Genie Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 1 minute ago, MakemineVanilla said: With the government projected to spend over a thousand billion pounds on services in 2025 and only expecting to save £1.4bn by scrapping the winter fuel allowance, it does seem more like a gesture than something desperately needed to solve the country's debt problem. The question to ask is whether all the resultant drama is just manipulation to make the electorate think Labour are making serious cuts? Make cuts which provoke a huge response, seems like the best way to create the impression most useful to government, seems like the plan. I thought the winter fuel allowance cut was to help close the gap on the £20b finance gap that exists on the balance sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 so only one MP in the nasty party has a backbone 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted September 10 Moderator Share Posted September 10 24 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said: With the government projected to spend over a thousand billion pounds on services in 2025 Total spending is projected to be that, but it's on more than just services, it's everything, including capital expenditure buying stuff, building stuff, mending stuff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 22 minutes ago, blandy said: Total spending is projected to be that, but it's on more than just services, it's everything, including capital expenditure buying stuff, building stuff, mending stuff... The government site provides two figures and I just quoted the one for services - cheers! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 35 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: so only one MP in the nasty party has a backbone You can do better than that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted September 10 VT Supporter Share Posted September 10 2 hours ago, Davkaus said: With the tory 'retort' that if this works, as @Danwichmann has been posting, the costs will be about the same, with more money going to those who need it more. It seems bizarre that this could have been sold as 'throw less money at the wealthy and give it to those who need it more' (with my caveats in previous posts), and instead Labour are sticking to the austerity lines, when it doesn't actually seem like it'll save a penny. At this point I half suspect that the only reason they're persevering is to look 'strong'. Scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 53 minutes ago, Genie said: I thought the winter fuel allowance cut was to help close the gap on the £20b finance gap that exists on the balance sheet. When you start with a thousand billion, finding £20bn in less controversial areas of expenditure does not seem impossible. I think they felt they needed to inflict the pain for political reasons. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 36 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said: I think they felt they needed to inflict the pain for political reasons. Nothing says thank you for your lifetime of contributions than death by hypothermia .... and some cheered as they condemned those people to death at least nobody on here voted for them so they don't have to share the shame 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted September 10 VT Supporter Share Posted September 10 46 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: Nothing says thank you for your lifetime of contributions than death by hypothermia .... and some cheered as they condemned those people to death at least nobody on here voted for them so they don't have to share the shame It's means tested, they need to apply for pension credit if they are below a certain income. It's taking money away from wealthy pensioners, that don't need it, and encouraging the less wealthy to claim a different benefit to boost their income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 2 hours ago, tinker said: It's means tested, they need to apply for pension credit if they are below a certain income. It's taking money away from wealthy pensioners, that don't need it, and encouraging the less wealthy to claim a different benefit to boost their income. Do you think 11.5k annual income is wealthy? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 7 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Do you think 11.5k annual income is wealthy? My brother does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Danwichmann Posted September 10 Popular Post Share Posted September 10 12 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Do you think 11.5k annual income is wealthy? This is where the debate should be. Not whether or not it should be means tested, but what the threshold should be and how it can be checked or assessed. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted September 10 VT Supporter Share Posted September 10 16 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Do you think 11.5k annual income is wealthy? If they are on less than 218 a week and single they get other benefits to boost their income. Housing benefit and other stuff. It's not a simple figure but this figure should be reasonable. Millionaire pensioners should not get it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 Short memory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 Well, the tables have turned here in 24 hours. I was getting slated yesterday for disrespecting Labour and sticking up for pensioners 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted September 10 VT Supporter Share Posted September 10 (edited) I don't like to comment too much on Labour as I haven't voted in the UK for a few years now. I feel pretty disturbed when Labour is ****-ing up because -- no matter what Britons think or don't think -- Labour is influential outside the UK, too. It sets the tone when great sea changes in politics are roiling through the masses. I'm not too pleased with what I've seen from Starmer's operation so far. It's good that Labour were elected, but he's burning through any earned political chips like a gambling junkie in Vegas. At the very least, he's getting his arse handed to him in the PR battle. I'm impressed by all the well-reasoned, if sometimes self-congratulatory arguments in favour of his cabinet's initiatives -- but I think some of the pro-Labour writers are deluded and London-centric, and they treat politics as a purely rational contest. When did reason matter in politics? Quote In its willingness to risk unpopularity – with the public at large, and on its own benches – this government is a marked contrast with recent chaotic and incompetent administrations. But as the House of Commons votes on reducing winter fuel payments, some evidence of a gentler politics would also not go amiss ... I just think people need to be careful about how hard it is for grassroots to win if the leaders seem out of touch. It's so hard to win a vote at the street level. Starmer seems less street smart than I guess I expected. No, I don't mean more Corbynism is needed. But a little -- finesse? Do they have any idea how hard it is to get someone to change their mind once it's made up against you? I don't know how it will all finish. Of course, I support Labour, FWIW. There's no credible alternatives, really, but I hope the PR battle turns around a bit. Edited September 10 by Marka Ragnos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 (edited) 1 hour ago, Danwichmann said: This is where the debate should be. Not whether or not it should be means tested, but what the threshold should be and how it can be checked or assessed. This is the crux of it. I am sure we'd all agree that someone on 12k a year should be getting winter fuel allowance. I'm also sure we'd all agree that someone with an annual income of 50k shouldn't. I'd also imagine it wouldn't be too hard to come to an agreement on a reasonable threshold figure. The biggest problem seems to be a way to actually check how much someones income is and that the cost of means testing it, beyond those they have already identified who receive pension credit, could end up costing more than what it will actually save. This is often the case with means testing it seems. I'd personally rather see 1 million people who have zero need for this £300 get it rather than see 100 people not get it who then as a result end up freezing this winter so I'd hope they can come up with a more suitable solution than they have. I suppose the bigger issue here is though that there should be zero need for these extra payments as the state pension should be much higher in the first place. Edited September 10 by markavfc40 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 11 Share Posted September 11 10 hours ago, PaulC said: My brother does Was your dad a tool maker by chance ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted September 11 Share Posted September 11 (edited) 15 hours ago, tonyh29 said: Nothing says thank you for your lifetime of contributions than death by hypothermia .... and some cheered as they condemned those people to death at least nobody on here voted for them so they don't have to share the shame And, let us not forget that a lot of those pensioners were former socialists in arms all through the 1960s, and the majority of those would be low-paid T&G workers, whose union subs sponsored Labour. I guess we have to accept that they have served their purpose and can rot as far as Labour is concerned. And the poor man remains in the caboose of the train but it ain't him to blame - he's only a pawn in the game. Edited September 11 by MakemineVanilla 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts