Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Politics] Labour Party meltdown incoming.......



Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
Indeed. I have mentioned the case for stopping the universality of the WFP on at least one of my previous posts.
Your Mum sounds like a doughty lady, so best not argue!😁
I think they could have, initially, stopped the WFP for higher rate tax payers and that would have given them time to devise a scheme that was ‘fit for purpose’ if they wanted to lower the barrier any further. It wouldn’t also have given due warning of their possible intentions or alternatively given time for the Treasury to decide whether it was really the best way to raise funds or whether it would be more politic to think up other dastardly plans to raise dosh

Why higher tax level?
That seems unnecessarily high.

I assume you mean the 40% tax bracket not 45%

Even then - that's still a significant income.
particularly for couples, who could earn £100k and still get the payment
 




KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
21,099
Wolsingham, County Durham
Yep - the "should be easy" fallacy is an interesting thing.

I'm sure the data is available, but analysing the data and understanding how to implement a new level of means-testing.
Will be an expensive change in any system.

Establishing how many people are going to die as a direct consequence of this, however.... piece of piss.
Only if you make it expensive by over-complicating it. If a business had to make a change like this urgently to stop themselves going out of business, they would do it as quickly and simply as possible.
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
Only if you make it expensive by over-complicating it. If a business had to make a change like this urgently to stop themselves going out of business, they would do it as quickly and simply as possible.

Yep and I bet they would opt for an existing piece of logic that provides a decent benchmark.
Like the Government are proposing........
 


KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
21,099
Wolsingham, County Durham
Yep and I bet they would opt for an existing piece of logic that provides a decent benchmark.
Like the Government are proposing........
Using a benefit that people have to apply for and do not get automatically, which you only get in full or not at all. Getting pension credits allows you to apply for many other benefits too, if you are just outside the threshold you get none of these. Doesn't sound very fair to me. What I am proposing would be much fairer which is what I thought this government wanted.
 


BLOCK F

Well-known member
Feb 26, 2009
6,723
I couldn't disagree with you more.

This is about a £200 p.a. deduction in a benefit exclusively for pensioners - and given to ALL pensioners, regardless of their income level -for something that we all have to pay for - energy.

What about the young people who fall just outside the threshhold for benefits? They get nothing. Pensioners are lucky they have the triple lock when there are many workers who are seeing earning fall in real terms year on year.

And how exactly is this whole business "an unholy mess"? Labour are absolutely correct in getting rid of WFP. The economy is f*cked so Labour do something about it by withdrawing an ageist benefit that the country can no longer afford. What part of "the economy is f*cked" don't you get??

And on that subject, the 60% of those over 65 who voted Brexit should be reflecting on their decision very carefully because that is the reason our status as a nation has changed from 'just about managing' to 'can't afford it'.
I don’t think most people would disagree that there is a strong case for ceasing the ‘universality’ of the WFP,(see my reply to Watford z), but there is a huge case to say that it is wrong to withdraw this benefit from those on very modest earnings just above the pension credit eligibility.
As far as young people are concerned, they are considered not to be as vulnerable to the cold weather as older people. Surely you can see this. As far as the triple lock is concerned, I am certain that this will be scrutinised by the powers that be and there will surely be a case to be argued that it is unsustainable for all pensioners to receive. Back to young people, I have three children who all pay substantial/humungeous rent for their accommodation and I feel a great deal of sympathy for their generation, but I don’t think that has any bearing on the WFP situation.
Whether one agrees with the ‘economy is f—-ed’ assertion or not, or whether one agrees that it is not as bleak as it is being painted by Starmer and Reeves, the discussion we are having here is whether it is right for Starmer and Reeves to have taken away the WFP from a considerable number of older people on low incomes, to try and put matters right. My view, and that of many others, is that it isn’t. You and I will, in the time honoured fashion, have to agree to disagree.
Finally, in case you wanted to know, I was not one of those over 65’s who voted for Brexit. I was horrified by the result. 👍
 
Last edited:




Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
Using a benefit that people have to apply for and do not get automatically, which you only get in full or not at all. Getting pension credits allows you to apply for many other benefits too, if you are just outside the threshold you get none of these. Doesn't sound very fair to me. What I am proposing would be much fairer which is what I thought this government wanted.

