

What an unintelligent post.

Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises.

The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.


I suppose then that all the public service workers are OK to get their gold plated pensions when they retire?
I am not alone on these boards as a "fully paid up" pensioner. We had our rough times in our youth and had to fight to get a mortgage and a job but we did it instead of just bleating about hard done we were. We did not have all the technology that is around today and we still brought up our children in a decent manner. If more youngsters and some older people got off their fat behinds and actually went out looking they would find a job and start like we had to.... from the bottom rung!!


Now this is a real spot bollock


Definitely hits the spot!


With Matt on this one; save that there are many pensioners in poverty. The issue is not one of taking money away; it is one of not giving to those who are wealthy and channelling resources to those who actually need it. Universal benefits to the elderly is just one of the sacred post war cows that needs to be gently led to the knacker's yard.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Hoof Hearted 05 Oct 15 11.29am

Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.24am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am

Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am

Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am

Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am

Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am

[Link]

1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote."

2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them"

What a delightful group.

What an unintelligent post.

Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises.

The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.


I suppose then that all the public service workers are OK to get their gold plated pensions when they retire?
I am not alone on these boards as a "fully paid up" pensioner. We had our rough times in our youth and had to fight to get a mortgage and a job but we did it instead of just bleating about hard done we were. We did not have all the technology that is around today and we still brought up our children in a decent manner. If more youngsters and some older people got off their fat behinds and actually went out looking they would find a job and start like we had to.... from the bottom rung!!


Now this is a real spot bollock


Definitely hits the spot!


With Matt on this one; save that there are many pensioners in poverty. The issue is not one of taking money away; it is one of not giving to those who are wealthy and channelling resources to those who actually need it. Universal benefits to the elderly is just one of the sacred post war cows that needs to be gently led to the knacker's yard.

As long as Public Sector pensions are led to the knacker's yard at the same time.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View DanH's Profile DanH Flag SW2 05 Oct 15 11.34am Send a Private Message to DanH Add DanH as a friend

Let's just get rid of everyone over the age of 60.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Hoof Hearted 05 Oct 15 11.37am

Quote DanH at 05 Oct 2015 11.34am

Let's just get rid of everyone over the age of 60.


Even Joanna Lumley Dan?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Midlands Eagle's Profile Midlands Eagle Flag 05 Oct 15 11.39am Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle Add Midlands Eagle as a friend

Quote DanH at 05 Oct 2015 11.34am

Let's just get rid of everyone over the age of 60.

There wouldn't be many left on this forum if you did


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Kermit8's Profile Kermit8 Flag Hevon 05 Oct 15 11.43am Send a Private Message to Kermit8 Add Kermit8 as a friend

Quote DanH at 05 Oct 2015 11.34am

Let's just get rid of everyone over the age of 60.


You might be on to something. Hyde in Greater Manchester does have a remarkably low pension cost still and no housing issues.

 


Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]


Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Lyons550's Profile Lyons550 Flag Shirley 05 Oct 15 11.47am Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Why are we paying pensions so early in life anyway?

Under the Pension reform in 1908 a pension of 5 shillings (£0.25p) was given to those over 70 whose annual means do not exceed £31.50.

Now bearing in mind that the average age at the turn of the 19th century was 47 for men and 50 for women; if we were to apply the same principles to todays avg ages of 79 for men and 83 for women, we wouldn't expect to see a pension until 102-103!

[Link]
[Link]


Edited by Lyons550 (05 Oct 2015 11.48am)

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View npn's Profile npn Flag Crowborough 05 Oct 15 11.56am Send a Private Message to npn Add npn as a friend

Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.18am

Quote Catfish at 05 Oct 2015 9.05am

It appears to be OK to means test pensioners for benefits but also OK to tax them on their property "wealth" whether or not they have the ability to pay. The Tories look set to take on that Lib Dem idea which will mean a person who has an expensive house but little income will be forced to sell up.


Good. One elderly lady/man living in a 5 bed house with families trying to get on the market but out priced because of the lack of supply.

If it means they sensibly downsize I approve. For the benefit of any doubt, you can flush that sentimental tripe about a house they have lived in all their lives, inheritance for their kids etc. In terms of familiarity, I am aware this will be a shock; however, one more family getting a family house outweighs that point. And as to inheritance, if they had any regard for their kids, they would give them their house.


Isn't that precisely what the much hated "bedroom tax" does though? Yet many on the left think that's a disgraceful piece of legislation

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 05 Oct 15 12.39pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.29am

Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.24am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am

Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am

Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am

Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am

Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am

[Link]

1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote."

2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them"

What a delightful group.

What an unintelligent post.

Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises.

The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.


I suppose then that all the public service workers are OK to get their gold plated pensions when they retire?
I am not alone on these boards as a "fully paid up" pensioner. We had our rough times in our youth and had to fight to get a mortgage and a job but we did it instead of just bleating about hard done we were. We did not have all the technology that is around today and we still brought up our children in a decent manner. If more youngsters and some older people got off their fat behinds and actually went out looking they would find a job and start like we had to.... from the bottom rung!!


Now this is a real spot bollock


Definitely hits the spot!


With Matt on this one; save that there are many pensioners in poverty. The issue is not one of taking money away; it is one of not giving to those who are wealthy and channelling resources to those who actually need it. Universal benefits to the elderly is just one of the sacred post war cows that needs to be gently led to the knacker's yard.

As long as Public Sector pensions are led to the knacker's yard at the same time.


Agree with that. At least they are moving to average salary I believe, I guess you would know better than I.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
leggedstruggle Flag Croydon 05 Oct 15 12.59pm

What about the under-10s? Cost the tax-payer a fortune in child allowance, are a constant drain on their parents' resources and they don't do a stroke of work. At least, in the good old days, you could stuff them up chimneys.

 


mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 05 Oct 15 1.07pm

Quote Lyons550 at 05 Oct 2015 11.47am

Why are we paying pensions so early in life anyway?

Under the Pension reform in 1908 a pension of 5 shillings (£0.25p) was given to those over 70 whose annual means do not exceed £31.50.

Now bearing in mind that the average age at the turn of the 19th century was 47 for men and 50 for women; if we were to apply the same principles to todays avg ages of 79 for men and 83 for women, we wouldn't expect to see a pension until 102-103!

[Link]
[Link]


Edited by Lyons550 (05 Oct 2015 11.48am)

I suspect it had something to do with 'not wanting to upset a core demographic of voters - i.e. the upper working class and middle classes' during the 80s and 90s, who are now approaching their pension age. After all these were the housing boom's biggest benefactors - We seem, as a nation to have been very keen on keeping them very happy, even if it means generations of people unable to afford a home. But it does seem a bit unfair that they're now singled out as a 'disposable vote', so that they Conservatives can presumably make more appeal to the Upper working class and middle classes (note that New Labour did nothing either - its not a tory slate).

Its an odd thing that anyone earning over 30k a year should be able to claim any kind of welfare benefit 'by default', in the same way that maybe someone can earn a '960,000' bonus for just doing their job.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 05 Oct 15 1.12pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 05 Oct 2015 12.59pm

What about the under-10s? Cost the tax-payer a fortune in child allowance, are a constant drain on their parents' resources and they don't do a stroke of work. At least, in the good old days, you could stuff them up chimneys.

Your fed up with them. I don't even have kids and am funding them to receive a second rate education and to keep their mothers in gin; when they're not getting knocked up again by fathers who clearly lack the IQ to roll on a condom - Are these the people we want raising our nations children, those incapable of actually how birth control works. Then when they go and get sick I have to pay to heal them.

Selfish society in operation. Kids, they're like heroin, but more expensive, time consuming and less enjoyable. Plus its easier to get off the junk than get rid of your kids.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 4 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Pensioners up next on the Government hit list?