|
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 12, 2024 11:39:55 GMT
The current leader or back then ..
|
|
4,164 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 12, 2024 13:41:17 GMT
Corbyn lost because he is not an effective political leader.
Doing politics effectively means moving your agenda forward by compromising and occasionally making decisions your own side won’t like to achieve the overall aim.
It’s easy to win votes when you tell people exactly what they want to hear, safe in the knowledge that you won’t have to try to deliver on those promises. Actually getting stuff done is harder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2024 15:52:49 GMT
The problem is labour were voted in, at least in part, on not being the conservative party and would get the rich to pay more.
But what have they done for their first big thing? Gone after billionaires? Big corporations? Nope, the elderly and a vulnerable section of society.
I don't disagree that the fuel payment should be means tested, and the fuel payment looked at at somepoint. but this really shouldn't have been one of their top priorities for getting money straight away.
|
|
2,348 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 12, 2024 15:55:10 GMT
Let's be honest, Corbyn lost because his own party wanted the Tories to win. Dangerous these centrists. We all remember Hilary Benn's face on election night 2017 Everyone to blame except the leader eh? You are Peter Mandelson and I claim my £5 I've never said that. Corbo is just not a leader. Imagine not getting behind that manifesto though, as a member of the Labour party? Did have a lot of people vote for him though that election |
|
2,348 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 12, 2024 15:57:17 GMT
The problem is labour were voted in, at least in part, on not being the conservative party and would get the rich to pay more. But what have they done for their first big thing? Gone after billionaires? Big corporations? Nope, the elderly and a vulnerable section of society. I don't disagree that the fuel payment should be means tested, and the fuel payment looked at at somepoint. but this really shouldn't have been one of their top priorities for getting money straight away. A really good post. Three very good points |
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 12, 2024 16:05:33 GMT
Okay, but if they are trailing this ahead of the Autumn Statement there should be real Catherine wheel fireworks on 30th Oct.
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Sept 12, 2024 16:08:40 GMT
It is a complicated one, but universal benefits are often simply 'nice things to have' and when times are tough and people need help elsewhere then introducing a means testing element is fair. I don't think Labour have pitched the level right, but I also accept that the cost of more sophisticated means testing would be counter-productive. I'd still have preferred an approach where the most wealthy pensioners were excluded, rather than just the very poorest being included.
The triple-lock has been in place for a number of years now, which was designed to result in real terms increases in the value of the state pension, so pensioners are now better off than they were when the winter fuel allowance was first introduced, but there is still a way to go. However, the very premise means that it is expected to end some time, and it will be interesting to see the political fall-out from that. It was previous mentioned that one year it was reduced to simply a 'double-lock', and there was enough fuss about that - despite pensions still going up by more than any other benefits or the pay of public sector workers.
I do have some sympathy for older people whose wealth is locked up in their home, and moving is a pain at any age. However, I have more sympathy for younger people for whom money is also very tight, but are struggling to find somewhere, anywhere to rent, never mind buy. Part of the problem is the obsession with keeping the family home to pass on as an inheritance, and depending on how much longer the person thinks they have - the inheritance tax laws don't help. In reality, most children would be glad to see their parents down-size and free up some cash for a more comfortable dotage, especially if it frees up a bit to pass around while they are still alive. Unfortunately, some elderly people feel guilty about what they might see as frittering away their children's inheritance, and alas, some children feel that way too. Large properties that remain empty for years on end while their owner is in an old folks home, with no chance of returning is such a waste.
I think it should be easier for older people to downsize into somewhere more suitable while they are still young enough to handle the change. For a while there was a trend for pensioners to do a kind of reverse mortgage, but that has fallen out of favour due to some dodgy practices. However, I don't see why there couldn't be a non-dodgy government version that is managed via councils. Eligible pensioners could 'borrow' up to say £5000 a year against the value of their home, and it gets repaid with token interest when it is sold or they die.
|
|
|
|
Post by sph on Sept 12, 2024 17:22:06 GMT
The problem is labour were voted in, at least in part, on not being the conservative party and would get the rich to pay more. But what have they done for their first big thing? Gone after billionaires? Big corporations? Nope, the elderly and a vulnerable section of society. I don't disagree that the fuel payment should be means tested, and the fuel payment looked at at somepoint. but this really shouldn't have been one of their top priorities for getting money straight away. Yes the optics are certainly bad. It feels more and more like the very rich are untouchable and the working and middle classes are continuing to be asked to make sacrifices. All I really want from a government at this point is to try to bring public services more into public ownership, and tax the billionaires more. |
|
5,118 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Sept 12, 2024 18:01:58 GMT
Could you imagine if the first thing this Labour Government and attacked Billionaires, like certain ones that live in Monaco has French residence and come here as non domicile, but is a Brexit supporting newspaper owner.
No one is saying that pensioners shouldn’t be given winter fuel allowance, who need it and would be in poverty otherwise. But when I hear a caller to LBC who said they’re losing their Christmas wine allowance then my mind boggles.
|
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 12, 2024 18:13:35 GMT
Obv. not theatregoers - WFA makes a nice Christmassy day out with the kids or grandkids, might stretch to a little lunch beforehand.
|
|
|
|
Post by marob on Sept 12, 2024 18:22:44 GMT
My dad used to say that every year the people in the pub would all be asking each other if they’d had “the Benidorm money” yet.
Quite happy to see Starker mention banning agency workers in the NHS.
|
|
2,348 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 12, 2024 18:41:59 GMT
Could you imagine if the first thing this Labour Government and attacked Billionaires, like certain ones that live in Monaco has French residence and come here as non domicile, but is a Brexit supporting newspaper owner. No one is saying that pensioners shouldn’t be given winter fuel allowance, who need it and would be in poverty otherwise. But when I hear a caller to LBC who said they’re losing their Christmas wine allowance then my mind boggles. The blanket payment was brought in because it was too difficult to work out who needed it? |
|
3,558 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Sept 12, 2024 19:14:30 GMT
My dad hits 80 in three weeks and has just been told he's getting a 25p rise in the pension due to his 80 year milestone.
I do hope they don't remove this perk before October along with the winter fuel allowance.
|
|
|
|
Post by sph on Sept 12, 2024 19:19:30 GMT
Is it really that difficult though? Or is the process overcooked with bureaucracy? We have a Universal Credit system which successfully tracks those receiving it, how much they are currently earning, and how much they may or may not need at the end of each month in order to survive.
|
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 12, 2024 19:42:39 GMT
Beyond £16K, Inland Reveune has no idea what your combination of assets worth might be. Unless you're dead (death and taxes, eh)
It makes me wonder if Theresa May didn't go for the pension credit variation in 2017 because Universal Credit hadn't been fully rolled out (I can't say for other factors; pension credit, etc).
|
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 13, 2024 12:56:29 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Sept 16, 2024 8:19:12 GMT
My dad hits 80 in three weeks and has just been told he's getting a 25p rise in the pension due to his 80 year milestone. I do hope they don't remove this perk before October along with the winter fuel allowance. There are many wealthy pensioners over the age of 80 who own their own home and live it up on regular winter breaks - many much wealthier than those in their twenties and thirties (and beyond) who are struggling to feed their kids or cover their rent. However, I think there may have been a case for making that 25p uplift something like £50-£100 this year to soften the blow for those pensioners that miss the cut-off for pension credits, and are most likely to struggle to keep warm without having the heating on high. At least that would be relatively easy to administer, because they have that information to hand, but I don't know what the resultant drop in savings would be. As much as I am uncomfortable with the poorer, but not poorest pensioners missing out, I am also mindful that the reported £1.4billion savings will be available for a group that may need it more. The usual suspects have tried to frame a below real terms pay rise for junior doctors as 'inflation busting', as if the government has chosen to favour lazy, greedy public sector workers over pensioners, but who is it that suffers most from an NHS on its knees? Normal pensioners, including the fairly wealthy. Only the very, very wealthy pensioners who can afford full private cover can be relaxed about staff shortages in the NHS. |
|
3,558 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Sept 16, 2024 8:27:48 GMT
These are good points jojo - my parents are both fortunately in pretty good health but still the 25p uplift was quite amusing after the removal of the £300 winter fuel allowance. I still marvel at a country that is financially on its knees can still afford to spend billions on wars. |
|
|
|
Post by SilverFox on Sept 16, 2024 10:06:51 GMT
My dad hits 80 in three weeks and has just been told he's getting a 25p rise in the pension due to his 80 year milestone. I do hope they don't remove this perk before October along with the winter fuel allowance. There are many wealthy pensioners over the age of 80 who own their own home and live it up on regular winter breaks - many much wealthier than those in their twenties and thirties (and beyond) who are struggling to feed their kids or cover their rent. However, I think there may have been a case for making that 25p uplift something like £50-£100 this year to soften the blow for those pensioners that miss the cut-off for pension credits, and are most likely to struggle to keep warm without having the heating on high. At least that would be relatively easy to administer, because they have that information to hand, but I don't know what the resultant drop in savings would be. As much as I am uncomfortable with the poorer, but not poorest pensioners missing out, I am also mindful that the reported £1.4billion savings will be available for a group that may need it more. The usual suspects have tried to frame a below real terms pay rise for junior doctors as 'inflation busting', as if the government has chosen to favour lazy, greedy public sector workers over pensioners, but who is it that suffers most from an NHS on its knees? Normal pensioners, including the fairly wealthy. Only the very, very wealthy pensioners who can afford full private cover can be relaxed about staff shortages in the NHS.
Somewhat random quote used here so that a link can be included! Not a direct response to jojo.
There are a lot of iniquities in the UK, and a lot of (often somewhat hysterical) rhetoric and media reports. The size of the pension is somewhat immaterial unless you compare it with living costs for that country. This report from Almond Financial (I make no claims as to how accurate it is) appears to place the UK below many similar European countries:-
AND it is based on maximum state pensions (only around 25% are on the 'new' state pension, and - rightly - if insufficient NI years are present, is reduced, so many are well below this), PLUS it assumes that pensioners own their own home, which is far from being the case. Even if they do own a home, the push to downsize may well have resulted in no rent or mortgage, but hefty leasehold maintenance payments which have rocketed since Grenfell.
It is also a fact that private pensions as a whole are reducing as salary based work pensions are being withdrawn wholesale, the self-employed have in recent years have often been unable to afford sufficient contributions, and anyone retiring recently had their pension pot decimated by Liz Truss and whilst annuity rates did increase, many recent retirees are not getting what they had expected and saved for. Some women have also had plans for retirement arbitrarily altered to their detriment. Despite working all my life, I have retired on a pension two thirds less than my fathers, whilst probably contributing more. The gap between the wealthiest pensioners and the poorest is vast. I do also agree that the WF payment should be means tested, and that would likely mean me missing out. The fact that no study was done to establish the effect of cutting it, is deplorable.
On the other side of the coin, students - graduates - are saddled with extortionate debts, making them unable to save deposits for property, nor contribute to their pensions. No-one should assume that the work-place pension will survive for decades to come. The past is littered with financial scandals (Equitable Life / Endowment Mortgages / black-holes in major companies finances / HM Govt stupidity or dogma etc), all of which is outside the control of the individual.
The world in general, and IMO, the UK in particular is becoming too divided by the extremes of the haves and the have-nots. I don't see it ending well.
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Sept 16, 2024 16:52:47 GMT
I think it's fair to say the state pension has been too low for too long - hence the introduction of the triple lock to steadily increase it relative to inflation. Comparisons with other countries can be interesting, but as you say SilverFox, there's a lot of hyperbolic rhetoric, so it can be hard to know what to really believe unless you are an expert.
I do know that some comparisons that are particularly unfavourable to the UK are out of date (so you aren't seeing the full impact of the triple lock), but perhaps most crucially, aren't comparing like with like. In Germany there is a state administered private pension so to speak. In other words - workers who in this country would pay into a private or company pension will pay the state for the same service. The average pension therefore paid out by the state in Germany is akin to the average state + private pension in the UK. The other big issue rarely considered in politically motivated comparisons are the contribution of 'extras'. In many European countries everyone pays a nominal amount to see their GP and will pay a nominal amount towards prescriptions. Not to mention the BBC licence fee and bus passes, and I'm sure lots of other little things that subsidise the cost of living for pensioners. Some other European countries will have free services for pensioners too, but unless you put the effort into finding out (which few do) then comparisons need a massive pinch of salt.
I also agree, unfortunately, about the divisions in society. Simply redistributing wealth isn't going to cut it. We need housing costs to come down, which means a lot more house building, in particular building the right housing in the right places. That's not popular with a lot of people who already have their home, who are also the ones most likely to vote. This is where I wave the flag for electoral reform too - the current FPTP system actively supports regional inequalities.
|
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Sept 18, 2024 15:01:14 GMT
Pensioners think that they paid in all their lives and deserve what they get but the reality is they neither paid enough tax nor had enough children. The country cannot afford the current level of welfare to pensioners and we are prioritising them and damaging the prospects of the young people we need to grow the economy because pensioners are a huge voting block and politicians are terrified of losing their vote.
The welfare state as is is completely unsustainable with an aging population and essentially no GDP per capita growth for 20 years.
The tax burden is at extremely high levels by historical standards and has shifted heavily on the rich, the top 1% pay 30% of income tax and the top 10% pay 60%. The idea that the rich aren't being taxed is laughable. The idea that they will increasingly seek to emigrate is not. The idea that would be a good thing is also laughable.
The logic of the welfare state is that the government appropriates money from the most productive people and then gives it to the least productive people and then people sit around and wonder why productivity is so bad.
There was a period in time when the welfare state could look like a viable idea due to very good demographics. That era is over. The whole thing was sold on absurd notions such as Beveridge's claim that the NHS would lower healthcare spending as the population would be healthier.
Most people are not ready for what is necessary but it will come one way or another.
|
|
3,558 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Sept 18, 2024 15:45:21 GMT
I'd like to comment on some points raised here...
"Pensioners think that they paid in all their lives and deserve what they get but the reality is they neither paid enough tax nor had enough children."
My parents are pensioners. My dad was a successful business director and my mum a university lecturer. They had seven children. I am guessing they probably paid enough tax if compound interest is factored in.
I am not a pensioner myself, but I know that having worked for 24 years and paid millions in tax, I have already paid in far more than I will ever get back off the state even if I live to be 100. Will I also be accused of not paying enough tax in future?
The reality is that state support per se is an unaffordable luxury in a country where millions sit on their arse doing nothing and millions more end up displaced here as a result of war, famine etc. The system needs reforming but - please - let's not penalise pensioners for simply wanting the government of the day to honour the deals agreed by past governments. Any unravelling of state pensions and benefits in general will take time.
The tax burden is at extremely high levels by historical standards and has shifted heavily on the rich, the top 1% pay 30% of income tax and the top 10% pay 60%. The idea that the rich aren't being taxed is laughable.
My father faced graduated taxation which sat in the 80 and 90% for a short period. THAT was a high level. In today's world, I am one of the 1% who contribute to that 30% figure and I am proud to do so. I believe that man should help fellow man and that money should be a tool to enact change for the better. I'm neither socialist not communist but I do believe that if everybody pays their way (regardless of income) then it is a fairer society for all. Broader shoulders SHOULD carry more of the burden, if existing in an ideal and fair world. My benchmark, albeit unscientific, is that twenty years ago somebody in my tax bracket would probably be described as rich. In today's world, I don't feel rich. However, by some people's standards, perhaps I am. My point, albeit made in a clumsy way, is that I think in general we have all got poorer in the UK, irrespective of earnings. We simply don't have enough money to meet the demands of society in 2024 AND eat into the national debt. I personally think that 3% increase across the board in income tax would be a big step forward.
The logic of the welfare state is that the government appropriates money from the most productive people and then gives it to the least productive people and then people sit around and wonder why productivity is so bad.
I'm not sure I agree. I might be financially productive, but there are far more productive and deserving people than myself in this country. It just so happens they do jobs that we as a society don't value enough. We then begrudge them pay rises, partly a combination of the politics of envy and partly because successive governments have devalued such people. I'd argue that productivity is bad because, put simply, we don't produce much any more, or we don't produce enough of anything of much worth from an exportable perspective.
There was a period in time when the welfare state could look like a viable idea due to very good demographics. That era is over. The whole thing was sold on absurd notions such as Beveridge's claim that the NHS would lower healthcare spending as the population would be healthier.
The UK is currently where America was 30 years ago in terms of obesity timebombs, the culture of junkfood etc. Who the hell ever thought that society would get hooked on lukewarm junkfood being delivered by a largely zero-hours immigrant population on mopeds? We are the product of our own aspirations - junk breeds junk. We are now a junk state which will eventually hit junk status on international markets. The NHS meanwhile sails on like a ghost ship that missed its dock and is now floating in the political equivalent of the bermuda triangle. Nobody knows what to do with it and are too scared to try tackling it in case it keels over and submerges. Imagine Covid x100 if that happens.
Most people are not ready for what is necessary but it will come one way or another.
I agree entirely. There is a day of reckoning coming for the UK and it will not be pleasant and punitive taxes won't fix it. Wholesale reform and hard truths are what is required across the board - for the NHS, budget and indeed politics itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by SilverFox on Sept 18, 2024 20:26:25 GMT
Pensioners think that they paid in all their lives and deserve what they get ....... Most people are not ready for what is necessary but it will come one way or another. In fairness, the Pension Advice Line (aka HMRC) - if you can ever get through - thinks the same. There is a bewildering system of complete/incomplete NI years (if you have missed by just a pound or so, it is deemed incomplete and therefore worthless - I had to add £7 for one year to get anything), together with an ill-explained count of how many 'complete' years are required - it depends on your date of birth, and you are invited to contribute more for any 'missing' years. How is that not paying into the system for your pension?
I would agree that many are not ready for what is necessary, but as already stated, the goalposts tend to be moved at random with little or no warning.
If anyone is preparing to retire in the next decade or so, I would strongly advise starting to enquire early, especially if you have been self-employed, or out-of-work for any period.
|
|
|
|
Post by interval99 on Sept 25, 2024 22:36:34 GMT
Wonderful to see unions even know what a lowlife policy this is and the conference voted against it.
Surprised considering all of us on this board have grandparents and elderly family that so many seem perfectly happy that this government openly lied to them about protecting pensioners just weeks ago.
By their own report issued late on a Friday 83% of over 80 year old and 71% of disabled pensioners will lose the payment. What a wonderful opening statement for this government. Everyone will be paying higher fuel bills this winter no matter what age as we have seen elections promises mean nothing to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 29, 2024 18:26:23 GMT
Wonderful to see unions even know what a lowlife policy this is and the conference voted against it. Surprised considering all of us on this board have grandparents and elderly family that so many seem perfectly happy that this government openly lied to them about protecting pensioners just weeks ago. By their own report issued late on a Friday 83% of over 80 year old and 71% of disabled pensioners will lose the payment. What a wonderful opening statement for this government. Everyone will be paying higher fuel bills this winter no matter what age as we have seen elections promises mean nothing to them.
But as I quote earlier from Government statistical analysis.:
I appreciate you started this thread and you haven't garnered too much sympathy. The general sentiment of people I speak to can be summerised in two words: 'crystalise assets' because assets is the reason they are not getting the WFA - the days of the property-wealthy grasping at every single policy bribe Gov handed out have ended. You have taken way too much from this country already.
|
|