Quite a lot about our tax/benefit system/Economy isn't fair though is it?

Not sure why this needs to be a priority for the government to come up with a new system to establish fairness.
Being applicable for Pension credit, is a means-test for pensioners, based on their income and savings.
It's fit for purpose.

There is always someone on the other side of the line.
There will be winners and losers.

We are talking about £200 - £300 in most cases.
 


Guinness Boy

Tofu eating wokerati
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Jul 23, 2003
37,353
Up and Coming Sunny Portslade
The Labour report of a possible 4,000 deaths is merely a necessary evil?

Nice.
Perhaps if it hadn't been for the financial damage caused by Brexit, these measures wouldn't be needed.

But, I guess you knew what you were voting for.....
 


BLOCK F

Well-known member
Feb 26, 2009
6,723
Why higher tax level?
That seems unnecessarily high.

I assume you mean the 40% tax bracket not 45%

Even then - that's still a significant income.
particularly for couples, who could earn £100k and still get the payment
Well, it would be a start and give time to devise a fairer scheme.
Alternatively, I understand that ‘Money Expert’ Martin Lewis put forward a suggestion of giving the payment to those in the lower council tax bands….not perfect, but possibly worth consideration.
Yes, the 40% bracket.
 




Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
There is a reason why the young generation came up with the meme "OK boomer!.

And this is it in a nutshell.

More noise about losing £200 a year for pensioners who may or may not need it, creates a far bigger political storm than the state of the NHS/Education/ the costs of student loans/Housing, the list goes on and on.

OK Boomer, indeed..
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
Well, it would be a start and give time to devise a fairer scheme.
Alternatively, I understand that ‘Money Expert’ Martin Lewis put forward a suggestion of giving the payment to those in the lower council tax bands….not perfect, but possibly worth consideration.
Yes, the 40% bracket.
Jesus...

Sure lets start at a level 40% higher than teh average salary for the country.
That's fair..

Age old problem

"The country is in trouble, why aren't the government doing something"
"No, not that!, something else, that doesn't cost me anything"
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,025
HMRC needs to tell the benefits department the level of everyone's income and savings that they have knowledge of. The benefits department can then decide who is eligible and who isn't. In this day and age that really shouldn't be very difficult but I'm sure it will be too complicated to implement without spending millions on consultants.
share data? we cant even get individual departements such as NHS to hold data together in one place or share without many many hoops. your plan is good but hopelessly optimistic.
 




Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
share data? we cant even get individual departements such as NHS to hold data together in one place or share without many many hoops. your plan is good but hopelessly optimistic.
I have no direct expewrience with this, but for this particular case, shouldn't the Universal credit system provide the data points necessary?

I doubt it's perfect, but probably far better than the NHS example.
 


BLOCK F

Well-known member
Feb 26, 2009
6,723
There is a reason why the young generation came up with the meme "OK boomer!.

And this is it in a nutshell.

More noise about losing £200 a year for pensioners who may or may not need it, creates a far bigger political storm than the state of the NHS/Education/ the costs of student loans/Housing, the list goes on and on.

OK Boomer, indeed..
Lots of these ghastly Boomers you talk of and seem to have a ‘bit of a downer on’, have a need of the NHS, have children with student loans and horrendous costs of obtaining accommodation, have grandchildren who require education, the list goes on and on.
Believe you me, all these things concern us awful Boomers rather a lot.
None of us can help when we were born, I am 76. Out of interest, how old are you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cjd


jcdenton08

Offended Liver Sausage
NSC Patron
Oct 17, 2008
14,563
The challenges have truly begun now and the honeymoon period is over. Trade offs have/will be made with the unions quid-pro-quo and backbench rebellions from the idealpolitik socialists will need to be quelled and their leader(s) politically squashed.

We all knew it was going to be very difficult. This was never going to be a Blair ‘97 feel good moment of sunshine, Britpop and on the cusp of a new millenium.

The country is grieving the past, not optimistic about the future.
 




BLOCK F

Well-known member
Feb 26, 2009
6,723
Jesus...

Sure lets start at a level 40% higher than teh average salary for the country.
That's fair..

Age old problem

"The country is in trouble, why aren't the government doing something"
"No, not that!, something else, that doesn't cost me anything"
Heavens above , I just made a possible easy to implement suggestion as an interim measure. Surely it is better that than cutting off a benefit to those who really need it.
I don’t need the WFP and readily acknowledge that. It won’t affect my life one iota if my wife and I don’t receive it, but it very important to a great number of pensioners on very low incomes who don’t qualify for Pension Credit.
 


KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
21,099
Wolsingham, County Durham
Quite a lot about our tax/benefit system/Economy isn't fair though is it?

Not sure why this needs to be a priority for the government to come up with a new system to establish fairness.
Being applicable for Pension credit, is a means-test for pensioners, based on their income and savings.
It's fit for purpose.

There is always someone on the other side of the line.
There will be winners and losers.

We are talking about £200 - £300 in most cases.
I seem to remember the Labour Party in opposition lamenting about how unequal our society has become. Surely establishing a system of fairness which would save the country money in the long run by targeting those who need extra help and reducing/removing help from those that don't need it, plus it could be used for increasing revenue in other parts of the government too (like the NHS), would be a good start to rebalancing this?
 


nevergoagain

Well-known member
Jul 28, 2005
1,539
nowhere near Burgess Hill
There is a reason why the young generation came up with the meme "OK boomer!.

And this is it in a nutshell.

More noise about losing £200 a year for pensioners who may or may not need it, creates a far bigger political storm than the state of the NHS/Education/ the costs of student loans/Housing, the list goes on and on.

OK Boomer, indeed..
Sigh, there's also a reason why people call a lot of the younger generation snowflakes. Yes student loans, housing and those items you reference are more difficult for youngsters than it was for my generation. This is the reason why a lot of us are determined to help out our children but it seems a lot on here deem our children not worthy of inheritance as they haven't earned it.

There's no mention of all the new chances/opportunities that Gen Z have that we could only dream of. The digital world, the ability to access virtually any piece of information in seconds, the ability to find and apply for opportunities/education all around the world (not just EU) at your fingertips. Work/life balances that would have had us laughed out of a building if we asked for. So many things that now get taken for granted that we had to really go out and find.
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
Lots of these ghastly Boomers you talk of and seem to have a ‘bit of a downer on’, have a need of the NHS, have children with student loans and horrendous costs of obtaining accommodation, have grandchildren who require education, the list goes on and on.
Believe you me, all these things concern us awful Boomers rather a lot.
None of us can help when we were born, I am 76. Out of interest, how old are you?
I'm 56 . And often get lumped in with the boomer generation.

I don't have an issue with the Boomer generation.
I have a massive problem with the fact that this issue is allowed to dominate the political discourse of this country.

It is one of the least critical economic injustices of the past 20 years.

Arguing the toss over what's fair - for a loss oof £300 pa....
Seriously?


The state of the economy for our kids generation is by far the most important political debate and always SHOULD BE.
 




Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
I seem to remember the Labour Party in opposition lamenting about how unequal our society has become. Surely establishing a system of fairness which would save the country money in the long run by targeting those who need extra help and reducing/removing help from those that don't need it, plus it could be used for increasing revenue in other parts of the government too (like the NHS), would be a good start to rebalancing this?
Much bigger injustices in the current system than the WFA.

Why do we have to start with the generation that have had all the benefits of the past 40 years?
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
12,138
Sigh, there's also a reason why people call a lot of the younger generation snowflakes. Yes student loans, housing and those items you reference are more difficult for youngsters than it was for my generation. This is the reason why a lot of us are determined to help out our children but it seems a lot on here deem our children not worthy of inheritance as they haven't earned it.

There's no mention of all the new chances/opportunities that Gen Z have that we could only dream of. The digital world, the ability to access virtually any piece of information in seconds, the ability to find and apply for opportunities/education all around the world (not just EU) at your fingertips. Work/life balances that would have had us laughed out of a building if we asked for. So many things that now get taken for granted that we had to really go out and find.

Sigh.

OK Boomer.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here