Tax on pensioners proposed

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Tax on pensioners proposed

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 3 of 18 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

silvertop Portishead 08 May 18 12.02pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays I think I tend to agree that windfall aren't the way to go. Still, this isn't the fault of pensioners and making people poorer isn't exactly a nice policy....especially when this is the voting block who most reliably vote for you. It's a horrible situation to be in for the Tories or indeed any party in charge. We are in this situation because parties are selfish rather than interested in the long term health of the country......but that's just a flaw in democracy. I know if I were leader I would hate this situation. Unfair singling out the Tories. There isn't a party that doesn't chase the grey vote. Most voters come in the 54+ bracket. And their primary concerns at present are their pensions, their healthcare and all those bl00dy immigrants making them wait at the GP and post office. Not, sadly, the future of their own children. Thus, policy, public resources and media coverage are heavily skewed to those issues. [There, didn't mention Brexit once]
Alert a moderator to this post

silvertop

Portishead 08 May 18 12.02pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I think I tend to agree that windfall aren't the way to go. Still, this isn't the fault of pensioners and making people poorer isn't exactly a nice policy....especially when this is the voting block who most reliably vote for you.

It's a horrible situation to be in for the Tories or indeed any party in charge.

We are in this situation because parties are selfish rather than interested in the long term health of the country......but that's just a flaw in democracy.

I know if I were leader I would hate this situation.

Unfair singling out the Tories. There isn't a party that doesn't chase the grey vote.

Most voters come in the 54+ bracket. And their primary concerns at present are their pensions, their healthcare and all those bl00dy immigrants making them wait at the GP and post office. Not, sadly, the future of their own children.

Thus, policy, public resources and media coverage are heavily skewed to those issues.

[There, didn't mention Brexit once]

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 08 May 18 12.08pm
Originally posted by Lyons550 Remove their winter £10 payment!! Don’t they get £200 or £250? COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 08 May 18 12.08pm

Originally posted by Lyons550

Remove their winter £10 payment!!

Don’t they get £200 or £250?

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 08 May 18 12.22pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman After removing rent or mortgage housing costs, £20 a week better off. Wow. And, of course, most pensioners will have paid off their mortgage (if they had one), so when they talk about disposable income, the fact you are no longer paying off a loan is not a pay rise, it's budgeting. I've had a spreadsheet going for years working out when my mortgage is paid off, chucked in more when I can, scrimped and saved to do so (driving crap cars, using second hand golf clubs, etc) and when that day comes, I don't expect to get penalised for it, otherwise I may just as well have enjoyed that cash while I could
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 08 May 18 12.22pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

After removing rent or mortgage housing costs, £20 a week better off. Wow.

And, of course, most pensioners will have paid off their mortgage (if they had one), so when they talk about disposable income, the fact you are no longer paying off a loan is not a pay rise, it's budgeting.

I've had a spreadsheet going for years working out when my mortgage is paid off, chucked in more when I can, scrimped and saved to do so (driving crap cars, using second hand golf clubs, etc) and when that day comes, I don't expect to get penalised for it, otherwise I may just as well have enjoyed that cash while I could

Alert a moderator to this post

YT Oxford 08 May 18 12.24pm
Originally posted by Willo Just a report into inter-generational fairness by 'The Research and policy organisation'. Not sure that the Conservative Party have or will give it serious consideration. To think the Chairman 'Lord Willetts' was once known as "Two brains" in recognition of his cerebral capacity ! D’oh! I mis-read it all those years ago; thought he had two sons, both called Brian. This always struck me as a bit odd. Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)
Alert a moderator to this post

Oxford 08 May 18 12.24pm

Originally posted by Willo

Just a report into inter-generational fairness by 'The Research and policy organisation'. Not sure that the Conservative Party have or will give it serious consideration.

To think the Chairman 'Lord Willetts' was once known as "Two brains" in recognition of his cerebral capacity !

D’oh! I mis-read it all those years ago; thought he had two sons, both called Brian. This always struck me as a bit odd.

Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)

Alert a moderator to this post

YT Oxford 08 May 18 12.31pm
There is evidence in this thread of the typical confusion (ably demonstrated by the meedja and by many MPs) between income and wealth. We don’t tax wealth in this country, we tax income. So to introduce some kind of new tax on “wealthy pensioners” would strike me as perverse. In the first place, how do you define “pensioner”? And secondly, how do you define who is wealthy and who is not? Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)
Alert a moderator to this post

Oxford 08 May 18 12.31pm

There is evidence in this thread of the typical confusion (ably demonstrated by the meedja and by many MPs) between income and wealth.

We don’t tax wealth in this country, we tax income. So to introduce some kind of new tax on “wealthy pensioners” would strike me as perverse. In the first place, how do you define “pensioner”? And secondly, how do you define who is wealthy and who is not?

Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)

Alert a moderator to this post

becky over the moon 08 May 18 12.36pm
Originally posted by silvertop Really? Tuppeny-happeny houses, a far more generous welfare system, subsidised transport, jobs for life, final salary pensions, student grants... There are 2 things that really bother me [just so you know where to prod next time]: 1. In our day we scrimped and saved for a house. These days the young just blow their money and get into debt. 2. I've paid tax all my life; I've earned my time in the sun. You prodded number 2. On the £10k handout, it will simply be absorbed by debt and give their parents at best a year before they start bailing them out again. Useless. Better would be to means test the state pension; start to invest heavily in private halthcare; and then use the vast resources released to work towards equalising life between young and old. Both would be eminently fair; and political suicide. Thus, never gonna happen. Even for the pensioners, the down payment and mortgage payments on their first house/flat were still large pro rata to their income - and you only got 1 and a half times principal salary. Far more generous welfare? How? All that was available for most of my working life was a very basic level of sick pay, and an existence level of unemployment benefit for those that needed it. Final salary pensions were only ever paid to those in Local Authority, Civil Service or large companies. The vast majority of pensioners from the so-called baby boomers don't have this luxury. Student grants again were only for the few that went to university - most went out to work as soon as they left school. So, to prod your No1 on the list, I quite agree...... let them live with their parents (even when they are married), regard a night out a month as a luxury treat (and that no more than a cinema or down the pub), 'make do and mend' with their clothes and mobiles, go without holidays and cars, and then they might get to the same point as their parents, who did do all these things! A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

becky

over the moon 08 May 18 12.36pm

Originally posted by silvertop

Really? Tuppeny-happeny houses, a far more generous welfare system, subsidised transport, jobs for life, final salary pensions, student grants...

There are 2 things that really bother me [just so you know where to prod next time]:

1. In our day we scrimped and saved for a house. These days the young just blow their money and get into debt.

2. I've paid tax all my life; I've earned my time in the sun.

You prodded number 2.

On the £10k handout, it will simply be absorbed by debt and give their parents at best a year before they start bailing them out again. Useless.

Better would be to means test the state pension; start to invest heavily in private halthcare; and then use the vast resources released to work towards equalising life between young and old.

Both would be eminently fair; and political suicide. Thus, never gonna happen.

Even for the pensioners, the down payment and mortgage payments on their first house/flat were still large pro rata to their income - and you only got 1 and a half times principal salary.

Far more generous welfare? How? All that was available for most of my working life was a very basic level of sick pay, and an existence level of unemployment benefit for those that needed it.

Final salary pensions were only ever paid to those in Local Authority, Civil Service or large companies. The vast majority of pensioners from the so-called baby boomers don't have this luxury.

Student grants again were only for the few that went to university - most went out to work as soon as they left school.

So, to prod your No1 on the list, I quite agree...... let them live with their parents (even when they are married), regard a night out a month as a luxury treat (and that no more than a cinema or down the pub), 'make do and mend' with their clothes and mobiles, go without holidays and cars, and then they might get to the same point as their parents, who did do all these things!

