Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So all parties look set to slash pensioners perks

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited June 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So all parties look set to slash pensioners perks

Osborne suggests that pensioners perks like winter fuel allowance could be cut
http://t.co/jbEyjR6uAm pic.twitter.com/2UZ6c7mYqS

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    The idea that we could ever have ring-fenced pensioner benefits with an ageing population and the recession/austerity was always a fantasy. It's a testament to the voting power of the over 60s that it's been this long until politicians will say so publicly.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited June 2013
    Necessary. Quincel has this one dead right. In which case, it's not 'election gamble or just facing reality', but in fact both.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    These have been ring-fenced because of Cameron's comments in the final debate of GE2010.

    The LDs should have demanded that this commitment be ignored as part of the coalition agreement - like student fees.

    In the current context they now look indefensible.

    Quincel said:

    The idea that we could ever have ring-fenced pensioner benefits with an ageing population and the recession/austerity was always a fantasy. It's a testament to the voting power of the over 60s that it's been this long until politicians will say so publicly.

  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    The threat to withdraw bus passes could be far more problematic as,on many routes, especially in more rural areas,it's hard to find a paying customer,and could threaten bus services dramatically.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    I hope that Labour have the guts to go into the campaign on the basis of eliminating some of the most egregious perks. That will enable the Tories to do the same (or at least not force them to make a silly pledge) and we can start looking at big elements of public spending in a more rational way. Personally, I'd just fold the winter fuel allowance into the regular pension and abolish the free TV licence (not sure who pays for it - if the BBC then the overall licence fee should be reduced to offset the extra income).

    Volcanopete - if there are no paying customers, why should the bus routes continue?
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    tim said:

    All parties?

    What about that xenophobic pensioners party known as UKIP?

    Yep, we wonder. UKIP will be delighted; its grins all round for 2015.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    tim said:


    What about that xenophobic pensioners party known as UKIP?

    UKIP's flat tax rate of 10% will pay for pension increases for all.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Check the video on the last thread. From the outside looking in at 4 minute and 10 seconds it looks like Tim Montgomerie
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited June 2013
    The TV licence fee was an appalling cobble up by Gordon Brown. As I understand it any household where there is someone aged 75+ living gets it irrespective of their means or the financial position of others in the household.

    It is paid by the tax-payer.

    The national pensioners bus pass scheme was announced by Brown in September 2007 when we were getting a big development a day from the LAB government. It was all in anticipation of the GE2007 that wasn't.

    I like my bus pass and would happily pay for it or accept a tax charge.

    Charles said:

    I hope that Labour have the guts to go into the campaign on the basis of eliminating some of the most egregious perks. That will enable the Tories to do the same (or at least not force them to make a silly pledge) and we can start looking at big elements of public spending in a more rational way. Personally, I'd just fold the winter fuel allowance into the regular pension and abolish the free TV licence (not sure who pays for it - if the BBC then the overall licence fee should be reduced to offset the extra income).

    Volcanopete - if there are no paying customers, why should the bus routes continue?

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited June 2013


    I like my bus pass and would happily pay for it or accept a tax charge.


    Charles said:

    I hope that Labour have the guts to go into the campaign on the basis of eliminating some of the most egregious perks. That will enable the Tories to do the same (or at least not force them to make a silly pledge) and we can start looking at big elements of public spending in a more rational way. Personally, I'd just fold the winter fuel allowance into the regular pension and abolish the free TV licence (not sure who pays for it - if the BBC then the overall licence fee should be reduced to offset the extra income).

    Volcanopete - if there are no paying customers, why should the bus routes continue?

    I've no issue with companies offering pensioners discounts!

    I just don't see why the taxpayer should pay for it. My mother loves hers - uses it whenever she comes to London. But she's not the best use of scarce state resources.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    Afternoon all :)

    One of the problems for any political party in building a coalition (as it were) of voters is that the voters in the coalition may sense they have a disproportionate influence over Government policy.

    As OGH frequently tells us, "it was the old wot won it" for the Conservatives in 2010 and those who believe that Conservative majority Government rule is gone forever should consider the demographics. If you win among the old, you'll probably win overall.

    In some respects, the "elderly bloc" is akin to the "Union bloc" of the 1960s and 1970s though currently less organised (but that might soon change). Any rational analysis of public spending if starting from the premise of no sacred cows would have to include some of these "benefits".

    That said, Mr Stodge Senior, at 85 years young, feels that strong sense of entitlement despite working all his life and serving in the Armed Forces.

    It will be "courageous" for any political parties to take on this group but better to make the challenge in advance rather than (as the LDs did so disastrously in 2010) make a commitment in Opposition and perform a volte-face in Government.

    The memory of the political debacle that was Norman Lamont's VAT on fuel in 1992 and the political carnage that caused the Conservatives in the succeeding years should be a salutary lesson.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    edited June 2013
    Removing the winter fuel allowance, free TV licences and bus passes isn't exactly a Logan's Run solution. However, political bullshit (especially given pensioners actually vote) may mean that we still don't shift this as much as we should.

    Pensioners find it hard to alter their income (relative to other groups, although it's worth noting we have more OAPs working than ever before), so changing what the state gives them will always be contentious. That said, the youth of today will work longer for less. It's not on to expect them to subsidise perks they can never hope to enjoy.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    One of the problems for any political party in building a coalition (as it were) of voters is that the voters in the coalition may sense they have a disproportionate influence over Government policy.

    As OGH frequently tells us, "it was the old wot won it" for the Conservatives in 2010 and those who believe that Conservative majority Government rule is gone forever should consider the demographics. If you win among the old, you'll probably win overall.

    In some respects, the "elderly bloc" is akin to the "Union bloc" of the 1960s and 1970s though currently less organised (but that might soon change). Any rational analysis of public spending if starting from the premise of no sacred cows would have to include some of these "benefits".

    That said, Mr Stodge Senior, at 85 years young, feels that strong sense of entitlement despite working all his life and serving in the Armed Forces.

    It will be "courageous" for any political parties to take on this group but better to make the challenge in advance rather than (as the LDs did so disastrously in 2010) make a commitment in Opposition and perform a volte-face in Government.

    The memory of the political debacle that was Norman Lamont's VAT on fuel in 1992 and the political carnage that caused the Conservatives in the succeeding years should be a salutary lesson.

    This is why Cameron has been resisting the generous advice from his political opponents that he go back on his promise. He may regret it now, but it is a promise he has been personally identified with.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    What would be really great if this welcome move was the first indication that all parties were going to embrace full means testing for all benefits and the return to the principle of the welfare system as a minimum safety net and nothing more.

    Won't happen for a while of course as the entitlement culture is now too ingrained into the British mindset. But the western social model is already dead. We just need it to be properly buried.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited June 2013
    These gimmicks never make sense. Gordon decided just before being ejected that all those with cancer should no longer pay prescription charges irrespective of severity whether it was likely to return or anything else and it applied to all prescriptions not just ones related to cancer.

    Why cancer why not other life threatening-or not-conditions?

    Because it could produce the biggest headline. That's all
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741

    Removing the winter fuel allowance, free TV licences and bus passes isn't exactly a Logan's Run solution. However, political bullshit (especially given pensioners actually vote) may mean that we still don't shift this as much as we should.

    Pensioners find it hard to alter their income (relative to other groups, although it's worth noting we have more OAPs working than ever before), so changing what the state gives them will always be contentious. That said, the youth of today will work longer for less. It's not on to expect them to subsidise perks they can never hope to enjoy.

    I think the problem is that pensioners, many of whom are dependent on savings, have been disproportionately badly affected by the recession post-2008 as interest rates have collapsed.

    The working family with a mortgage (especially a tracker or offset mortgage) have done extremely well and, with secure employment, may barely have noticed the recession.

    This is, I think, a factor in the emergence of UKIP as traditional Conservative-voting pensioners have had cause to ask what this Government has done for them.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Stodge, that's a very good point.
  • FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    edited June 2013
    Roger said:

    These gimmicks never make sense. Gordon decided just before being ejected that all those with cancer should no longer pay prescription charges irrespective of severity whether it was likely to return or anything else and it applied to all prescriptions not just ones related to cancer.

    Why cancer why not other life threatening-or not-conditions?

    Because it could produce the biggest headline. That's all

    Wodger,

    You are starting to scare me! You have started sounding as someone to the "left" of me with a brain-cell. And we all know that that cannot be you.... :)
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    http://t.co/6m9EJgk2aJ

    I was intrigued by this from OGH earlier in the week which showed the extent to which the Conservatives still have a big chance to win the next election. Given the 30% or so of the electorate which represents the Conservative core vote, the 48% of UKIP supporters wanting a majority Conservative Government suggests a potential pool of 7-8% additional voters who could yet be persuaded to back the blue team.

    As we also know that UKIP support is disproportionately older, it seems there remains a key element of the elderly who might make the difference.

    Contrast with the lower number wanting a majority Labour Government and the lower percentage of that desire among UKIP supporters.

    In addition to the above, of course, the biggest prize of all is the 20-25% of the electorate who have yet to decide what they want.

  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    I don't think there's anything wrong with spending money on pensioners, they deserve a decent lifestyle at the end of a working life, and I hate the idea of filling in forms and all the bureaucracy that comes with means testing.

    But what could the government cut apart from winter fuel payments and TV licences that make up only £2.8bn in this tax year? The other £108bn that pensioners get (according to the IFS) is made up as follows:

    Total pensions (including credit): £89.5
    DLA: £10.5
    HB: £6.4
    Other (?): £1.9

    I think the best thing is just to slowly increase the pension age in line with life expectancy (as Osborne suggested this morning). How is DLA and HB supposed to be cut for pensioners, unless more of them work?
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    Test
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Pensioner benefits should be taxed. Simples. Or even abolished in some cases, even if only to target the same money on needier cases.

    But this is fiddling at the margins. A million over 65 now work. This will skyrocket in coming decades, as society still has yet to work out how to adjust itself to increasing longevity. When "65" became the "standard" (male) retirement age life expectancy was I think about 66. It's gone up and continues to go up at 18-24 months a decade, has now reached late 70's and company pension schemes now have to assume an average age of death for 40 year olds of about 89. It cannot be made to add up across the board and stick to "65"(and hence the complete ongoing destruction of private sector final salary schemes now having the last rites, destroyed by demographics and idiotic govt taxes and regulation with QE the final knife twist) but politicians are scared of saying " look truth is mr and mrs voter you're all going to have to work a lot longer, starting a lot earlier than we've let on so far". Watch those state retirement ages go up faster and earlier than thus far flagged up no matter who is in power - I note Labour's commitment to the state pension levels recently had left that door wide open despite the headlines of "protecting pension levels" - and quite right too.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Ecuador appears to have gained a new potential resident

    Sky

    The whistleblower Edward Snowden, who leaked details about snooping carried out by the US government, has landed in Moscow after flying from Hong Kong.

    The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks, which says it is now representing Snowden, said he is using Moscow as a transit point to a third country.

    That country appears to be Ecaudor, after the Reuters news agency reported that the country's ambassador to Russia had arrived at a hotel near Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport.

    A car bearing the country's flag was also seen outside the airport, while the AFP news agency said that he had requested asylum in the South American country.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    'An eagerly awaited Newspoll has both parties down on the primary vote and little change to two-party preferred. Headline grabber: Labor primary vote below 30%.'

    The Australian’s Troy Bramston tweets that Newspoll has the Coalition leading 57-43, down from 58-42 last time. However, the poll has Labor’s primary vote below 30% for the first time this year, down one to 29%, with the Coalition also down a point to 48% and the Greens steady on 9%. Tony Abbott’s lead as preferred prime minister has reached a new peak of 45-33, up from 43-35 at the last poll three weeks ago, but personal ratings are little changed: Julia Gillard is steady at 28% approval and 62% disapproval, while Abbott is down one to 36% and steady at 53%.

    As Parliament returns for its last week before the election tomorrow, is it now curtains for Gillard?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    O/T

    Mr. Dancer, as our resident expert: clearing out some old books. Should I keep the Tom Holland Rubicon series - never got round to reading them, but should I do so at some point?
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    A wealth tax would do the job better.

    Why should people who don't work still get to own their own homes?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Plato said:

    Ecuador appears to have gained a new potential resident

    Sky

    The whistleblower Edward Snowden, who leaked details about snooping carried out by the US government, has landed in Moscow after flying from Hong Kong.

    The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks, which says it is now representing Snowden, said he is using Moscow as a transit point to a third country.

    That country appears to be Ecaudor, after the Reuters news agency reported that the country's ambassador to Russia had arrived at a hotel near Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport.

    A car bearing the country's flag was also seen outside the airport, while the AFP news agency said that he had requested asylum in the South American country.

    IIRC Assange was apparently some complicated 'bait the American' scheme but doesn't seem to have worked well (Ecuador stuck in an inelegant stalemale that doesn't look to have a workable resolution that doesn't involve Assange going to Sweden). Perhaps, once Snowden is safe in Quito, and after a suitable time has elapsed, Assange could become more vulnerable to being kicked out of the Embassy?
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Osborne is being very cunning here.

    He needs to slash the non-cyclical welfare budget by £20 billion but is being frustrated from doing so by the Lib Dems who won't play unless he agrees to means test pensioner benefits.

    By suggesting he may be prepared to move on the fuel allowance, Osborne is calling the Lib Dems hand.

    Clegg can either stand firm and be isolated as the only party of the big three which is too frit to take the "hard decisions" or he returns to the table and joins with Osborne in agreeing a new base for welfare spending in the next parliament.

    The two Eds deciding to become Osborne's bitches on austerity leaves Clegg with little option but to join them.




  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    IOS said:

    A wealth tax would do the job better.

    Why should people who don't work still get to own their own homes?

    I'm going to assume that is drunk trolling.

    If not, then, from the bottom of my heart, please make that appear in Labour's manifesto next time round.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    When Jeffrey is being "cunning" then Tory hearts hould sink.

    His little ruses have hardly helped the blue team over the years.
    AveryLP said:

    Osborne is being very cunning here.

    He needs to slash the non-cyclical welfare budget by £20 billion but is being frustrated from doing so by the Lib Dems who won't play unless he agrees to means test pensioner benefits.

    By suggesting he may be prepared to move on the fuel allowance, Osborne is calling the Lib Dems hand.

    Clegg can either stand firm and be isolated as the only party of the big three which is too frit to take the "hard decisions" or he returns to the table and joins with Osborne in agreeing a new base for welfare spending in the next parliament.

    The two Eds deciding to become Osborne's bitches on austerity leaves Clegg with little option but to join them.




  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Charles, at the risk of making myself sound like an utter turnip-head, I'm afraid I've never read them. [On the subject of Rome falling I recently took note of books by Bryan Ward-Perkins and Ammianus Marcellinus].

    I'd just read the first chapter and make a judgement on that.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    Ecuador appears to have gained a new potential resident

    Sky

    The whistleblower Edward Snowden, who leaked details about snooping carried out by the US government, has landed in Moscow after flying from Hong Kong.

    The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks, which says it is now representing Snowden, said he is using Moscow as a transit point to a third country.

    That country appears to be Ecaudor, after the Reuters news agency reported that the country's ambassador to Russia had arrived at a hotel near Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport.

    A car bearing the country's flag was also seen outside the airport, while the AFP news agency said that he had requested asylum in the South American country.

    IIRC Assange was apparently some complicated 'bait the American' scheme but doesn't seem to have worked well (Ecuador stuck in an inelegant stalemale that doesn't look to have a workable resolution that doesn't involve Assange going to Sweden). Perhaps, once Snowden is safe in Quito, and after a suitable time has elapsed, Assange could become more vulnerable to being kicked out of the Embassy?
    I think you may be right. Assange blew himself up with very unflattering side issues/his bail sponsors deserting him. Snowden is also a much bigger real-life fish given his actual previous employment status [if only for 3 months].

    TBH, I feel rather sorry for the staff of the Ecuadorian embassy having Assange and his ego in perpetual residence - it must be like being haunted...
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Charles said:

    please make that appear in Labour's manifesto next time round.

    So far IOS has only been given responsibility for the rural affairs section of the next Labour manifesto. However if he keeps tweaking those algorithms so well he'll soon rise to ruler of all the manifesto writing section.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    I think the aspect of pensioner "benefits" and their affordability that astounds me is that the demographic "time-bomb" of an ageing population living longer has been known about for a fair while and certainly long before 2010.

    Indeed, I suspect the 1979-97 Conservative administration would have prepared projections as to future affordability of welfare payments of pensioners and that impact on the country's economic resources and while they might perhaps have assumed that continuous 4-5% annual economic growth would have made such benefits afforable in pepetuity, that seems an incredibly dangerous assumption to have made.

    It's analagous to those people who took out endowment mortgages in the 80s and 90s based on credible yet over-optimistic forecasts of profit and now find themselves with maturing policies well short of the amounts expected.

    The 1997-2010 Labour Governments are equally if not more complicit in this disaster as they could see the demographic crisis coming but either were too politically weak to make the economic and cultural changes required to combat it or too economically inept to realise that if 4-5% annual growth didn't happen, there might be big problems.

    The emerging concensus on this is encouraging but there seems sure to be a rearguard action against any change and it will be fascinating to see if UKIP decides to take on the mantle of the pro-pensioner party and how they will respond to questions about the ongoing affordability of these benefits.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Neil said:

    Charles said:

    please make that appear in Labour's manifesto next time round.

    So far IOS has only been given responsibility for the rural affairs section of the next Labour manifesto. However if he keeps tweaking those algorithms so well he'll soon rise to ruler of all the manifesto writing section.
    There are times I miss the 'like' button
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Jeffrey?

    It's ridiculous that Obama being ignorant is somehow a negative against Osborne (who has plenty of real negatives to deal with). Then again, he was attacked for being on a yacht and neither taking nor asking for donations from him.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    OT

    I am not sure if this has already been mentioned as it was from yesterday's Telegraph but given his very strident statements that this simply will not happen I wonder what RCS is making of the latest announcement from Ofgem?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10136903/Energy-regulator-to-warn-over-blackouts.html

    I have never quite understood why Robert is so firm that blackouts will not happen.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    stodge said:

    Removing the winter fuel allowance, free TV licences and bus passes isn't exactly a Logan's Run solution. However, political bullshit (especially given pensioners actually vote) may mean that we still don't shift this as much as we should.

    Pensioners find it hard to alter their income (relative to other groups, although it's worth noting we have more OAPs working than ever before), so changing what the state gives them will always be contentious. That said, the youth of today will work longer for less. It's not on to expect them to subsidise perks they can never hope to enjoy.

    I think the problem is that pensioners, many of whom are dependent on savings, have been disproportionately badly affected by the recession post-2008 as interest rates have collapsed.

    The working family with a mortgage (especially a tracker or offset mortgage) have done extremely well and, with secure employment, may barely have noticed the recession.

    This is, I think, a factor in the emergence of UKIP as traditional Conservative-voting pensioners have had cause to ask what this Government has done for them.

    Now this is true. Gilt yields ( around which annuities revolve and therefore the price of any given £ of pension payment ) were last this low somewhere around the time the Duke of Marlborough was getting on his horse to trot off to Blenheim ie the early 18th century ( yes eighteenth). Notwithstanding last week's little rise from the floor these yields have crucified the spending power of anyone with savings and forced up the effective cost of pensions causing companies and individuals to save even more as defensive mechanisms thereby taking demand out of the economy. Those with debts have seen spending power protected by the same mechanisms. Where the balance lies is for future economic historians to fathom but QE sure ain't a painless panacea. Stil,l think of this, when the buyer of last resort with literally limitless cash exits the gilt market and starts to unwind the policy, not only will the buying have stopped but a whole third of the total stock of gilts will flow back to the market lowering prices and therefore ( 'cos it's hard maths folks) increase the yields artificially so what goes around comes around. Unless bond holders are paid back with inflated £'s to square the circle of course........
  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    A few random tidbits from the Sunday Times YouGov.

    Labour haven't had 2 consecutve weeks at less than 40% since November 2010.

    Tories with best numbers since Ukip's rise after last week in April. "Out of intensive care and into recovery".

    Lib Dems seems stuck on about 10% after starting to recover to 11% or 12% in March and April.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    IOS said:

    A wealth tax would do the job better.

    Why should people who don't work still get to own their own homes?

    I assume this is a joke. Please reassure me.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited June 2013
    One of Jeffrey's cunning stunts ;

    Why Gordon bottled a snap election in 2007.

    "Labour's own research showed that that the Tories' tax-cutting promises at Blackpool had scored well not just in the national polls but among voters in crucial marginal seats. The Conservatives' policy of cutting stamp duty had gone down well with young voters, while women in Middle England's marginal seats in particular were impressed by the Shadow Chancellor George Osborne's plan to raise the inheritance tax threshold from £300,000 to £1m. "It became clear that the inheritance tax had had a big impact in the marginals," said one Downing Street source."

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/election-what-election-why-brown-lost-his-bottle-394416.html
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited June 2013
    OT. The US and UK governments claiming to act in our names are bastards and deserve to get their comeuppance when the people finally rebel.

    Are we happy to have our phone's hacked or to have the whistleblowers who inform us of these facts arrested? I'm not and I'd be surprised if many of us are
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453


    His little ruses have hardly helped the blue team over the years.

    Yes, it's a shame his IHT plan wasn't enough to get Dave into Downing Street.

    Oh, wait...

    Now Ed is endorsing his spending plans. Another ruse that has back-fired.

    Oh, wait...

    Starbucks paying UK corporation tax for the first time in 5 years. Why didn't George sort that out?

    Oh, wait...

  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    Roger said:

    OT. The US and UK governments claiming to act in our names are bastards and deserve to get their comeuppance when the people finally rebel.

    Are we happy to have our phone's hacked or to have the whistleblowers who inform us of these facts arrested? I'm not and I'd be surprised if many of us are

    If Obama was a decent President , he'd recall Snowden to the US so as to award him with the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    edited June 2013
    Come on, India!!!

    [Sunil suddenly clutches his head, screaming, as his Tebbit Chip kicks in....]

    Aaaarrrrgh!!!

    [...before a more servile expression crosses his face]

    Must be loyal to England.... must be loyal...

    :)
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Ha Neil you take the piss but you know that it's the ground game that it all comes down too.

    Charles. My main concern is that people have had a massive capital windfall that they haven't worked for. So I would take a lot of that of them. Also don't see why those who don't work but get their mortgage paid by the state should benefit from ANY capital gains.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Roger

    'Are we happy to have our phone's hacked'

    I couldn't care less and if it results in one less person being murdered by Muslim nutters then it's job done.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    IOS said:

    y main concern is that people have had a massive capital windfall that they haven't worked for.

    You mean the Milibands and their 'tax efficient' estate planning?
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    IOS said:

    Ha Neil you take the piss but you know that it's the ground game that it all comes down too.

    Charles. My main concern is that people have had a massive capital windfall that they haven't worked for. So I would take a lot of that of them. Also don't see why those who don't work but get their mortgage paid by the state should benefit from ANY capital gains.

    Serious question: why then only capital gains on houses? Why not shares? Once purchased any increase isn't "worked for". Of course it would stuff everyone's pension totally mind so we'd all have no hope of retiring and would be working into ancient old age. Mind you that would solve the problem of "nobody not working can have a house" - I paraphrase- as we'd all have to work till we dropped, as the entire concept of investing for the future would've gone west too.

    Are you my father in law? He has this view of the world as far as I can work out.....
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    To be fair I do think you overplay Osborne slightly on the bad campaign Tim.

    The campaign was screwed long before the short campaign by the Tories just not having a clue what a ground campaign looks like. Fortunately we can almost say the Tories have screwed the next one as well.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    IOS said:

    To be fair I do think you overplay Osborne slightly on the bad campaign Tim.

    The campaign was screwed long before the short campaign by the Tories just not having a clue what a ground campaign looks like. Fortunately we can almost say the Tories have screwed the next one as well.

    If the Tories screwed up so badly, how come Labour have been in opposition since 2010?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    IOS said:

    To be fair I do think you overplay Osborne slightly on the bad campaign Tim.

    Nobody has been more intensely, consistently and comprehensively wrong than tim on Osborne.

    Who can forget, man on a boat, man gets out of a car, man cries at a funeral, and of course everyone's favourite, the bet that paid for the PB Tories cocktail night, man will apologise for agreeing with his opponent.

    It's an impressive record, one that may never be matched.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    IOS said:

    Ha Neil you take the piss but you know that it's the ground game that it all comes down too.

    Charles. My main concern is that people have had a massive capital windfall that they haven't worked for. So I would take a lot of that of them. Also don't see why those who don't work but get their mortgage paid by the state should benefit from ANY capital gains.

    And why exactly should you or anyone else have the right to "take a lot of that of [sic] them"?

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Scott_P said:

    the bet that paid for the PB Tories cocktail night

    It may have paid for the cocktail night - unfortunately it didnt stretch to the return train fare to Bournemouth.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    IOS said:

    Ha Neil you take the piss but you know that it's the ground game that it all comes down too.

    Charles. My main concern is that people have had a massive capital windfall that they haven't worked for. So I would take a lot of that of them. Also don't see why those who don't work but get their mortgage paid by the state should benefit from ANY capital gains.

    IOS would you be happy to compensate those who lose money in real estate speculation?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    john_zims said:

    @Roger

    'Are we happy to have our phone's hacked'

    I couldn't care less and if it results in one less person being murdered by Muslim nutters then it's job done.

    Yet another of the idiotic "if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" brigade. Of course what these people always assume is that the definition of "done nothing wrong" will be the one they agree with. They soon start shouting when it is the them who is being spied upon and the laws are used in some way they hadn't envisaged.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Richard_Tyndall

    Not as bad as these 'i'm being spied on' paranoid idiots.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    john_zims said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    Not as bad as these 'i'm being spied on' paranoid idiots.

    Those" paranoid idiots" were right. Who's the idiot ?

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    It is clear that Osborne is close to restoring his standing in the Tory party. Last year’s unravelling Budget is becoming an increasingly distant memory. His track record at getting those close to him promoted means that ministers and MPs are increasingly keen to be seen as in his camp. At the same time, Balls’s unpopularity has neutered some of the arguments about whether Osborne is an electoral liability. Revealingly, some of those closest to him have once again begun to wonder about whether he might be a candidate to move next door at some point.

    Osborne’s political career to date has been marked by pronounced highs and deep lows. Another trough would revive all the old questions about him. But if the economy really is in for a period of stable growth, then the Chancellor will have an opportunity to establish himself as the dominant force in the parliamentary Conservative party.
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/politics/8940631/george-osbornes-own-personal-recovery/
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    john_zims said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    Not as bad as these 'i'm being spied on' paranoid idiots.

    Except of course it turns out they were right. So not paranoid and not idiots.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Scott_P said:

    It is clear that Osborne is close to restoring his standing in the Tory party.
    The Speccie has this slightly wrong.

    The first line should have been:

    Osborne is close to restoring the standing of the Tory party.

    It is the reason tim is raging at the dying of the rose tinted light.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    john_zims said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    Not as bad as these 'i'm being spied on' paranoid idiots.

    Except of course it turns out they were right. So not paranoid and not idiots.
    But rarely in the specific - it's possible to be a parnoid idiot and still be right from time to time.

    The man who wanders the streets saying 'the end of the world is nigh' will be right one day. But I postulate that he is a paranoid idiot.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    I've criticised any "deserving" model of benefits such as the winter fuel payment, and I hope that this isn't a shift by the Tories. As I said at the time Labour said similar, I don't oppose this sort of thing, because I think it can be incorporated into a "need" model fine. It's the language used in the shift I'm looking for (concerned with for Labour; yet to hear from the Conservatives).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    john_zims said:

    @Roger

    'Are we happy to have our phone's hacked'

    I couldn't care less and if it results in one less person being murdered by Muslim nutters then it's job done.

    Yet another of the idiotic "if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" brigade. Of course what these people always assume is that the definition of "done nothing wrong" will be the one they agree with. They soon start shouting when it is the them who is being spied upon and the laws are used in some way they hadn't envisaged.
    That sounds like a good reason to post this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wXMnjLU63I

    "If you've done nothing wrong
    You've got nothing to fear
    If you've something to hide
    You shouldn't even be here "

    and, prophetically:

    "Everyone has their own number in the system that we operate under
    We're moving to a situation where your lives exist as information"
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    How can we tell that Osborne has comprehensively won the spending argument?

    Even the Lib Dems are laughing at Labour

    @politicshome
    Lib Dem MP @malcolmbruce: Labour's acceptance of some welfare spending restraints "undermines their credibility." @JPonpolitics
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846

    john_zims said:

    @Roger

    'Are we happy to have our phone's hacked'

    I couldn't care less and if it results in one less person being murdered by Muslim nutters then it's job done.

    Yet another of the idiotic "if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" brigade. Of course what these people always assume is that the definition of "done nothing wrong" will be the one they agree with. They soon start shouting when it is the them who is being spied upon and the laws are used in some way they hadn't envisaged.
    That sounds like a good reason to post this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wXMnjLU63I

    "If you've done nothing wrong
    You've got nothing to fear
    If you've something to hide
    You shouldn't even be here "

    and, prophetically:

    "Everyone has their own number in the system that we operate under
    We're moving to a situation where your lives exist as information"
    I am kind of hot and cold with the PSB but that (along with a number of their other tracks) is fantastic
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    Charles said:

    john_zims said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    Not as bad as these 'i'm being spied on' paranoid idiots.

    Except of course it turns out they were right. So not paranoid and not idiots.
    But rarely in the specific - it's possible to be a parnoid idiot and still be right from time to time.

    The man who wanders the streets saying 'the end of the world is nigh' will be right one day. But I postulate that he is a paranoid idiot.
    Agreed. But we were arguing about the specifics of those who claimed there was wholesale spying on people rather than targeted against individuals. Turns out they were right after all.

    More to the point John is just indulging in a deflection strategy to avoid the basic argument about whether people should welcome or fear wholesale intrusive government monitoring of the population.
  • AveryLP said:

    Scott_P said:

    It is clear that Osborne is close to restoring his standing in the Tory party.
    The Speccie has this slightly wrong.

    The first line should have been:

    Osborne is close to restoring the standing of the Tory party.

    It is the reason tim is raging at the dying of the rose tinted light.
    I don't think brand 'Osbourne' will ever be palatable to the electorate. Like Ed Balls he lacks any kind of 'likeability'.

    From that point of view it's far more important that he helps restore the fortunes of the wider party. If by 2015 he has helped restore the Tory party as the party of economic competece then a 1992 style result may be possible. It also helps that Labour are all over the shop on the economy at the moment. Which perhaps explains their comparatively small mid-term poll lead.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited June 2013

    These have been ring-fenced because of Cameron's comments in the final debate of GE2010.

    The LDs should have demanded that this commitment be ignored as part of the coalition agreement - like student fees.

    Probably if Clegg and those around him were thinking of dumping that welfare spending back then.

    Clegg is using it now as it has the utility of exposing Osbrowne's posturing to gullible tories over yet more welfare cuts since Clegg usually replies "when you do so for the richest pensioners". Clegg knows Osbrowne won't dare do that this side of the election.



  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    edited June 2013

    john_zims said:

    @Roger

    'Are we happy to have our phone's hacked'

    I couldn't care less and if it results in one less person being murdered by Muslim nutters then it's job done.

    Yet another of the idiotic "if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" brigade. Of course what these people always assume is that the definition of "done nothing wrong" will be the one they agree with. They soon start shouting when it is the them who is being spied upon and the laws are used in some way they hadn't envisaged.
    That sounds like a good reason to post this:

    "If you've done nothing wrong
    You've got nothing to fear
    If you've something to hide
    You shouldn't even be here "

    and, prophetically:

    "Everyone has their own number in the system that we operate under
    We're moving to a situation where your lives exist as information"
    That's a good song with a great message! Depeche Mode had a number with a slightly different gist:

    Now you're standing there tongue-tied
    You'd better learn your lesson well
    Hide what you have to hide
    And tell what you have to tell

    You'll see your problems multiply
    If you continually decide
    To faithfully pursue
    The policy of truth

    Never again
    Is what you swore
    The time before


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2VBmHOYpV8
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Cook
    Bell
    Trott
    Root

    Is that anyone's dream Twenty20 batting line up?

    Might I suggest the England cricket team try some

    F L E X I B L E T H I N K I N G
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Breaking : Mandela Condition now critical.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    Paul Goodman on Conhom - Cameron's coming reshuffle will be a reshuffle for women

    "Having reshaped his Cabinet substantially last summer - sacking two Cabinet Ministers in the process - David Cameron is unlikely to do so again during this one. This is because to do so would both risk destabilising his already fractious Parliamentary Party, and offend his instinct to keep changes to his front bench to a minimum. From the Prime Minister's point of view, it makes sense to delay a substantial Cabinet clearout until next summer, when a team can be put in place to fight the election in 2015.

    Leaving the next big shuffle until later in the Parliament will also minimise any backlash from sacked Ministers, since they will rally round Cameron during the election run-up (that's the theory, at any rate). The claim that Sir George Young will stay in post for the time being would dovetail with such an approach. The Prime Minister's most likely reshuffle course, therefore, will be to restrict change to the lower ranks of the Government - but to promote to just below Cabinet level men and women who, in his view, are capable of making it to the top table next year.
    Especially women. Remember David Cameron's opposition pledge to aim at making a third of his Ministers women by the end of the Parliament. The promise was always a little ambiguous, and the Party is in coalition. But Conservative women MPs won't have forgotten the pledge. (Neither will Conservative male ones, for that matter.) Nor will the Prime Minister himself, who is anxious about the Party's slide in ratings among women voters. Furthermore, those two Cabinet Ministers dismissed last year were both women: Cheryl Gillan and Caroline Spelman.

    I suspect that the proportion of women on Cameron's Commons front bench will be larger than it is now once the reshuffle has taken place. The Prime Minister would do well to stick with rather than sack the women he has in Cabinet already. But if there were vacancies, the women Ministers below Cabinet level are: Helen Grant, Esther McVey, Chloe Smith, Anna Soubry and Elizabeth Truss. Cameron will have an eye to regional balance as well as political outlook if he is looking to promote one or more of them."
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @another_richard But those four are admirably monosyllabic working class names, a world away from cricket's image of catering for out-of-touch public school fops. There's no pleasing you.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279

    The threat to withdraw bus passes could be far more problematic as,on many routes, especially in more rural areas,it's hard to find a paying customer,and could threaten bus services dramatically.

    Excellent point @volcanopete. It will be interesting to see how Danny Alexander as the Libdem presence at the Treasury deals with this issue, as well as OAP winter fuel payments considering the rural Highlands seat he currently represents.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    NewsBreaker ‏@NewsBreaker 4m

    FULL STATEMENT: Nelson Mandela's conditioned has worsened; now critical - @PresidencyZA pic.twitter.com/1FGu4K07Zl
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    Apologies for the crap formatting/spelling/etc. I'm trying to tap this out on a not very good nokia phone (don't buy one, they're awful)

    Anyway, on topic

    it's about time the boomers started contributing, but it needs to go much further than just axing the free bus passes. I don't doubt that it will seem unfair to the pensioners that they were promised all this stuff and now it's being taken away, but they need to understand they were sold a lie. The boomers had too few children and are living far too long for their children (and grandchildren) to pay the bill. The generational settlement is null and void & needs renegotiating.

    We should do these things immediately;

    1. Make retirement much more flexible - the general retirement age needs to rise to the mid-70's. that's what todays young people can expect
    2.pop the btl/house price asset bubble With german-style renting rights. Your grandchildrens right to rent/buy an affordable house to live & raise a family in trumps your right to a btl property portfolio.
    3. backdate £9k tuition fees to all graduates. Charge interest at commercial rates, but allow penalty-free immediate repayment. That would make a decent dent in the national debt
    4. Expand the scale of the QE programme to cover much more of the total debt, then go for a bout of hyperinflation. I'm convinced this is the plan anyway, but we can be more aggressive about it. It's the most painless way to default on the unaffordable obligations to the oldies.

    94. Remove free bus passes
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2013

    AveryLP said:

    Scott_P said:

    It is clear that Osborne is close to restoring his standing in the Tory party.
    The Speccie has this slightly wrong.

    The first line should have been:

    Osborne is close to restoring the standing of the Tory party.

    It is the reason tim is raging at the dying of the rose tinted light.
    I don't think brand 'Osbourne' will ever be palatable to the electorate. Like Ed Balls he lacks any kind of 'likeability'.

    From that point of view it's far more important that he helps restore the fortunes of the wider party. If by 2015 he has helped restore the Tory party as the party of economic competece then a 1992 style result may be possible. It also helps that Labour are all over the shop on the economy at the moment. Which perhaps explains their comparatively small mid-term poll lead.
    Osborne is not an obvious candidate for electoral adoration or national leadership.

    But don't underestimate the need for the British to mock and often dislike the political leaders they respect the most.

    He can be David's rock.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Andy Murray wins Queens;

    Justin Rose first Englishman to win the US Open golf tournament in decades;

    HM Queen becomes the first reigning monarch to win the Ascot Gold Cup;

    The Lions win the first Rugby test against Australia;

    Mo Farah storms home in 5,000 metres at European Athletics Team Championships;

    British Eight and two women's pairs win Gold at the Rowing World Cup;

    and,

    England wins the ICC Trophy.

    Not a Lib Dem performance in sight.


    F**king Coalition Cricket!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766

    OT

    I am not sure if this has already been mentioned as it was from yesterday's Telegraph but given his very strident statements that this simply will not happen I wonder what RCS is making of the latest announcement from Ofgem?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10136903/Energy-regulator-to-warn-over-blackouts.html

    I have never quite understood why Robert is so firm that blackouts will not happen.

    I think the best reason why I am sceptical of blackout is this line in the article:

    "Mr Atherton said the risk was not of blackouts but of a “substantial price spike” needed to attract mothballed gas plants back on. “You are looking at 15pc to 20pc on retail bills,” he said."

    Alternatively, we can introduce a scheme to pay people to put capacity in now that we don't need. That would, however, require payments to generators to develop plant they would not otherwise develop, which would raise rates now.

    So: do you think the government will (a) raise power prices now, to prevent possible power price rises in 2015/2016; or (b) chance power prices rising 20% in 2015/2016?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    OT

    I am not sure if this has already been mentioned as it was from yesterday's Telegraph but given his very strident statements that this simply will not happen I wonder what RCS is making of the latest announcement from Ofgem?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10136903/Energy-regulator-to-warn-over-blackouts.html

    I have never quite understood why Robert is so firm that blackouts will not happen.

    As I remember young Bob thinks blackouts are impossible because the market isn't predicting any.

    But then again the markets didn't predict banks crashing and the worst recession for over 100 years either.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Richard_Tyndall

    'More to the point John is just indulging in a deflection strategy to avoid the basic argument about whether people should welcome or fear wholesale intrusive government monitoring of the population.'

    Wrong,as I said in my initial response I couldn't care less.

    Whilst some people have always got to find something to worry about,I would imagine in general, this issue has the same level of concern as the lunch menu in the local town hall. .
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    "But if there were vacancies, the women Ministers below Cabinet level are: Helen Grant, Esther McVey, Chloe Smith, Anna Soubry and Elizabeth Truss"

    Esther McVey!!! All the appeal of Lucretia Borgia.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Roger said:


    Esther McVey!!! All the appeal of Lucretia Borgia.

    I'm impressed she's managed to make an impression on you!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Will a brave politician threaten the tax free lump sum on retirement from pension schemes?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    antifrank said:

    Will a brave politician threaten the tax free lump sum on retirement from pension schemes?

    No.

    Besides it could only hurt current workers not current pensioners.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    England do have a talent for snatching disaster from triumph in limited over games.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910

    England do have a talent for snatching disaster from triumph in limited over games.

    My Tebbit Chip is now working perfectly! :)
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Pong said:

    Apologies for the crap formatting/spelling/etc. I'm trying to tap this out on a not very good nokia phone (don't buy one, they're awful)

    Anyway, on topic

    it's about time the boomers started contributing, but it needs to go much further than just axing the free bus passes. I don't doubt that it will seem unfair to the pensioners that they were promised all this stuff and now it's being taken away, but they need to understand they were sold a lie. The boomers had too few children and are living far too long for their children (and grandchildren) to pay the bill. The generational settlement is null and void & needs renegotiating.

    We should do these things immediately;

    1. Make retirement much more flexible - the general retirement age needs to rise to the mid-70's. that's what todays young people can expect
    2.pop the btl/house price asset bubble With german-style renting rights. Your grandchildrens right to rent/buy an affordable house to live & raise a family in trumps your right to a btl property portfolio.
    3. backdate £9k tuition fees to all graduates. Charge interest at commercial rates, but allow penalty-free immediate repayment. That would make a decent dent in the national debt
    4. Expand the scale of the QE programme to cover much more of the total debt, then go for a bout of hyperinflation. I'm convinced this is the plan anyway, but we can be more aggressive about it. It's the most painless way to default on the unaffordable obligations to the oldies.

    94. Remove free bus passes

    I agree with your preamble and point 1 thereafter I increasingly ( respectfully) part company though I do agree "inflation" is in the plan. "3 and a bit for about fifteen years" is what they are probably hoping for. Thing is it's useless if it's international commodity price inflation as that's not at all " painless ", and inflation is a slippery fish - ask the Weimar Republic's finance minister ( I know he's long dead, but you know what I mean).

    Inflation rewards those with lots of debt and screws the virtuous savers who are the innocents in the debacle we are living through. People get screwed by it, they get angry, and snake oil politicians can step into the breach. That's why modern Germany is still so hung up about it and the Euro. They have folk memory of inflation going really pear shaped.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    A reminder of the background to the latest news on Mandela.
    Thulani ‏@TaThulz 8h

    Ambulance carrying Mandela to hospital breaks down and backup arrives only 40 minutes later. Imagine being the driver, scary though
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    My Brighton timeline full of Poyet getting sacked when live on air pundit-ing for MOTD. Oops.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @Neil They should though. It's a "much-loved anomaly" whose time is past.

    If I were Chancellor of the Exchequer, I'd plumb new depths of unpopularity.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279

    OT

    I am not sure if this has already been mentioned as it was from yesterday's Telegraph but given his very strident statements that this simply will not happen I wonder what RCS is making of the latest announcement from Ofgem?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10136903/Energy-regulator-to-warn-over-blackouts.html

    I have never quite understood why Robert is so firm that blackouts will not happen.

    Richard, unable to access that article in the Daily Telegraph as my free access limit has been reached. But I have always been surprised at how little publicity has been given to some of the previous warnings about this risk in recent years?

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited June 2013
    tim said:

    Scott_P said:

    How can we tell that Osborne has comprehensively won the spending argument?

    Even the Lib Dems are laughing at Labour

    @politicshome
    Lib Dem MP @malcolmbruce: Labour's acceptance of some welfare spending restraints "undermines their credibility." @JPonpolitics

    Strange quote.
    But as you believe Osborne has won the spending debate by outspending Labour under Brown no surprise really.
    Ludicrous claim. You must be really desperate.

    Given the increasing debt interest payments were increasing and needed to be funded. Additionally, managed expenditure was expected to increase because of the economic situation. Consequently departmental expenditure had to be squeezed to keep the overall spending envelope in acceptable limits.

    If you wanted to freeze cash spending at Brown's levels the implications for departmental expenditure (Avery do you have the figures?) would have been horrific.

    These things have to be done over a period of time
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    Carola said:

    My Brighton timeline full of Poyet getting sacked when live on air pundit-ing for MOTD. Oops.

    Current topic of conversation between the footie fans in my household as I post this. Oops indeed.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    antifrank said:

    Will a brave politician threaten the tax free lump sum on retirement from pension schemes?

    Why the hell would they do that? It's not brave, it's nuts. We have a problem going back decades of not saving enough in this country and consuming too much in the here and now. Now short term we lack demand sure, but long term we have to stop living on the never never so disincentivising long term saving in this or any other matter is a straight up and down no no. Unless your name is G Brown of course in which case you regard pension savings as a tax milch cow to pillage as you see fit and blow on spending now.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Absolutely despicable.

    More evidence that the current establishment is incapable of self-regulation; give people power and they'll abuse it.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    @Neil

    "I'm impressed she's managed to make an impression on you!"


    http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/6/69951/2981246-giuseppe+veneziano+3.jpg
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Pong said:

    Apologies for the crap formatting/spelling/etc. I'm trying to tap this out on a not very good nokia phone (don't buy one, they're awful)

    Anyway, on topic

    it's about time the boomers started contributing, but it needs to go much further than just axing the free bus passes. I don't doubt that it will seem unfair to the pensioners that they were promised all this stuff and now it's being taken away, but they need to understand they were sold a lie. The boomers had too few children and are living far too long for their children (and grandchildren) to pay the bill. The generational settlement is null and void & needs renegotiating.

    We should do these things immediately;

    1. Make retirement much more flexible - the general retirement age needs to rise to the mid-70's. that's what todays young people can expect
    2.pop the btl/house price asset bubble With german-style renting rights. Your grandchildrens right to rent/buy an affordable house to live & raise a family in trumps your right to a btl property portfolio.
    3. backdate £9k tuition fees to all graduates. Charge interest at commercial rates, but allow penalty-free immediate repayment. That would make a decent dent in the national debt
    4. Expand the scale of the QE programme to cover much more of the total debt, then go for a bout of hyperinflation. I'm convinced this is the plan anyway, but we can be more aggressive about it. It's the most painless way to default on the unaffordable obligations to the oldies.

    94. Remove free bus passes

    3. is an interesting idea. It'd be painful, and cause a lot of squealing, but does have the appeal that it is fair both across generations and because those who have benefited most are being asked to pay. I guess you would need to add in a minimum income, though, which means you wouldn't catch many pensioners.

    (Although, the headmaster at my old school tried it: he called us all up and tried to argue that since they had mispriced our education at the time we had a duty to contribute...)
This discussion has been closed.