Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: normal rules on January 24, 2023, 11:27:10 am
-
I hear that the govt may announce as soon as March their intention to bring forward plans to raise state pension age to 68. It was planned to happen in 2046, but may now be brought forward to 2035. That will affect anyone who is aged 54 or under today.
I see the French are protesting over Macrons change to their state pension. I hope to see the same in the uk if this goes ahead.
-
I hear that the govt may announce as soon as March their intention to bring forward plans to raise state pension age to 68. It was planned to happen in 2046, but may now be brought forward to 2035. That will affect anyone who is aged 54 or under today.
I see the French are protesting over Macrons change to their state pension. I hope to see the same in the uk if this goes ahead.
French state Pension age is 62 at the present, they want to raise it to 64, still miles better than ours
-
I think even now many people are going to be fully dependent on the state pension so to delay it further for retirement will be a big blow to many.
Some may say that everyone should make it their business to ensure they have as comfortable a retirement as they can manage but i would imagine this will hit the ones who will need it most and happen to work in low end jobs that are physically strenuous and none pension providing, so a double whammy.
For many this is a long way away but education is the key.
-
What is education going to do for people on national minimum wage or zero hours contracts for whom every day is a struggle just to afford to live?
-
What is education going to do for people on national minimum wage or zero hours contracts for whom every day is a struggle just to afford to live?
Zero hour contract and agency’s should be outlawed. My Son started with an agency before Christmas, he’s been at three different locations, Yesterday he went to Work at 8:15 am, to get to work for a 10am start, at 11am they finished all the agency staff, a disgraceful way to treat people, how can anyone plan a life around that
-
What is education going to do for people on national minimum wage or zero hours contracts for whom every day is a struggle just to afford to live?
Education as in being made aware of what they require to do make sure they don't get lumbered in old age with just the state pension to live off.
Education as in if you're in a zero hours or minimum wage job then you certainly should be looking to get yourself some, because if you don't then your life is mapped out for you as in struggling now and later in life.
We know that some wont be in a position to do so for a variety of different reasons but apathy wont pay the bills, so if someone can educate people in this position to go out and do something for themselves then this should be it.
-
danumdon you are ignoring the question of those whose earnings aren't enough to live let alone buy a private pension.
-
danumdon you are ignoring the question of those whose earnings aren't enough to live let alone buy a private pension.
I doubt i ignored the question, the answer is in there unless you want me to spell it out.
-
What is the rationale for this exactly? The previous rationale if I am correct is that life expectancy was going up? It has dropped in recent years.
If it’s an attempt at cost-cutting it could backfire if a higher % of people are not in a fit state to work and taking more sick days from age-related illnesses etc.
-
I would imagine there will be an ever increasing number of people in their late 60s being on the dole or invalidity benefit. How many will be riddled with arthritis, rheumatism and breathing related problems?
You certainly wouldn’t employ someone in their late 60s to do hard manual labour.
Would benefits be cheaper than paying them the state pension?
Is that the reason behind this train of thought?
Where would all of the extra jobs come from for this sudden influx of potential employees?
-
Lots in this to think about, please try to read it all before jumping in .............
''Britain lavishes benefits on plenty of rich pensioners. Let’s means test them now''
Bumping the state pension age up to 68 will do little to help those who are so poor, they won’t even reach that age ......
..... In a country so grossly unequal, nothing is fair. As the government plans to raise the state pension age from 66 to 68 at a much earlier date than previously announced, it looks increasingly unjust to pay out the pension at the same rate and at the same age for everyone, regardless of wildly differing circumstances''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/26/britain-rich-pensioners-state-pension-age-68-poor
-
Dogma, not the needs of people, has driven decision making by the Conservative party since 1979. As its consequences become ever more stark the Conservatives have little left to maintain them in power. The Conservative triple lock on pensions guarantees an inflation proofing 10% rise to the wealthiest age group in the nation. An age group which, coincidentally, happens to vote Conservative. But that same inflation proofing is denied to striking nurses and ambulance staff, whose pay has been squeezed. strangled and perpetually devalued for a decade. The rest of the benefit system, paid almost entirely to the least wealthy 20% of society, has lost a fifth of its value over the 12 years of this Conservative government. Coincidentally that least wealthy 20% tends not to vote Conservative. An interesting divergence in approach between different benefits. Funny that...
BobG
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
-
Syd, how would you draw the line at which a pensioner would be classed as being wealthy.
-
The retirement age for men in the Netherlands is 68 years old now.
-
Something very apt about the Baby Boomer generation getting the state pension (which is paid for by the rest of the population) at 65, then voting to pull up the ladder behind them.
-
Something very apt about the Baby Boomer generation getting the state pension (which is paid for by the rest of the population) at 65, then voting to pull up the ladder behind them.
I’m a Baby Boomer but can’t get mine till I’m 67
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
-
Yep Billy, we have the returns of our fathers the best generation that this country ever had, its not our fault your lot have made a mess of it since the 1980s, buck up get going, heads down arses up and you might enjoy the fruits of your labour.
If you carry on snorting powder, working from home, less hours, sitting on motorways and stopping people from getting to work and listening to the left loonies its going to get worse buddy.
And by the way, if you want a good pension you need to put a lot of money in it over your working life.
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
-
My heart bleeds for you dd, did you address the bit about getting a better education at no extra cost that helped put you there?
-
Yep Billy, we have the returns of our fathers the best generation that this country ever had, its not our fault your lot have made a mess of it since the 1980s, buck up get going, heads down arses up and you might enjoy the fruits of your labour.
If you carry on snorting powder, working from home, less hours, sitting on motorways and stopping people from getting to work and listening to the left loonies its going to get worse buddy.
And by the way, if you want a good pension you need to put a lot of money in it over your working life.
I'm not sure what's more depressing here. How little you actually understand, or how rancid your horrible attitude is to people working hard to pay your state pension.
You want to know why the country is in such a mess? A great Economist once said "Productivity isn't everything. But in the long run, it's nearly everything."
Look here
https://mobile.twitter.com/RichardALJones/status/1618880919674421248/photo/1
We are now earning 22% less for every hour worked than we should be.
Ask yourself what happened in 2010 that put us on this disastrous path just as we were starting to recover from the Global Financial Crash. And which side of the political argument those people who get their daily dose of shit poured into their heads by Mike Graham support.
-
What would you like me to say?
I consider my country educated me and i'm repaying it by paying ludicrous amounts of tax and NI,
MY observation of you is that you come across as politically driven to see to it that we have a society that gets dumbed down to the lowest common denominator, you would rather see people who have worked for their wellbeing struck and dragged down so we all have nothing rather than try to convince society that we all need to work and strive harder so we all do well. Something i totally disagree with, i want to see people do well to act as good examples to others who can achieve the same with drive and effort and not excepting mediocrity.
-
What would you like me to say?
I consider my country educated me and i'm repaying it by paying ludicrous amounts of tax and NI,
MY observation of you is that you come across as politically driven to see to it that we have a society that gets dumbed down to the lowest common denominator, you would rather see people who have worked for their wellbeing struck and dragged down so we all have nothing rather than try to convince society that we all need to work and strive harder so we all do well. Something i totally disagree with, i want to see people do well to act as good examples to others who can achieve the same with drive and effort and not excepting mediocrity.
[/quote
I don't think any of your many many observations of me have been correct to date dd, my politics are due to me wanting a more equal society and I place my vote, efforts and some resources to further that goal.
Politics is the main opportunity to change and improve society and your jaundiced view of politicians only demonstrates ignorance.
If you want to see people do well maybe you should strive to give all people the same opportunity. To understand this you need to get your head around social mobility and how it works but mainly how it doesn't work.
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
It's not debateable.
I don't behave like the Daily Mail
BobG
-
Syd, how would you draw the line at which a pensioner would be classed as being wealthy.
Come on Syd, I really would value your opinion on where the line should be.
-
Does it matter when we are discussing principles? Too much detail too soon is no way to explore options.
BobG
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
You have every right to moan Sydders!
To be eligible for Age Pension you must be Age Pension age and meet some other rules. On 1 July 2021, Age Pension age increased to 66 years and 6 months for people born from 1 July 1955 to 31 December 1956, inclusive. If your birthdate is on or after 1 January 1957, you'll have to wait until you turn 67.
-
Yep Billy, we have the returns of our fathers the best generation that this country ever had, its not our fault your lot have made a mess of it since the 1980s, buck up get going, heads down arses up and you might enjoy the fruits of your labour.
If you carry on snorting powder, working from home, less hours, sitting on motorways and stopping people from getting to work and listening to the left loonies its going to get worse buddy.
And by the way, if you want a good pension you need to put a lot of money in it over your working life.
Historically, your last sentence is b*llocks. Plus you're just talking about incomings, anyone who can't recognise the massive discrepancies between the rises in costs/house prices and wages won't really contribute much to a thread like this.
-
Syd, how would you draw the line at which a pensioner would be classed as being wealthy.
Come on Syd, I really would value your opinion on where the line should be.
Does it matter when we are discussing principles? Too much detail too soon is no way to explore options.
BobG
Well yes of course it does.
Syd appears to have a strong view on this so I would think he has something in mind as to what level of wealth would be appropriate and whether the wealth should be measured in property value, income or even cash in the bank.
It is a fair question of mine and as such a shrewd politically minded person I would like to know how he measures wealth and whether a certain level would prevent those people from having a state pension.
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
-
sprot when you get hold of the wrong end of the stick try not to poke yourself in the eye with it.
-
sprot when you get hold of the wrong end of the stick try not to poke yourself in the eye with it.
Blinking Aussie Govt, wot a set of Backstabbers eh Skiprat?
-
Greenwich uni did an interesting paper on wealth tax. They did put figures on wealth thresholds. The issue with this kind of policy is that wealthy families could vote with their feet and leave the uk.
This paper analyses the revenue potential of a progressive annual net wealth tax in the UK. A progressive net wealth tax is a tax on the stock of net wealth that is designed to raise revenues primarily from the wealthiest households. We present a baseline progressive net wealth tax that only taxes the top 1% wealthiest households. Households with net wealth above £3.4 million (the top 1%) are taxed at a marginal rate of 1%; above £5.7 million (the top 0.5%) at a marginal rate of 5% and above £18.2 million (the top 0.1%) at a marginal rate of 10%. We estimate that this tax would raise roughly £70-130 billion a year after administration costs and tax avoidance/evasion: £70 billion if 50% of the tax is evaded and £130 billion if 15% of the tax is evaded. This is equivalent to roughly 9-16% of total tax revenues taken by the UK government each year.
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Rich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.
Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?
I think you will be constantly disappointed
-
Showing ignorance again dd
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Rich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.
Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?
I think you will be constantly disappointed
what kind of lifestyle do you mean?
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Rich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.
Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?
I think you will be constantly disappointed
what kind of lifestyle do you mean?
#
Good example for you as you say you work on the railway.
How many "contract staff" on the railway pay accountants to "sort out" their tax returns and at the same time claim benefits that they are not entitled to , because they can?
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Rich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.
Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?
I think you will be constantly disappointed
what kind of lifestyle do you mean?
#
Good example for you as you say you work on the railway.
How many "contract staff" on the railway pay accountants to "sort out" their tax returns and at the same time claim benefits that they are not entitled to , because they can?
I have no idea as I'm assuming you mean being self-employed which I am employed directly with a company. However what you say if that is happening is morally wrong however the corruption further up the food chain you go in unacceptable
-
Without doubt the further up the chain you go the corruption is magnified but in this instance we were talking about people who make a conscience decision to defraud the benefits system because they don't want the hassle of having to work hard to better themselves.
I know plenty of rail staff who work very hard, try their best everyday and don't get no recognition for their dues, these people are playing the game and can go home on a night safe in the knowledge they have earned their pay through their own endeavours and not gamed the system for what they can get out of it. It happens.
-
Show the proof you have and I'll make sure it goes to the right people dd,
-
Have you "shown us" yet how would you draw the line at which a pensioner would be classed as being wealthy?
-
No proof then dd?
BobG
-
Without doubt the further up the chain you go the corruption is magnified but in this instance we were talking about people who make a conscience decision to defraud the benefits system because they don't want the hassle of having to work hard to better themselves.
I know plenty of rail staff who work very hard, try their best everyday and don't get no recognition for their dues, these people are playing the game and can go home on a night safe in the knowledge they have earned their pay through their own endeavours and not gamed the system for what they can get out of it. It happens.
I agree in the sense that there are career benefit claimers and would be better served working as would raise more revenue for tax claimants, obviously you have the other end of the scale where single people or couples go to work with children and then are worse off working than being on benefits which isn't right in my view. You've also got a mental health pandemic as well on our hands, it's a complicated time.
I agree with what you say in terms of the railway, those clearly playing the game need to be rooted out and whether any whistleblowing policy applies then it should be raised definitely.
In terms of incomes at whichever spectrum you look at the more they keep wages driven down and that's not only the public sector but the private and this in turn means that the richer gain and get richer and the poorer get poorer. This is Tory ideology.
-
Without doubt the further up the chain you go the corruption is magnified but in this instance we were talking about people who make a conscience decision to defraud the benefits system because they don't want the hassle of having to work hard to better themselves.
I know plenty of rail staff who work very hard, try their best everyday and don't get no recognition for their dues, these people are playing the game and can go home on a night safe in the knowledge they have earned their pay through their own endeavours and not gamed the system for what they can get out of it. It happens.
A comment from wilts
''You are 23 (twenty-three) times more likely to be prosecuted for benefit fraund than tax crime. Even though tax fraud and error costs an estimated £20bn a year compared to £2bn in benefit fraud and error.
This is a government of the wealthy run on behalf of the super-rich determined to get the poor to pay for their lifestyles.
https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1617781231625830401
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1617609190989787137''
How does this fit with your lack of logic dd
-
No proof then dd?
BobG
You may be a pensioner Bob? would you like to have a stab at the same question, i'm sure your pal would love the hands up seen as he's very reluctance to disclose his theory.
-
Without doubt the further up the chain you go the corruption is magnified but in this instance we were talking about people who make a conscience decision to defraud the benefits system because they don't want the hassle of having to work hard to better themselves.
I know plenty of rail staff who work very hard, try their best everyday and don't get no recognition for their dues, these people are playing the game and can go home on a night safe in the knowledge they have earned their pay through their own endeavours and not gamed the system for what they can get out of it. It happens.
A comment from wilts
''You are 23 (twenty-three) times more likely to be prosecuted for benefit fraund than tax crime. Even though tax fraud and error costs an estimated £20bn a year compared to £2bn in benefit fraud and error.
This is a government of the wealthy run on behalf of the super-rich determined to get the poor to pay for their lifestyles.
https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1617781231625830401
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1617609190989787137''
How does this fit with your lack of logic dd
As far as i'm concerned fraud is fraud, be it tax or benefit, it should all be rooted out and any government should make this a leading priority and senior politicians/business people should be made an example of.
Im just wondering what the Tory's are doing differently to when Labour was last in power, would these be the same laws that allowed a Labour PM and senior politicians to game the system for their own self aggrandisement or have the laws been changed?
Are you trying to tell me that tax accountants are more professional these days.
-
But aren't you another economic rationalist dd, resources should be where the best returns are, no?
-
No proof then dd?
BobG
You may be a pensioner Bob? would you like to have a stab at the same question, i'm sure your pal would love the hands up seen as he's very reluctance to disclose his theory.
You're full of river water dd, direct facts and questions inevitable result on insults and a change of subject.
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
I’m backing you up. I’m saying enough is never enough with the world view that leftists have. It’s a race to the bottom zero-sum game
-
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!
I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.
Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?
Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not.
Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.
Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state.
If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.
We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.
Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?
When is enough, enough?
When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Got some evidence to justify that?
I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.
Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
“You don’t share my worldview therefore you must be brainwashed”
What has say a hardworking middle class person with a good income got to do with the ruling elite anyway?
-
nc, my reply is to dd
-
nc, my reply is to dd
I know and I’m picking it apart
-
nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?
-
nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?
I’m referencing your comment there “maybe if you read something other than the sun or express”. You seem to think that dd has no agency over his own opinions just because they are different to yours.
Anyway, since you asked. I felt a lot more powerful and confident in my life since I realised that I am responsible for myself. Rather than complaining that things aren’t fair or are somebody else’s fault all the time.
-
nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?
I’m referencing your comment there “maybe if you read something other than the sun or express”. You seem to think that dd has no agency over his own opinions just because they are different to yours.
Anyway, since you asked. I felt a lot more powerful and confident in my life since I realised that I am responsible for myself. Rather than complaining that things aren’t fair or are somebody else’s fault all the time.
So agency over his opinions or your opinions about what he thinks and what I think? it sort of contradicts your above world view, in fact your world view sounds very small, very me.
-
nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?
I’m referencing your comment there “maybe if you read something other than the sun or express”. You seem to think that dd has no agency over his own opinions just because they are different to yours.
Anyway, since you asked. I felt a lot more powerful and confident in my life since I realised that I am responsible for myself. Rather than complaining that things aren’t fair or are somebody else’s fault all the time.
So agency over his opinions or your opinions about what he thinks and what I think? it sort of contradicts your above world view, in fact your world view sounds very small, very me.
Ok Sydney you spend the rest of your days getting outraged by politics every morning, I hope it brings you and those around you happiness.
-
You and dd are very similar as soon as you are questioned you change the subject.
-
nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?
I’m referencing your comment there “maybe if you read something other than the sun or express”. You seem to think that dd has no agency over his own opinions just because they are different to yours.
Anyway, since you asked. I felt a lot more powerful and confident in my life since I realised that I am responsible for myself. Rather than complaining that things aren’t fair or are somebody else’s fault all the time.
I was quite prepared to just ignore his self opinionated ignorance of any one who thinks differently to his inward looking socialist group think spiel.
What you stated would be a complete anathema to him, he doesn't want powerful and confident individuals who are independently minded, he wants the whole country to be presiding over and run by people who want to tell you when and what to think, to have no independent means to anything and for his socialist state to be able to control your every waking thought.
The best thing people who think like that could do is go a join him in his backyard and all sit together seething about the world getting on with its life and not requiring their state handouts, diktats and control.
We're all still waiting for you to explain yourself SR, so, when would a pensioner be classed as too wealthy ?
In your own time fella.
-
I you can show where I said any of that dd, or is it yet again your wonky compass letting you down.
http://www.bom.gov.au/
Here's a link to the gov weather site, at least you'll know that it does rain in Australia.
-
I you can show where I said any of that dd, or is it yet again your wonky compass letting you down.
http://www.bom.gov.au/
Here's a link to the gov weather site, at least you'll know that it does rain in Australia.
Fair enough fella you change the goalposts again.
Waste of time trying to converse with ideologists who can never get their own way, you seethe away fella whilst the world ignores you and your like and gets on with its life.
-
Incredible to think that a post about state pension, which affects most of us who have yet to reach that point in life, has descended, once again, into a personal slagging match between some.
Is it that hard to discuss a topic without making it personal?
Is it impossible to have reasoned discussion and debate without insulting each other?
-
Incredible to think that a post about state pension, which affects most of us who have yet to reach that point in life, has descended, once again, into a personal slagging match between some.
Is it that hard to discuss a topic without making it personal?
Is it impossible to have reasoned discussion and debate without insulting each other?
It becomes that way when people would agitate to ensure we all don't eventually qualify for a state pension. Dangerous ideologists need calling out. But your post is noted on my behalf.
-
You and dd are very similar as soon as you are questioned you change the subject.
:ohmy:
-
nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?
I’m referencing your comment there “maybe if you read something other than the sun or express”. You seem to think that dd has no agency over his own opinions just because they are different to yours.
Anyway, since you asked. I felt a lot more powerful and confident in my life since I realised that I am responsible for myself. Rather than complaining that things aren’t fair or are somebody else’s fault all the time.
So agency over his opinions or your opinions about what he thinks and what I think? it sort of contradicts your above world view, in fact your world view sounds very small, very me.
Ok Sydney you spend the rest of your days getting outraged by politics every morning, I hope it brings you and those around you happiness.
again nc nowhere near an answer, tell me again about your world view, doesn't sound very worldly at all.
-
Incredible to think that a post about state pension, which affects most of us who have yet to reach that point in life, has descended, once again, into a personal slagging match between some.
Is it that hard to discuss a topic without making it personal?
Is it impossible to have reasoned discussion and debate without insulting each other?
Maybe you need to go back to the first handful of comment where questions were being asked about those unable to plan for retirement through no fault of their own nr.
-
With all the talk about disappearing state pensions i had a look to see how my work pension was progressing after a really crummy 20 months.
At the moment, not bad but im not holding my breath for the next few years, it could be quite a rollercoaster with what's on the horizon.
I wonder if Starmer can save my bacon?
-
I you can show where I said any of that dd, or is it yet again your wonky compass letting you down.
http://www.bom.gov.au/
Here's a link to the gov weather site, at least you'll know that it does rain in Australia.
Fair enough fella you change the goalposts again.
Waste of time trying to converse with ideologists who can never get their own way, you seethe away fella whilst the world ignores you and your like and gets on with its life.
If you haven't got enough money dd which appears to be why you moan and deny others a reasonable life, you obviously didn't make the right life choices and should have got yourself a better paying job, some people aye?
-
I you can show where I said any of that dd, or is it yet again your wonky compass letting you down.
http://www.bom.gov.au/
Here's a link to the gov weather site, at least you'll know that it does rain in Australia.
Fair enough fella you change the goalposts again.
Waste of time trying to converse with ideologists who can never get their own way, you seethe away fella whilst the world ignores you and your like and gets on with its life.
If you haven't got enough money dd which appears to be why you moan and deny others a reasonable life, you obviously didn't make the right life choices and should have got yourself a better paying job, some people aye?
Live and let live is my motto Sydney, I don't think i've ever denied anyone a reasonable life, if anything i've probability paid for quite a few with my tax and Ni contributions so i'm quite happy with my life choices.
As for the better job, don't you worry fella, i'm more than happy with my lot, that's definitely one thing you wont hear me whinge about.
-
It's difficult with what you've just posted to explain your rants about those on the lower rungs, but there you go.
-
My whole argument in this thread is for the "lower rungs" to have some sort of pension entitlement when they retire, not sure what you've been reading?
-
It doesn't appear to be too much of an issue really. I've not even had one CV across my desk for someone over the age of 50, which is a shame as needed a bit of experience. So many dropped out of work way before pension age.
-
My whole argument in this thread is for the "lower rungs" to have some sort of pension entitlement when they retire, not sure what you've been reading?
And the point that you appear to miss is that there isn't room on the ladder for everyone. I don't deny anyone the spoils that has done well (Legally and not through cronyism) through their own efforts contrary to your observations of me, but what I do say is that opportunity and social mobility should be opened up through better education and jobs. Regards education I would rather everyone had the opportunity to get a grammar school education, grammar schools for everyone or none.
-
Don't know how long you've been exiled but it looks like your fighting last centuries arguments still. Most LEA's have got rid of their Grammer schools, not many left at all in some areas.
I would of thought you should be arguing for better teaching in state schools as that's were the vast majority of kids will, be schooled.Make sure they have proper and dedicated staff, far more important than worrying about what sort of school they attend.
Sounds like the politics of envy?
Also whats the point of a grammer school education for a child who is payently not up to the level of passing the entrance exam, why would you distroy kids lives like this for an idiology?
-
'most' huh?
''Repair bill for schools in England doubles to over £11bn, finds survey''
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/may/27/repair-bill-for-schools-in-england-doubles-to-over-11bn-finds-survey
''Teaching unions are warning they will be forced to reballot their members over strike action in the coming months if ministers continue to resist a “sensible solution” to the crisis in teacher recruitment and retention''
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jan/15/teachers-unions-new-strike-ballots-naht-threshold
Here's a couple of thing to keep you occupied modern man
-
So what happened to all the schools built with PFI funding, they were all supposed to be on 25 year maintenance contracts as part of the original funding? Is this not a consequence of the Lab government not tying down these contracts properly?
If teachers want to strike over their pay and conditions that's entirely their choice, i hope they have given their pupils some consideration, after all they'll be the biggest losers in all this.
I see you didn't bother to answer my question in the last paragraph, makes it pointless answering any of your posts.
-
You are so busy ascribing your opinions and dropping insults into the conversation you miss the thrust of my arguments, I vie for better education for all no matter what it takes, individuals will benefit but the country and all it's people will do so massively.
And the crux of the matter, those supporting the tories by direct or indirect vote are subscribing to all this. Their mismanagement of themselves and the country is palpable. They only know how to pass exams and get into government and as Hyde implies about johnson they don't want to do the hard work.