A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

YT Oxford 08 May 18 12.37pm
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle I can't see this vote loser ever coming into being as whichever party introduces it will lose the next election. I'm also blowed if I am going to pay extra tax just so that some 25 year old knife wielding drug dealer can have a bonus courtesy of me Mrs YT and I said exactly the same over breakfast this morning! Under the heading of what would a 25 year old do if £10k landed in their lap. First answer was buy the latest top of the range iPhone and book loads of foreign travel. We have children in the relevant age range, by the way. Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)
Alert a moderator to this post

Oxford 08 May 18 12.37pm

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

I can't see this vote loser ever coming into being as whichever party introduces it will lose the next election.

I'm also blowed if I am going to pay extra tax just so that some 25 year old knife wielding drug dealer can have a bonus courtesy of me

Mrs YT and I said exactly the same over breakfast this morning! Under the heading of what would a 25 year old do if £10k landed in their lap. First answer was buy the latest top of the range iPhone and book loads of foreign travel. We have children in the relevant age range, by the way.

Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)

Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle 08 May 18 12.57pm
Originally posted by silvertop As a PS, you are aware that recently the average income for pensioners passed the average income for the waged? That can't be true. My state pension is £712 per month which taken over a 40 hour week is less than half of the minimum wage
Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle

08 May 18 12.57pm

Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle

Originally posted by silvertop

As a PS, you are aware that recently the average income for pensioners passed the average income for the waged?

That can't be true. My state pension is £712 per month which taken over a 40 hour week is less than half of the minimum wage

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 08 May 18 1.21pm
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle That can't be true. My state pension is £712 per month which taken over a 40 hour week is less than half of the minimum wage It’s after housing costs of rent or mortgage I guess are deducted from the average worker. COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 08 May 18 1.21pm

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

That can't be true. My state pension is £712 per month which taken over a 40 hour week is less than half of the minimum wage

It’s after housing costs of rent or mortgage I guess are deducted from the average worker.

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 08 May 18 1.21pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman After removing rent or mortgage housing costs, £20 a week better off. Wow. Well yeah, but isn't the point that a waged person should never be poorer than a non working person the state pays. Capitalism 101 isn't it? 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

08 May 18 1.21pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

After removing rent or mortgage housing costs, £20 a week better off. Wow.

Well yeah, but isn't the point that a waged person should never be poorer than a non working person the state pays.

Capitalism 101 isn't it?

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 08 May 18 1.27pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Well yeah, but isn't the point that a waged person should never be poorer than a non working person the state pays. Capitalism 101 isn't it? The living wage is on its way. Will be interesting to see if it narrows following the £10 living wage coming in but a possible fall in wages for those just above in the way of redundancies and lower pay elsewhere or smaller annual wage increases. COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 08 May 18 1.27pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Well yeah, but isn't the point that a waged person should never be poorer than a non working person the state pays.

Capitalism 101 isn't it?

The living wage is on its way. Will be interesting to see if it narrows following the £10 living wage coming in but a possible fall in wages for those just above in the way of redundancies and lower pay elsewhere or smaller annual wage increases.

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 08 May 18 1.30pm
I detect this idea in several of these posts that.....If someone has lived their life responsibly and done all the right things....that the state should reward them....you know, their people and all that. I have some sympathy for this view but it's not really a sustainable nor healthy way to run a country. The fact is the country is called Great Britain and it's about the British.....not just Mr or Mrs/Ms/Miss Sensible....you run the country for the brightest and thickest, most able and least able. Mr and Mrs Sensible didn't live their lives responsibly for the benefit of the state. They lived it sensibly purely for the benefit of themselves....like sensible people do. If they also had decent luck they received the rewards that came from that. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

08 May 18 1.30pm

I detect this idea in several of these posts that.....If someone has lived their life responsibly and done all the right things....that the state should reward them....you know, their people and all that.

I have some sympathy for this view but it's not really a sustainable nor healthy way to run a country.

The fact is the country is called Great Britain and it's about the British.....not just Mr or Mrs/Ms/Miss Sensible....you run the country for the brightest and thickest, most able and least able.

Mr and Mrs Sensible didn't live their lives responsibly for the benefit of the state. They lived it sensibly purely for the benefit of themselves....like sensible people do. If they also had decent luck they received the rewards that came from that.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 3 of 18 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Tax on pensioners proposed

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors