Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour has introduced means tested winter fuel payments, with 10 million pensioners losing their winter fuel payment, the cut will raise 1.4 billion. As the pensioners struggle to keep warm this winter 🥶... " Hang on Labour has already said pensioners on pension credits and other support will receive the winter fuel allowance as normal. Many Pensioners where I live are fantastically wealthy with inflation proof final salary linked pensions plus the State Pension and are in no need of the winter fuel allowance. Also the state pension went up by 10% in 2023 and 8% in 2024. About 20% in total. Don't hard working Junior Doctors deserve similar? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth!" It'll go nowhere. We may find out the Tories 'did this and that wrong' but that's about it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 igacy? The £20 bil. 'hole' is a lame excuse, they must have known all along - or else they weren't 'shadowing' very effectively. Anyway, now the shortfall is £30 bil. and rising. Run for the hills!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour has introduced means tested winter fuel payments, with 10 million pensioners losing their winter fuel payment, the cut will raise 1.4 billion. As the pensioners struggle to keep warm this winter 🥶, above inflation pay rises for teachers, NHS workers at 5.5%, armed forces 6%, prison service 5% and police 4.75%. And the cream goes to junior doctors who have been rewarded 22% for holding the country and previous government to ransom. Well done. 👏. Despite Reeves constantly reminding us that there is £20 billion short, these pay rises are going to cost a further £9.4 billion. The question is how long before Reeves comes clean and breaks the labour promise of no tax rises, because they're spending money they haven't got again.... 🤷🏼♂️ " Means testing winter fuel pay, good. Higher than inflation pay out for nhs staff - still way way way off pre austerity wages. The doctors, ffs! Maybe I should join the bma. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party." My mum gets pension credit and that's a gateway benefit. Wish I was as wealthy as she is | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour has introduced means tested winter fuel payments, with 10 million pensioners losing their winter fuel payment, the cut will raise 1.4 billion. As the pensioners struggle to keep warm this winter 🥶... Hang on Labour has already said pensioners on pension credits and other support will receive the winter fuel allowance as normal. Many Pensioners where I live are fantastically wealthy with inflation proof final salary linked pensions plus the State Pension and are in no need of the winter fuel allowance. Also the state pension went up by 10% in 2023 and 8% in 2024. About 20% in total. Don't hard working Junior Doctors deserve similar?" Which will still be 10 million pensioners who won’t receive the payment. The lowest paid pensioners won’t be impacted the rich pensioners won’t be impacted, it is those poor pensioners who are just out of reach of support that will feel it bite hardest. It is a shocking move on a base electorate that has already paid into the country through taxes and hard work that are being singled out, who do you reckon is next to be on the block? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party." Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…." Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…." For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 So @ £3,900 pa.
Well, you can guess the rest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. " 💯 agree with this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed " Don’t be silly, they’ve served their purpose and demographically are less likely to support Labour than any other age group. If we can bump a few off when it gets cold then there’s more money for those who’ve never worked to produce more children who’ll never work - but will continue to vote Labour. If this strategy doesn’t succeed I guess there’s always the option to lower the age of voting… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth! It'll go nowhere. We may find out the Tories 'did this and that wrong' but that's about it. " Yep. Makes you sick. Some people got very rich off the back of the pandemic. Some of them were dodgy. Would be nice to think they got done for it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Don’t be silly, they’ve served their purpose and demographically are less likely to support Labour than any other age group. If we can bump a few off when it gets cold then there’s more money for those who’ve never worked to produce more children who’ll never work - but will continue to vote Labour. If this strategy doesn’t succeed I guess there’s always the option to lower the age of voting…" And setting themselves up for losing the next election. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. " Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth! It'll go nowhere. We may find out the Tories 'did this and that wrong' but that's about it. Yep. Makes you sick. Some people got very rich off the back of the pandemic. Some of them were dodgy. Would be nice to think they got done for it!" Maybe. However, an enquiry is a complete waste of money, that we apparently don't have. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth!" I'm still getting used to grown ups being in charge. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just another thought - I will bet that there are many pensioners 'just about managing' but happy not to claim pension credit, pride is a wonderful thing - I will bet many will claim it now however. The pension credit is worth £75 a week, I believe So @ £3,900 pa.
Well, you can guess the rest. "Pension credit also has a disability element if anyone gets dla, pip, aa. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k." That's the wrong info according to Martin Lewis. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. " Why two children? In theory you can get child benefit for ten children. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. That's the wrong info according to Martin Lewis. " Really? I better sack my accountant then! https://www.gov.uk/child-benefit-tax-charge | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k." Not true. If you (or your partner) earn more than £60,000 a year, you will still get the full amount of Child Benefit, but you will have to pay some of it back. This is known as the 'high income Child Benefit tax charge'. The charge is tapered, so the more you earn over £60,000, the more you need to pay back. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth! It'll go nowhere. We may find out the Tories 'did this and that wrong' but that's about it. Yep. Makes you sick. Some people got very rich off the back of the pandemic. Some of them were dodgy. Would be nice to think they got done for it! Maybe. However, an enquiry is a complete waste of money, that we apparently don't have. " They don’t need to have the money, it is worth getting into debt to confirm the obvious. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth! It'll go nowhere. We may find out the Tories 'did this and that wrong' but that's about it. Yep. Makes you sick. Some people got very rich off the back of the pandemic. Some of them were dodgy. Would be nice to think they got done for it! Maybe. However, an enquiry is a complete waste of money, that we apparently don't have. " Hmmm it doesn’t say inquiry it says appoint a Commissioner. Not sure what that means in practice though! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. That's the wrong info according to Martin Lewis. Really? I better sack my accountant then! https://www.gov.uk/child-benefit-tax-charge" The very first line reads: You may have to pay the High Income Child Benefit Charge if you or your partner have an individual income that’s over £60,000 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. Not true. If you (or your partner) earn more than £60,000 a year, you will still get the full amount of Child Benefit, but you will have to pay some of it back. This is known as the 'high income Child Benefit tax charge'. The charge is tapered, so the more you earn over £60,000, the more you need to pay back." Apologies it does start from £60k Still means not everyone gets it (or gets to keep it). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. That's the wrong info according to Martin Lewis. Really? I better sack my accountant then! https://www.gov.uk/child-benefit-tax-charge The very first line reads: You may have to pay the High Income Child Benefit Charge if you or your partner have an individual income that’s over £60,000 " Yeah my mistake | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth! It'll go nowhere. We may find out the Tories 'did this and that wrong' but that's about it. Yep. Makes you sick. Some people got very rich off the back of the pandemic. Some of them were dodgy. Would be nice to think they got done for it! Maybe. However, an enquiry is a complete waste of money, that we apparently don't have. Hmmm it doesn’t say inquiry it says appoint a Commissioner. Not sure what that means in practice though!" I assumed 'to look into corruption' meant an enquiry. Even if it doesn’t, it'll be a waste of money if there's no recourse, which there won't be. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. Not true. If you (or your partner) earn more than £60,000 a year, you will still get the full amount of Child Benefit, but you will have to pay some of it back. This is known as the 'high income Child Benefit tax charge'. The charge is tapered, so the more you earn over £60,000, the more you need to pay back. Apologies it does start from £60k Still means not everyone gets it (or gets to keep it)." That is correct, but not that many people earn over 80k, which means the vast majority get it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. Not true. If you (or your partner) earn more than £60,000 a year, you will still get the full amount of Child Benefit, but you will have to pay some of it back. This is known as the 'high income Child Benefit tax charge'. The charge is tapered, so the more you earn over £60,000, the more you need to pay back. Apologies it does start from £60k Still means not everyone gets it (or gets to keep it)." Not really, it then becomes a trade off to tax . . . The more you earn over £60,000, the higher the tax. As long as your income doesn't go above £80,000 each year, it's still worth claiming. If your income goes above £80,000 the extra you pay in tax will cancel out what you get in Child Benefit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. That's the wrong info according to Martin Lewis. Really? I better sack my accountant then! https://www.gov.uk/child-benefit-tax-charge The very first line reads: You may have to pay the High Income Child Benefit Charge if you or your partner have an individual income that’s over £60,000 Yeah my mistake" Aha I know why I thought from £50k because that’s what it used to be… - over £60,000 for the tax year 2024 to 2025 - over £50,000 for tax years 2012 to 2013 up to tax year 2023 to 2024 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. Not true. If you (or your partner) earn more than £60,000 a year, you will still get the full amount of Child Benefit, but you will have to pay some of it back. This is known as the 'high income Child Benefit tax charge'. The charge is tapered, so the more you earn over £60,000, the more you need to pay back. Apologies it does start from £60k Still means not everyone gets it (or gets to keep it). Not really, it then becomes a trade off to tax . . . The more you earn over £60,000, the higher the tax. As long as your income doesn't go above £80,000 each year, it's still worth claiming. If your income goes above £80,000 the extra you pay in tax will cancel out what you get in Child Benefit." Yeah but not everyone gets it is still factually correct if you have to pay it back. Long time since I only earned £80k (or previously £60k as it only changed this year) so can’t really remember. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. Not true. If you (or your partner) earn more than £60,000 a year, you will still get the full amount of Child Benefit, but you will have to pay some of it back. This is known as the 'high income Child Benefit tax charge'. The charge is tapered, so the more you earn over £60,000, the more you need to pay back. Apologies it does start from £60k Still means not everyone gets it (or gets to keep it). Not really, it then becomes a trade off to tax . . . The more you earn over £60,000, the higher the tax. As long as your income doesn't go above £80,000 each year, it's still worth claiming. If your income goes above £80,000 the extra you pay in tax will cancel out what you get in Child Benefit. Yeah but not everyone gets it is still factually correct if you have to pay it back. Long time since I only earned £80k (or previously £60k as it only changed this year) so can’t really remember." The latest government data (published July 2024) reveals that the mean average UK weekly wage (including bonuses) across all industry sectors (in England and Wales) is £689 gross (that's the equivalent to an annual pre-tax salary of £35,828. So most will. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Not true. If you earn over £60k you lose all child benefit with it being gradually phased out between £50k to £60k. Not true. If you (or your partner) earn more than £60,000 a year, you will still get the full amount of Child Benefit, but you will have to pay some of it back. This is known as the 'high income Child Benefit tax charge'. The charge is tapered, so the more you earn over £60,000, the more you need to pay back. Apologies it does start from £60k Still means not everyone gets it (or gets to keep it). Not really, it then becomes a trade off to tax . . . The more you earn over £60,000, the higher the tax. As long as your income doesn't go above £80,000 each year, it's still worth claiming. If your income goes above £80,000 the extra you pay in tax will cancel out what you get in Child Benefit. Yeah but not everyone gets it is still factually correct if you have to pay it back. Long time since I only earned £80k (or previously £60k as it only changed this year) so can’t really remember. The latest government data (published July 2024) reveals that the mean average UK weekly wage (including bonuses) across all industry sectors (in England and Wales) is £689 gross (that's the equivalent to an annual pre-tax salary of £35,828. So most will." Agreed but most still isn’t all. It is basically means tested albeit with a high threshold. Not the same but if you earn over £100k (to £123k I think) you gradually lose/pay back the tax free personal allowance. I think all these “give with one hand, claw back with another” stealthy “taxes” need abolishing. Simplify our tax system. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. " Children are the future, we need them to grow up and work and pay tax to pay for our pensions in future. Pensioners have already paid in and are drawing out. Many (not all, obviously) pensioners are well off and are sitting on huge wealth in the form of property. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. Why should all parents get non-means tested benefits for two children free. Why should other taxpayers pay for it? At least Pensioners have paid it in. Children are the future, we need them to grow up and work and pay tax to pay for our pensions in future. Pensioners have already paid in and are drawing out. Many (not all, obviously) pensioners are well off and are sitting on huge wealth in the form of property. " All' pensioners are most definitely not well off. Property. Only if they draw out the equity in it or sell it. And most would like to pass it on as an inheritance. *edit* | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed " Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour has introduced means tested winter fuel payments, with 10 million pensioners losing their winter fuel payment, the cut will raise 1.4 billion. As the pensioners struggle to keep warm this winter 🥶, above inflation pay rises for teachers, NHS workers at 5.5%, armed forces 6%, prison service 5% and police 4.75%. And the cream goes to junior doctors who have been rewarded 22% for holding the country and previous government to ransom. Well done. 👏. Despite Reeves constantly reminding us that there is £20 billion short, these pay rises are going to cost a further £9.4 billion. The question is how long before Reeves comes clean and breaks the labour promise of no tax rises, because they're spending money they haven't got again.... 🤷🏼♂️ " As I understand it from the BBC any pensioner who is not entitled to pension credit or other means tested benefits will loose the winter fuel payments. If correct then a person or couple that put money into a private pension to try to plan for the future, may find they go just over the limit for pension credits. The private pension may be small but just enough to tip them over. This means they don't get the credits and now don't get the winter fuel payments either. Sounds like unless you have a great pension, you will now be better off not having one so you get credits and fuel allowance. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? " Like child benefit - should taper. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour has introduced means tested winter fuel payments, with 10 million pensioners losing their winter fuel payment, the cut will raise 1.4 billion. As the pensioners struggle to keep warm this winter 🥶, above inflation pay rises for teachers, NHS workers at 5.5%, armed forces 6%, prison service 5% and police 4.75%. And the cream goes to junior doctors who have been rewarded 22% for holding the country and previous government to ransom. Well done. 👏. Despite Reeves constantly reminding us that there is £20 billion short, these pay rises are going to cost a further £9.4 billion. The question is how long before Reeves comes clean and breaks the labour promise of no tax rises, because they're spending money they haven't got again.... 🤷🏼♂️ As I understand it from the BBC any pensioner who is not entitled to pension credit or other means tested benefits will loose the winter fuel payments. If correct then a person or couple that put money into a private pension to try to plan for the future, may find they go just over the limit for pension credits. The private pension may be small but just enough to tip them over. This means they don't get the credits and now don't get the winter fuel payments either. Sounds like unless you have a great pension, you will now be better off not having one so you get credits and fuel allowance." And she knows this - Cynical in the least - she knows that she will have to cave to the greater amount for the doctors and as the pensioers are not 'tardy' Labour voters she really doesn't give a fig. But this will come back at Labour at the next election for sure. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? " Why are you plucking figures when they've already put a figure on it. A measly 12 fucking grand. Are you saying that someone getting 12 grand isn't one of the 'poorest'? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? Like child benefit - should taper. " Taper is just a posh word for means testing… So again… at what level do you “taper”? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? Why are you plucking figures when they've already put a figure on it. A measly 12 fucking grand. Are you saying that someone getting 12 grand isn't one of the 'poorest'?" A) it is not the same for a single pensioner as it is for a couple…. The couples threshold is much higher B) if you are below that you are already getting support for council tax and housing benefits and other things | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? Like child benefit - should taper. Taper is just a posh word for means testing… So again… at what level do you “taper”? " My point is. I did write this above btw, If you are going to scrap the fuel allowance, scrap child benefit too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour has introduced means tested winter fuel payments, with 10 million pensioners losing their winter fuel payment, the cut will raise 1.4 billion. As the pensioners struggle to keep warm this winter 🥶, above inflation pay rises for teachers, NHS workers at 5.5%, armed forces 6%, prison service 5% and police 4.75%. And the cream goes to junior doctors who have been rewarded 22% for holding the country and previous government to ransom. Well done. 👏. Despite Reeves constantly reminding us that there is £20 billion short, these pay rises are going to cost a further £9.4 billion. The question is how long before Reeves comes clean and breaks the labour promise of no tax rises, because they're spending money they haven't got again.... 🤷🏼♂️ As I understand it from the BBC any pensioner who is not entitled to pension credit or other means tested benefits will loose the winter fuel payments. If correct then a person or couple that put money into a private pension to try to plan for the future, may find they go just over the limit for pension credits. The private pension may be small but just enough to tip them over. This means they don't get the credits and now don't get the winter fuel payments either. Sounds like unless you have a great pension, you will now be better off not having one so you get credits and fuel allowance. And she knows this - Cynical in the least - she knows that she will have to cave to the greater amount for the doctors and as the pensioers are not 'tardy' Labour voters she really doesn't give a fig. But this will come back at Labour at the next election for sure." Indeed it is. Imagine saving for a private pension all your working life and the result is it takes you fractionally over the limit to claim credits. If that wasn't bad enough now it means you can't get the fuel allowance. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should by now have recognised index of poverty across society. Anything that falls below this threshold should receive the relevant top up to income. Also note my point above about pension credit. There will be an unintended consequence from this for Labour. First it will be monetary, then loss of trust in pensioners. " Presumably Labour’s calculation is that pensioners don’t vote Labour anyway so who cares. Public sector workers do so here’s some pork. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should by now have recognised index of poverty across society. Anything that falls below this threshold should receive the relevant top up to income. Also note my point above about pension credit. There will be an unintended consequence from this for Labour. First it will be monetary, then loss of trust in pensioners. Presumably Labour’s calculation is that pensioners don’t vote Labour anyway so who cares. Public sector workers do so here’s some pork." Said this above and it will come back at them at the next election. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth! It'll go nowhere. We may find out the Tories 'did this and that wrong' but that's about it. " This, and at the cost of more money too All pointless sabre rattling Keeps people happy though, help's them but into the whole charade | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really struggle with the left wing mentality of taking money off people who have tried in life, but are happy to throw money at people who can't be arsed. " That's socialism for you. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs". Fine in principle, but it doesn't work. It discourages entrepreneurs and endeavour; punishes success. After all, why bother if you can live off the state? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? Why are you plucking figures when they've already put a figure on it. A measly 12 fucking grand. Are you saying that someone getting 12 grand isn't one of the 'poorest'?" 12k so paying in, In come tax if they don't raise the bace rate up even more will have to pay in and more complicated lots will need to do a self assessment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll use my Dad as an example here. He's no longer going to get Winter Fuel payments because he doesn't qualify for means tested benefits. However, he still has a large mortgage, age 85, and hardly any money in the bank. He has other debts remaining. He doesn't pay council tax anymore due to a diagnosis of dementia. He chose, when of sound mind, to buy a 3 bed semi on a mortgage (with commensurate cost to run). He chose to spend money he didn't have and run up debt. But he has a decent enough private pension which SHOULD be adequate for a single person. His really crap decision making when competent mean he actually has very little left to live on now he's elderly and mentally infirm and now he loses the £300 fuel thingy. Should people like him, asset poor and cash poor but due to their own actions, receive the fuel allowance? Or should the fact he has a decent occupational pension for a single person preclude him? All I know is that it will be down to me to try and balance his budgets, at a time when we have to keep his house very warm, due to his lack of body condition nowadays. He's still wearing a sweater and three layers in the current weather. " Look into attendance allowance/pip he might get that for dementia. Look into water bills, does depend on the region. Don't forget council tax for the dementia and single person discounts. If he gets any of these he may then get pension credit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll use my Dad as an example here. He's no longer going to get Winter Fuel payments because he doesn't qualify for means tested benefits. However, he still has a large mortgage, age 85, and hardly any money in the bank. He has other debts remaining. He doesn't pay council tax anymore due to a diagnosis of dementia. He chose, when of sound mind, to buy a 3 bed semi on a mortgage (with commensurate cost to run). He chose to spend money he didn't have and run up debt. But he has a decent enough private pension which SHOULD be adequate for a single person. His really crap decision making when competent mean he actually has very little left to live on now he's elderly and mentally infirm and now he loses the £300 fuel thingy. Should people like him, asset poor and cash poor but due to their own actions, receive the fuel allowance? Or should the fact he has a decent occupational pension for a single person preclude him? All I know is that it will be down to me to try and balance his budgets, at a time when we have to keep his house very warm, due to his lack of body condition nowadays. He's still wearing a sweater and three layers in the current weather. Look into attendance allowance/pip he might get that for dementia. Look into water bills, does depend on the region. Don't forget council tax for the dementia and single person discounts. If he gets any of these he may then get pension credit." He gets AA. Council tax discounted entirely. But still doesn't qualify for anything means tested because of his income. To honest, it's his own stupid fault (his financial situation, not the dementia!). We drag him ever onwards. I end up subbing him, paying for repairs etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really struggle with the left wing mentality of taking money off people who have tried in life, but are happy to throw money at people who can't be arsed. That's socialism for you. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs". Fine in principle, but it doesn't work. It discourages entrepreneurs and endeavour; punishes success. After all, why bother if you can live off the state?" This move on pensioners feels like Robin Hood gone rogue | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll use my Dad as an example here. He's no longer going to get Winter Fuel payments because he doesn't qualify for means tested benefits. However, he still has a large mortgage, age 85, and hardly any money in the bank. He has other debts remaining. He doesn't pay council tax anymore due to a diagnosis of dementia. He chose, when of sound mind, to buy a 3 bed semi on a mortgage (with commensurate cost to run). He chose to spend money he didn't have and run up debt. But he has a decent enough private pension which SHOULD be adequate for a single person. His really crap decision making when competent mean he actually has very little left to live on now he's elderly and mentally infirm and now he loses the £300 fuel thingy. Should people like him, asset poor and cash poor but due to their own actions, receive the fuel allowance? Or should the fact he has a decent occupational pension for a single person preclude him? All I know is that it will be down to me to try and balance his budgets, at a time when we have to keep his house very warm, due to his lack of body condition nowadays. He's still wearing a sweater and three layers in the current weather. Look into attendance allowance/pip he might get that for dementia. Look into water bills, does depend on the region. Don't forget council tax for the dementia and single person discounts. If he gets any of these he may then get pension credit." Don't think he will get PIP, you need to have this already and cannot claim this after you have reached retirement age. The Attendance Allowance could be the way to go. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just read about the cancelled building projects. How long ago was it the Labour leadership were saying they will get Britain building again. " Agreed. But all these projects go way over budget. Hs2 is an example In Plymouth our Labour run councils city centre make over was initially set to cost £4.2M, current estimate are £12.8m to complete it Labours PFI for the NHS cost £80bn and delivered £13bn investment And they are finger pointing at the tories. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll use my Dad as an example here. He's no longer going to get Winter Fuel payments because he doesn't qualify for means tested benefits. However, he still has a large mortgage, age 85, and hardly any money in the bank. He has other debts remaining. He doesn't pay council tax anymore due to a diagnosis of dementia. He chose, when of sound mind, to buy a 3 bed semi on a mortgage (with commensurate cost to run). He chose to spend money he didn't have and run up debt. But he has a decent enough private pension which SHOULD be adequate for a single person. His really crap decision making when competent mean he actually has very little left to live on now he's elderly and mentally infirm and now he loses the £300 fuel thingy. Should people like him, asset poor and cash poor but due to their own actions, receive the fuel allowance? Or should the fact he has a decent occupational pension for a single person preclude him? All I know is that it will be down to me to try and balance his budgets, at a time when we have to keep his house very warm, due to his lack of body condition nowadays. He's still wearing a sweater and three layers in the current weather. Look into attendance allowance/pip he might get that for dementia. Look into water bills, does depend on the region. Don't forget council tax for the dementia and single person discounts. If he gets any of these he may then get pension credit.Don't think he will get PIP, you need to have this already and cannot claim this after you have reached retirement age. The Attendance Allowance could be the way to go. Mrs x" He's already getting AA, it's paying towards his share of home care. That's leaving him massively out of pocket (care). One cannot make a new PIP claim if you are over state pension age. It didn't even exist before he attained pension age. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. You tell me how most pensioners get by on that? Food. Utilities. Council Tax. Housing costs. Leisure costs. etc. The winter fuel cap will be increase by another 10% this winter. Water is expected to rise by at least 20%. I'll say it again . . . The current State Pension is £221.20 a week. Shocking announcement from the lying chancellor. It is now well established that she already knew about the black hole before the election and is now pretending that this cut to pensioners is ONLY because she suddenly found it out - it's a gross-lie on her behalf and vis-a-vi the Labour Party. Sort of…. Yes the state pension is £221.20…. But there is also a “minimum income guarantee” for a single pensioner/married couple…. If all there income coming in (from both the state pension AND private pension) is below the minimum guaranteed.. then they are entitled to pension credit If someone is on pension credit.. they get a discount on the things like council tax, and housing benefits Actually I don’t mind the winter fuel allowance being means tested…. Why should someone get 200/300 pounds a year, regardless of circumstances, just for being over pension age…. For the their long standing service to the country, maybe? How much tax have they paid in, overall with Income / VAT / NIC / council / stamp duty / and many others. They should be looked after not rinsed Again, the poorest are not having their winter fuel allowance taken away…… So let me pick a figure out of thin air…. Let’s say a person is living on 30000 per year, or 50,000… or 100,000….. or 250,000 Are you saying they should all get the extra 200/300 pounds per year regardless of circumstances? Why are you plucking figures when they've already put a figure on it. A measly 12 fucking grand. Are you saying that someone getting 12 grand isn't one of the 'poorest'? A) it is not the same for a single pensioner as it is for a couple…. The couples threshold is much higher B) if you are below that you are already getting support for council tax and housing benefits and other things " We're talking about people above the threshold. I asked a question, would you answer? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll use my Dad as an example here. He's no longer going to get Winter Fuel payments because he doesn't qualify for means tested benefits. However, he still has a large mortgage, age 85, and hardly any money in the bank. He has other debts remaining. He doesn't pay council tax anymore due to a diagnosis of dementia. He chose, when of sound mind, to buy a 3 bed semi on a mortgage (with commensurate cost to run). He chose to spend money he didn't have and run up debt. But he has a decent enough private pension which SHOULD be adequate for a single person. His really crap decision making when competent mean he actually has very little left to live on now he's elderly and mentally infirm and now he loses the £300 fuel thingy. Should people like him, asset poor and cash poor but due to their own actions, receive the fuel allowance? Or should the fact he has a decent occupational pension for a single person preclude him? All I know is that it will be down to me to try and balance his budgets, at a time when we have to keep his house very warm, due to his lack of body condition nowadays. He's still wearing a sweater and three layers in the current weather. Look into attendance allowance/pip he might get that for dementia. Look into water bills, does depend on the region. Don't forget council tax for the dementia and single person discounts. If he gets any of these he may then get pension credit.Don't think he will get PIP, you need to have this already and cannot claim this after you have reached retirement age. The Attendance Allowance could be the way to go. Mrs x He's already getting AA, it's paying towards his share of home care. That's leaving him massively out of pocket (care). One cannot make a new PIP claim if you are over state pension age. It didn't even exist before he attained pension age. " One of its predecessors would have done, dla, invalidity benefit or something else. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll use my Dad as an example here. He's no longer going to get Winter Fuel payments because he doesn't qualify for means tested benefits. However, he still has a large mortgage, age 85, and hardly any money in the bank. He has other debts remaining. He doesn't pay council tax anymore due to a diagnosis of dementia. He chose, when of sound mind, to buy a 3 bed semi on a mortgage (with commensurate cost to run). He chose to spend money he didn't have and run up debt. But he has a decent enough private pension which SHOULD be adequate for a single person. His really crap decision making when competent mean he actually has very little left to live on now he's elderly and mentally infirm and now he loses the £300 fuel thingy. Should people like him, asset poor and cash poor but due to their own actions, receive the fuel allowance? Or should the fact he has a decent occupational pension for a single person preclude him? All I know is that it will be down to me to try and balance his budgets, at a time when we have to keep his house very warm, due to his lack of body condition nowadays. He's still wearing a sweater and three layers in the current weather. Look into attendance allowance/pip he might get that for dementia. Look into water bills, does depend on the region. Don't forget council tax for the dementia and single person discounts. If he gets any of these he may then get pension credit.Don't think he will get PIP, you need to have this already and cannot claim this after you have reached retirement age. The Attendance Allowance could be the way to go. Mrs x He's already getting AA, it's paying towards his share of home care. That's leaving him massively out of pocket (care). One cannot make a new PIP claim if you are over state pension age. It didn't even exist before he attained pension age. One of its predecessors would have done, dla, invalidity benefit or something else." He wasn't incapacitated/disabled/with dementia until after all of those. So ineligible by all different measures. He doesn't qualify for pension credit, we have been through the various assessments when he needed a new boiler last year. He was without heating and hot water from September to November because he didn't qualify for any support but had less than money. Eventually sorted but only after writing to all and sundry. And no, I couldn't afford to buy him a new boiler. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll use my Dad as an example here. He's no longer going to get Winter Fuel payments because he doesn't qualify for means tested benefits. However, he still has a large mortgage, age 85, and hardly any money in the bank. He has other debts remaining. He doesn't pay council tax anymore due to a diagnosis of dementia. He chose, when of sound mind, to buy a 3 bed semi on a mortgage (with commensurate cost to run). He chose to spend money he didn't have and run up debt. But he has a decent enough private pension which SHOULD be adequate for a single person. His really crap decision making when competent mean he actually has very little left to live on now he's elderly and mentally infirm and now he loses the £300 fuel thingy. Should people like him, asset poor and cash poor but due to their own actions, receive the fuel allowance? Or should the fact he has a decent occupational pension for a single person preclude him? All I know is that it will be down to me to try and balance his budgets, at a time when we have to keep his house very warm, due to his lack of body condition nowadays. He's still wearing a sweater and three layers in the current weather. Look into attendance allowance/pip he might get that for dementia. Look into water bills, does depend on the region. Don't forget council tax for the dementia and single person discounts. If he gets any of these he may then get pension credit.Don't think he will get PIP, you need to have this already and cannot claim this after you have reached retirement age. The Attendance Allowance could be the way to go. Mrs x He's already getting AA, it's paying towards his share of home care. That's leaving him massively out of pocket (care). One cannot make a new PIP claim if you are over state pension age. It didn't even exist before he attained pension age. One of its predecessors would have done, dla, invalidity benefit or something else. He wasn't incapacitated/disabled/with dementia until after all of those. So ineligible by all different measures. He doesn't qualify for pension credit, we have been through the various assessments when he needed a new boiler last year. He was without heating and hot water from September to November because he didn't qualify for any support but had less than money. Eventually sorted but only after writing to all and sundry. And no, I couldn't afford to buy him a new boiler. " Likewise with my dad, who has recently been awarded aa. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth!" and what will that achieve other than costing the taxpayer even more money? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really struggle with the left wing mentality of taking money off people who have tried in life, but are happy to throw money at people who can't be arsed. That's socialism for you. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs". Fine in principle, but it doesn't work. It discourages entrepreneurs and endeavour; punishes success. After all, why bother if you can live off the state? This move on pensioners feels like Robin Hood gone rogue " Indeed, and Labour think anybody with more than a tenner in their bank is the Sheriff of Nottingham. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth!and what will that achieve other than costing the taxpayer even more money?" Hopefully less than the partygate enquiry, which reportedly cost the taxpayer £460,000 Or Boris Johnson’s aborted garden bridge project - £53 million, or his Irish Sea tunnel feasibility study - £900,000 Or labours PFI for the nhs , which cost £80bn and delivered £13bn investment £800 million wasted on Rwanda scheme £70bn over budget on hs2 £2bn a year spent on emergency housing of the homeless beacuse red and blue sold over 2.3 million council houses and flats at a discount £100bn annual hit on the economy due to Brexit with associated tax loss £90bn+ a year interest on the national debt, which Labour doubled, then the tories trebled. It goes on and on | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really struggle with the left wing mentality of taking money off people who have tried in life, but are happy to throw money at people who can't be arsed. That's socialism for you. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs". Fine in principle, but it doesn't work. It discourages entrepreneurs and endeavour; punishes success. After all, why bother if you can live off the state? This move on pensioners feels like Robin Hood gone rogue Indeed, and Labour think anybody with more than a tenner in their bank is the Sheriff of Nottingham." If they are fleecing pensioners in their first month what are the rest of us in for. Businesses outside of ltd structure in for a kicking. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth!and what will that achieve other than costing the taxpayer even more money?" Because there is slither of a chance those crooks might just be caught and and even smaller chance of recouping some of the money. I’d start with Matt Hancock’s pub landlord mate who was awarded £20m contract to supply glass test tubes. Or do we simply let them all get away with it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth!and what will that achieve other than costing the taxpayer even more money? Because there is slither of a chance those crooks might just be caught and and even smaller chance of recouping some of the money. I’d start with Matt Hancock’s pub landlord mate who was awarded £20m contract to supply glass test tubes. Or do we simply let them all get away with it?" Yes go for it There were more Labour MPs jailed for expenses fraud than any other party. Now let the tories have it. Baroness Mone - £203million still not repaid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£20bn spent on Iraq and Afghan wars started by Labour and now pensioners have to pay for it. " They are also contributing to the 22% pay rise for doctors they can’t get appointments with. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will appoint a Covid corruption commissioner to look into how public money was spent during the pandemic; GOOD! I hope this has teeth!and what will that achieve other than costing the taxpayer even more money? Hopefully less than the partygate enquiry, which reportedly cost the taxpayer £460,000 Or Boris Johnson’s aborted garden bridge project - £53 million, or his Irish Sea tunnel feasibility study - £900,000 Or labours PFI for the nhs , which cost £80bn and delivered £13bn investment £800 million wasted on Rwanda scheme £70bn over budget on hs2 £2bn a year spent on emergency housing of the homeless beacuse red and blue sold over 2.3 million council houses and flats at a discount £100bn annual hit on the economy due to Brexit with associated tax loss £90bn+ a year interest on the national debt, which Labour doubled, then the tories trebled. It goes on and on " There’s another big elephant in this room of govt spending/debt…Covid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I doubt many will care but Labour have confirmed that VAT on private school fees will start in January. In the middle of a school year! Maximum disruption. Completely stitching up parents who are on the cusp of affordability but who now have only a few weeks to sort out a state school place. Why not wait to introduce from next September. Tell me this isn’t punitive!" Socialism is always great when it’s someone else’s money that they are spending. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£20bn spent on Iraq and Afghan wars started by Labour and now pensioners have to pay for it. They are also contributing to the 22% pay rise for doctors they can’t get appointments with. " Which is a pity, because this Winter without heating the elderly will be prone to many ailments.    | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I doubt many will care but Labour have confirmed that VAT on private school fees will start in January. In the middle of a school year! Maximum disruption. Completely stitching up parents who are on the cusp of affordability but who now have only a few weeks to sort out a state school place. Why not wait to introduce from next September. Tell me this isn’t punitive! Socialism is always great when it’s someone else’s money that they are spending." This will backfire. It will end up raising very little or be a net loss in the end. Super rich will absorb. Poorer kids will lose access as bursaries and scholarships are scaled back or phased out. Those who currently can just barely afford fees will likely look to move to the best state schools, pushing up house prices in catchment areas pushing out poorer people to create middle class enclaves. And the often unknown thing is that there is a cohort of kids in boarding schools who are the children of diplomats or military personnel. Guess who pays their fees? The tax payer! And now they too will be paying more (except it is wooden dollars with money just flowing from one govt dept to another). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£20bn spent on Iraq and Afghan wars started by Labour and now pensioners have to pay for it. They are also contributing to the 22% pay rise for doctors they can’t get appointments with. Which is a pity, because this Winter without heating the elderly will be prone to many ailments. "I guess that's their solution to the ageing population problem. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I doubt many will care but Labour have confirmed that VAT on private school fees will start in January. In the middle of a school year! Maximum disruption. Completely stitching up parents who are on the cusp of affordability but who now have only a few weeks to sort out a state school place. Why not wait to introduce from next September. Tell me this isn’t punitive! Socialism is always great when it’s someone else’s money that they are spending. This will backfire. It will end up raising very little or be a net loss in the end. Super rich will absorb. Poorer kids will lose access as bursaries and scholarships are scaled back or phased out. Those who currently can just barely afford fees will likely look to move to the best state schools, pushing up house prices in catchment areas pushing out poorer people to create middle class enclaves. And the often unknown thing is that there is a cohort of kids in boarding schools who are the children of diplomats or military personnel. Guess who pays their fees? The tax payer! And now they too will be paying more (except it is wooden dollars with money just flowing from one govt dept to another)." as much as I agree with the policy (as covered) I don't agree with it being January. That feels odd. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I doubt many will care but Labour have confirmed that VAT on private school fees will start in January. In the middle of a school year! Maximum disruption. Completely stitching up parents who are on the cusp of affordability but who now have only a few weeks to sort out a state school place. Why not wait to introduce from next September. Tell me this isn’t punitive! Socialism is always great when it’s someone else’s money that they are spending. This will backfire. It will end up raising very little or be a net loss in the end. Super rich will absorb. Poorer kids will lose access as bursaries and scholarships are scaled back or phased out. Those who currently can just barely afford fees will likely look to move to the best state schools, pushing up house prices in catchment areas pushing out poorer people to create middle class enclaves. And the often unknown thing is that there is a cohort of kids in boarding schools who are the children of diplomats or military personnel. Guess who pays their fees? The tax payer! And now they too will be paying more (except it is wooden dollars with money just flowing from one govt dept to another)." Those who can afford to are now paying up front for the entirety of their children’s education, thus circumventing what’s on the horizon | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£20bn spent on Iraq and Afghan wars started by Labour and now pensioners have to pay for it. They are also contributing to the 22% pay rise for doctors they can’t get appointments with. Which is a pity, because this Winter without heating the elderly will be prone to many ailments.
I guess that's their solution to the ageing population problem. "It's a Boomer cull!!!!!!!!!!!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This will backfire. It will end up raising very little or be a net loss in the end. Super rich will absorb. Poorer kids will lose access as bursaries and scholarships are scaled back or phased out. Those who currently can just barely afford fees will likely look to move to the best state schools, pushing up house prices in catchment areas pushing out poorer people to create middle class enclaves. And the often unknown thing is that there is a cohort of kids in boarding schools who are the children of diplomats or military personnel. Guess who pays their fees? The tax payer! And now they too will be paying more (except it is wooden dollars with money just flowing from one govt dept to another)." it won't make a jot of difference to the public school industry. subsidising public schools is costing this country a fortune and has to stop really. it would be better to link VAT to the amount of scholarships that these schools provide. if a school meets the threshold then they pay no VAT. if they meet 50% of the threshold then they pay 75% of the vat or similar idea. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This will backfire. It will end up raising very little or be a net loss in the end. Super rich will absorb. Poorer kids will lose access as bursaries and scholarships are scaled back or phased out. Those who currently can just barely afford fees will likely look to move to the best state schools, pushing up house prices in catchment areas pushing out poorer people to create middle class enclaves. And the often unknown thing is that there is a cohort of kids in boarding schools who are the children of diplomats or military personnel. Guess who pays their fees? The tax payer! And now they too will be paying more (except it is wooden dollars with money just flowing from one govt dept to another). it won't make a jot of difference to the public school industry. subsidising public schools is costing this country a fortune and has to stop really. it would be better to link VAT to the amount of scholarships that these schools provide. if a school meets the threshold then they pay no VAT. if they meet 50% of the threshold then they pay 75% of the vat or similar idea." Does it cost the country a fortune though? Every kid in private school is one less for the government to pay for in state schools. Private schools pay taxes through buildings, salaries etc. I don't think their staff are moonlighting either - like in private medicine. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the overwhelming percentage of public school places are the overseas super rich. scholarships represent less than 2% of places. since the milenium fees have skyrocketed but no one has been put off and public schools have thrived. they don't need the taxpayer subsidy of charitable status to continue thriving." What % is 'overwhelming'? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ho no look what we found, look at what they have done. We now have to make the tough choices It is the tories fault. Blah blah I knew this was going to happen Same old shit So glad I never voted for this I cannot believe that I believe Jeremy Hunt, as I knew about the black hole before the election and I am just an everyday guy, so if Rachel Reeves is telling us she just found this out she is a fibber, who doesn't interview well. I had no hope that labour would be any better than the tories none. I feel like I am in a political wilderness with no one to vote for. " it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. " we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the overwhelming percentage of public school places are the overseas super rich. scholarships represent less than 2% of places. since the milenium fees have skyrocketed but no one has been put off and public schools have thrived. they don't need the taxpayer subsidy of charitable status to continue thriving." Where do you get that % from? The proportion of overseas parents in UK private schools is less than 5% and the majority of those are British diplomats, military etc on foreign postings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny." All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny." And add £1.7trn added to the national debt over last 14 years. Makes these £20bn here and there black holes insignificant | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the overwhelming percentage of public school places are the overseas super rich. scholarships represent less than 2% of places. since the milenium fees have skyrocketed but no one has been put off and public schools have thrived. they don't need the taxpayer subsidy of charitable status to continue thriving. Where do you get that % from? The proportion of overseas parents in UK private schools is less than 5% and the majority of those are British diplomats, military etc on foreign postings." That we are paying for https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/aug/10/uk-spends-13m-on-private-schooling-for-diplomats-children | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And add £1.7trn added to the national debt over last 14 years. Makes these £20bn here and there black holes insignificant " = conservative party's monumental weaponised incompetence | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. " it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the overwhelming percentage of public school places are the overseas super rich. scholarships represent less than 2% of places. since the milenium fees have skyrocketed but no one has been put off and public schools have thrived. they don't need the taxpayer subsidy of charitable status to continue thriving. Where do you get that % from? The proportion of overseas parents in UK private schools is less than 5% and the majority of those are British diplomats, military etc on foreign postings. That we are paying for https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/aug/10/uk-spends-13m-on-private-schooling-for-diplomats-children" That's fair enough isn't it if we post people overseas? We either educate their kids in boarding schools in UK or in an International school in their host country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross."" So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. " I'm not sure where your numbers are from and how they tie up, but I've seen nothing that suggests the hole is smaller (which is what I think your are pointing at). The above suggests IFS see it as bigger, no? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. I'm not sure where your numbers are from and how they tie up, but I've seen nothing that suggests the hole is smaller (which is what I think your are pointing at). The above suggests IFS see it as bigger, no? " There was a 35b shortfall in the Autumn Statement. That was a Tory statement. Have you managed to watch Hunt question Reeves yesterday? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. I'm not sure where your numbers are from and how they tie up, but I've seen nothing that suggests the hole is smaller (which is what I think your are pointing at). The above suggests IFS see it as bigger, no? There was a 35b shortfall in the Autumn Statement. That was a Tory statement. Have you managed to watch Hunt question Reeves yesterday?" Hunt said yesterday that they’re setting it up for tax hikes in the October budget. If he turns out to be right, the Labour Party will be shown to have been lying from the get go…, It could undo them before they’ve got off the line at this rate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. I'm not sure where your numbers are from and how they tie up, but I've seen nothing that suggests the hole is smaller (which is what I think your are pointing at). The above suggests IFS see it as bigger, no? There was a 35b shortfall in the Autumn Statement. That was a Tory statement. Have you managed to watch Hunt question Reeves yesterday? Hunt said yesterday that they’re setting it up for tax hikes in the October budget. If he turns out to be right, the Labour Party will be shown to have been lying from the get go…, It could undo them before they’ve got off the line at this rate. " They will stick with saying what they've said about tax rises for working people, NI etc.. Everyone was saying, well the IFS and other independents were that tax rises were inevitable whomever was in government.. It's all about who and how they spin such things which is always the way.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"as i recall the labour party maintained that they would increase wealth taxes throughout the election campaign. taxes such as capital gains, IHT etc. they also maintained that they would not increase the rate of VAT, IC or NI" They made manifesto pledge to not increase VAT, IC, NIC but avoided discussing all other taxes. Pretty certain they never openly admitted anything relating to IHT or CGT. That was speculation by think tanks and in the media. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"as i recall the labour party maintained that they would increase wealth taxes throughout the election campaign. taxes such as capital gains, IHT etc. they also maintained that they would not increase the rate of VAT, IC or NI They made manifesto pledge to not increase VAT, IC, NIC but avoided discussing all other taxes. Pretty certain they never openly admitted anything relating to IHT or CGT. That was speculation by think tanks and in the media. " i'm pretty sure it was mentioned during interviews on the sunday wonk programes, radio 4's today etc so it's of no surprise. besides, it's what needs to happen to fix the last governments monumental mess i think | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"as i recall the labour party maintained that they would increase wealth taxes throughout the election campaign. taxes such as capital gains, IHT etc. they also maintained that they would not increase the rate of VAT, IC or NI They made manifesto pledge to not increase VAT, IC, NIC but avoided discussing all other taxes. Pretty certain they never openly admitted anything relating to IHT or CGT. That was speculation by think tanks and in the media. i'm pretty sure it was mentioned during interviews on the sunday wonk programes, radio 4's today etc so it's of no surprise. besides, it's what needs to happen to fix the last governments monumental mess i think" I’m pretty sure THEY didn’t. Others might have but Labour representatives did not AFAIK | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I doubt many will care but Labour have confirmed that VAT on private school fees will start in January. In the middle of a school year! Maximum disruption. Completely stitching up parents who are on the cusp of affordability but who now have only a few weeks to sort out a state school place. Why not wait to introduce from next September. Tell me this isn’t punitive! Socialism is always great when it’s someone else’s money that they are spending." And when the tories spent someone else's money, what was that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ho no look what we found, look at what they have done. We now have to make the tough choices It is the tories fault. Blah blah I knew this was going to happen Same old shit So glad I never voted for this I cannot believe that I believe Jeremy Hunt, as I knew about the black hole before the election and I am just an everyday guy, so if Rachel Reeves is telling us she just found this out she is a fibber, who doesn't interview well. I had no hope that labour would be any better than the tories none. I feel like I am in a political wilderness with no one to vote for. " They just didn't know the depth of the hole | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This will backfire. It will end up raising very little or be a net loss in the end. Super rich will absorb. Poorer kids will lose access as bursaries and scholarships are scaled back or phased out. Those who currently can just barely afford fees will likely look to move to the best state schools, pushing up house prices in catchment areas pushing out poorer people to create middle class enclaves. And the often unknown thing is that there is a cohort of kids in boarding schools who are the children of diplomats or military personnel. Guess who pays their fees? The tax payer! And now they too will be paying more (except it is wooden dollars with money just flowing from one govt dept to another). it won't make a jot of difference to the public school industry. subsidising public schools is costing this country a fortune and has to stop really. it would be better to link VAT to the amount of scholarships that these schools provide. if a school meets the threshold then they pay no VAT. if they meet 50% of the threshold then they pay 75% of the vat or similar idea. Does it cost the country a fortune though? Every kid in private school is one less for the government to pay for in state schools. Private schools pay taxes through buildings, salaries etc. I don't think their staff are moonlighting either - like in private medicine." Don't you know that 6 figure sums aren't enough for consultants | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ho no look what we found, look at what they have done. We now have to make the tough choices It is the tories fault. Blah blah I knew this was going to happen Same old shit So glad I never voted for this I cannot believe that I believe Jeremy Hunt, as I knew about the black hole before the election and I am just an everyday guy, so if Rachel Reeves is telling us she just found this out she is a fibber, who doesn't interview well. I had no hope that labour would be any better than the tories none. I feel like I am in a political wilderness with no one to vote for. it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. " Don't let facts get in the way of the righteous righties having a moan  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. I'm not sure where your numbers are from and how they tie up, but I've seen nothing that suggests the hole is smaller (which is what I think your are pointing at). The above suggests IFS see it as bigger, no? There was a 35b shortfall in the Autumn Statement. That was a Tory statement. Have you managed to watch Hunt question Reeves yesterday? Hunt said yesterday that they’re setting it up for tax hikes in the October budget. If he turns out to be right, the Labour Party will be shown to have been lying from the get go…, It could undo them before they’ve got off the line at this rate. " Yeah, we wouldn't want a different govt lying would we . 14 years is enough for any sane person, even a tory!
Just a thought, but how the heck were tories going to reduce taxes? That would not have been the lie to end all lies? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. I'm not sure where your numbers are from and how they tie up, but I've seen nothing that suggests the hole is smaller (which is what I think your are pointing at). The above suggests IFS see it as bigger, no? There was a 35b shortfall in the Autumn Statement. That was a Tory statement. Have you managed to watch Hunt question Reeves yesterday? Hunt said yesterday that they’re setting it up for tax hikes in the October budget. If he turns out to be right, the Labour Party will be shown to have been lying from the get go…, It could undo them before they’ve got off the line at this rate. " I think he is right in that they are preparing the public for more tax increases and/ or cuts but I would be very surprised if they break their pledge on not raising things like income tax. Now they have penalised pensioners for saving for their retirement and getting Britain building by cancelling building projects, I suspect changes to ISA and maybe the tax free amount you can get in normal saving accounts. Possibly a hike in petrol duty. Inheritance tax a possibility. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yeah, we wouldn't want a different govt lying would we . 14 years is enough for any sane person, even a tory!
Just a thought, but how the heck were tories going to reduce taxes? That would not have been the lie to end all lies? "Exactly. The Tories are huffing and puffing to distract from the fact that they maxed out the credit card. The grown ups realise this and know that very difficult spending cuts and tax increases have to be implemented, whichever party is in power. Labour has said they will try to protect working people and tax wealth to try to balance the books. Some Tories are squealing like little pigs forgetting they created this whole mess in the first place. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it sounds as if the the black hole is bigger than was first thought by IFS and ONS. we all new the previous government had created a black hole. but we, the IFS nor the ONS and others, could accurately calculate the size of it while the previous government was hiding the data from outside scrutiny. All this bullshit about the IFS not knowing, they reported months back that we'd need to find £35b. You've fallen for 'it's all the Tories fault' hook, line and sinker. it can be both. Part of the hole was known about. Part of it not. “Rachel Reeves is within her rights to feel somewhat aggrieved. It was always clear and obvious that the spending plans she inherited were incompatible with Labour’s ambitions for public services, and that more cash would be required eventually. But the extent of the in-year funding pressures does genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside, which only adds to the scale of the problem." [Some stuff was known] "Nonetheless, some of the specifics are indeed shocking, and raise some difficult questions for the last government. If the scale of these overspends and spending pressures was apparent in the spring – and in lots of cases, there’s no reason to suppose otherwise – then it is hard to understand why they weren’t made clear or dealt with in the Spring Budget. Jeremy Hunt’s £10 billion cut to national insurance looks ever less defensible. On asylum costs, the decision to effectively stop processing claimants, and to budget virtually nothing for the resultant costs of housing them, looks like very poor policy making. The new Chancellor is right to be cross." So we've gone from needing £35b to needing £22b. That's a difference of £13b. Yet all the focus is on the latter figure, which is less than the former. Of course there's a massive hole, we all knew about, apart from Labour apparently. I'm not sure where your numbers are from and how they tie up, but I've seen nothing that suggests the hole is smaller (which is what I think your are pointing at). The above suggests IFS see it as bigger, no? There was a 35b shortfall in the Autumn Statement. That was a Tory statement. Have you managed to watch Hunt question Reeves yesterday? Hunt said yesterday that they’re setting it up for tax hikes in the October budget. If he turns out to be right, the Labour Party will be shown to have been lying from the get go…, It could undo them before they’ve got off the line at this rate. I think he is right in that they are preparing the public for more tax increases and/ or cuts but I would be very surprised if they break their pledge on not raising things like income tax. Now they have penalised pensioners for saving for their retirement and getting Britain building by cancelling building projects, I suspect changes to ISA and maybe the tax free amount you can get in normal saving accounts. Possibly a hike in petrol duty. Inheritance tax a possibility." Not enough to be made through those options in my opinion. They spent 9.5 billion yesterday, that’s not bad for the first 25 days. Rayner has gone full dictator, you will not have a say in the amount of houses we are going to build in your back garden or where we decide to put them, you haven’t a choice. They are going to force some kind of infrastructure upgrade to support these unmanaged, unchallenged builds, but I haven’t a clue how they propose to do it and I don’t think she does to be honest, but it sounds okay to the feckless who will be the beneficiaries of Rayners dictatorship. The race to the bottom is well and truly on, day 25. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's with all the hooha re reducing criteria for winter fuel payments? Suddenly the righteous righties want all oldies to get it but want other welfare payments stopped, like child benefit (NOT to be confused with child tax credits). Yet historically you'll find charities like the Joseph rowntree foundation go up in arms as it prevents a certain amount of child poverty (they may even continue to do so). I know there are going to be pensioners who just miss out, but in all benefits there are those who slip through the net" Yes the Tories are supposed to stand for a small state and individual responsibility. I bet they opposed WFA when Gordon Brown introduced it in 1997. Tories generally hate GB but now are squealing with rage when one of his policies has been abandoned. Farcical. I think their attacks on Labour were due to being in purdah for the start of their Leadership election. But I read they have now restarted their infighting attacking Kemi Badenoch earlier today. The Tories will never change. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. " What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements," Agreed. Well done them. But they clearly don’t need WFA so let’s get real on that. Or if not then I want my Child Benefit back! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, Agreed. Well done them. But they clearly don’t need WFA so let’s get real on that. Or if not then I want my Child Benefit back! "They can have what ever their hearts desire, the money they must have pumped into the countries assets over the years, £300 is a little thank you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements," | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, Agreed. Well done them. But they clearly don’t need WFA so let’s get real on that. Or if not then I want my Child Benefit back!
They can have what ever their hearts desire, the money they must have pumped into the countries assets over the years, £300 is a little thank you"Ok but then I want my child benefit back as I have added an indigenous person to the future workforce who will pay tax and help support all of our state pensions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, Agreed. Well done them. But they clearly don’t need WFA so let’s get real on that. Or if not then I want my Child Benefit back!
They can have what ever their hearts desire, the money they must have pumped into the countries assets over the years, £300 is a little thank you"Oh beeeeehave. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, Agreed. Well done them. But they clearly don’t need WFA so let’s get real on that. Or if not then I want my Child Benefit back!
They can have what ever their hearts desire, the money they must have pumped into the countries assets over the years, £300 is a little thank you
Ok but then I want my child benefit back as I have added an indigenous person to the future workforce who will pay tax and help support all of our state pensions. "Not the same I’m afraid you took a punt, if your kids cut it we will think about reimbursing you, unless they went private and we will demand back payment for nothing in particular but we don’t like people who can afford to go elsewhere. I’m practicing to become a labour minister, how am I doing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, Agreed. Well done them. But they clearly don’t need WFA so let’s get real on that. Or if not then I want my Child Benefit back!
They can have what ever their hearts desire, the money they must have pumped into the countries assets over the years, £300 is a little thank you
Ok but then I want my child benefit back as I have added an indigenous person to the future workforce who will pay tax and help support all of our state pensions.
Not the same I’m afraid you took a punt, if your kids cut it we will think about reimbursing you, unless they went private and we will demand back payment for nothing in particular but we don’t like people who can afford to go elsewhere.
I’m practicing to become a labour minister, how am I doing? "You’ve been studying well sir! All that money my kid saved tax payers by not using the state school system means naff all clearly! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements," I can't say I'm "proud of their achievements" honestly. My grandmother has always been on benefits, except for 1 year at about 15 years old where she worked in a cotton mill. My grandfather also didn't work till he hit 52. But they did amazingly with my great-granparents, they inherited a fortune. I'm very proud of my great-grandparents and their achievements, they came to the UK with nothing but trauma for WW2 and worked exceedingly hard. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, I can't say I'm "proud of their achievements" honestly. My grandmother has always been on benefits, except for 1 year at about 15 years old where she worked in a cotton mill. My grandfather also didn't work till he hit 52. But they did amazingly with my great-granparents, they inherited a fortune. I'm very proud of my great-grandparents and their achievements, they came to the UK with nothing but trauma for WW2 and worked exceedingly hard. " The gift of inheritance, such a beautiful gift to pass on your hard earned to the people you love. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, I can't say I'm "proud of their achievements" honestly. My grandmother has always been on benefits, except for 1 year at about 15 years old where she worked in a cotton mill. My grandfather also didn't work till he hit 52. But they did amazingly with my great-granparents, they inherited a fortune. I'm very proud of my great-grandparents and their achievements, they came to the UK with nothing but trauma for WW2 and worked exceedingly hard. The gift of inheritance, such a beautiful gift to pass on your hard earned to the people you love." Exactly that! It's nice to think those properties etc have stayed in the family to the next generation and may do for another (if my Mom is lucky!) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The grandparents are pissed about it. They own quite the portfolio of properties, spend 7 months of the year in 2 abroad properties and I'd struggle to imagine what they have in the bank. But the winter fuel payment they got used to cover pretty much their entire gas bill as they'd be away in Spain or Portugal usually. What a wonderfully successful couple they are, and I’m glad they’re relaxing in their latter years. You Must very proud of their achievements, I can't say I'm "proud of their achievements" honestly. My grandmother has always been on benefits, except for 1 year at about 15 years old where she worked in a cotton mill. My grandfather also didn't work till he hit 52. But they did amazingly with my great-granparents, they inherited a fortune. I'm very proud of my great-grandparents and their achievements, they came to the UK with nothing but trauma for WW2 and worked exceedingly hard. The gift of inheritance, such a beautiful gift to pass on your hard earned to the people you love. Exactly that! It's nice to think those properties etc have stayed in the family to the next generation and may do for another (if my Mom is lucky!) "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
