Older People Have Never Had It So Good

[Gromit]

// Pensioners in their 60s and 70s have seen their incomes rise steadily during the recession years - and now they are less likely to be poor than any other group in society, according to a new report.

A senior Church of England cleric, Bishop of London the Right Reverend Richard Chartres, said the ‘fortunate generation’ in their 60s are soaking up too much taxpayers’ money and that state spending on older people ‘raises questions of intergenerational equity’. //

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2341553/Older-people-good-New-report-says-60s-seen-incomes-rise-recession.html#ixzz2WYp1jtcy

Why are we still paying £billions to them to pay for free travel and winter fuel, which were after all, just Tony Blair's election bribes?

[ludwig]

// Older People Have Never Had It So Good

That's good, isn't it? //

Apparently not Naomi. The wrinkly scroungers are 'soaking up too much taxpayers money' according to the bishop of London.

[netibiza]

I only have it so good because I married a younger man, who is still working, my state pension is a joke, but there again I didn't work for long in England and there were no contributions for pensions when I moved to Spain. I could not afford to move back to England.

[Gromit]

The IFS Report is interesting

http://www.ifs.org.uk/conferences/Income_longrun2013.pdf

[jno]

the real ones living off the fat of the land are surely those who don't have children and so are expecting other people's children to provide their pension.

They should all be horsewhipped in the village square and fined annually the amount it costs to keep two children at Eton.

[tamborine]

Bishop of London says..."Larger numbers of older people are also staying in jobs rather than taking retirement. Official figures this week showed that more than a million over-65s are now working, double the numbers of 20 years ago."...

Most businesses are owned by 'grey hairs'. We are employers and create jobs with our finance. When you do same Bishop Chartres you have ground to criticise us.

[Svejk]

Lol, got to tell you this.
My pensioner mate just called around for a coffee. I mentioned this thread to him and he said," I get £174 a week and rent paid. If I wanted I could live on the £74 and save £100 a week,". "Surely not, Alan"I said. "Well,svejk, if I was on JSA I'd have to, wouldn't I"?
There's no faulting his logic,is there?
He added some rude stuff about shopping in M&S etc. But it is full of OAPs, isn't it?

[emmie]

jom, exactly right, a mate of my mums struggles, she has her husbands pension, who had the audacity to up and die, leaving her alone to raise three children. Many do struggle, the basic state pension is not much to actually live on, if you were unable to pay into a private scheme. And even those people got shafted, by guess who.. G Brown,

[emmie]

tambo, the government has been getting people back into work, either disabled, or not quite retirement age, mentally ill or not, take your pick, so if some are working past so called retirement age, perhaps its the government who are doing it. They say there is not enough in the pension pot, so everyone will have to work on longer, how would that be their fault if they didn't actually want to.

[Sqad]

em

\\\\if you were unable to pay into a private scheme. And even those people got shafted, by guess who.. G Brown, \\\

Too bloody right....1997...first thing he did when Labour got into power.

[emmie]

sqad, yes i know, and some say he had a bad press, cor blimey..

[jake-the-peg]

There is a big difference between pensioners

Some are very poor and some are very rich

It's a question of Universal benefits.

Is the pension there as a Universal right regardless of circumstance as a reward for a lifetime's work or should the pension be there as a safety net to protect the very poorest who could not or did not make adequate private provision.

As more and more people live way past retirement age there is a tendancy to think it should be the latter.

We simply cannot afford to keep the next generation of pensioners the way we have kept this generation .

The 'Covenant' is that the next generation supports the last

This generation has failed in that covenant by not raising enough children to keep that going

If you haven't brought up two kids and you're moaning about immigration - then it's your fault if pensions drop

[emmie]

i would say that most are not rich, not by a long chalk, some may have equity in their homes, but if either partner gets sick, and has to go into a home that may have to be sold to pay for care.

[emmie]

why do you constantly bang on about if we don't have enough immigrants to support us in our old age, for heavens sake, what makes you think the Poles, Latvians, Afghanis are working, or indeed if they are going to stay long enough to put much into the pot.

[jomifl]

You have to feel sorry for the young, their jobs are taken by old people who can't afford to live on the state pension and who get free tablets whereas young people have to buy their own out of their jobseekers allowance and they bring out a new one every 6 months.

[New Judge]

“Free travel is timed for when transport is underused and the costs, therefore, already spent.”

Not in London, OG. Pensioners’ “Freedom Passes” can be used on all TfL services 24/7 and on most National Rail services within the TfL area after 9:30am.

“the real ones living off the fat of the land are surely those who don't have children and so are expecting other people's children to provide their pension.”

I do not expect anybody else’s children to provide my State pension, jno. As per my earlier post, I have provided for mine by means of the contributions I have made during my working life. It is scarcely my fault if those who took it from me have pee’d it up the wall instead of investing it on my behalf as any other pension provider would.

“Is the pension there as a Universal right regardless of circumstance as a reward for a lifetime's work or should the pension be there as a safety net to protect the very poorest who could not or did not make adequate private provision.”

The rules of the game during all the time I have been making contributions is that it would be my right and the amount I receive (which will form part of my taxable income, incidentally) will be based on my contributions. If those rules are to change somebody should have told me forty years ago and at the same time should have given me the chance to opt out. And jake, please don’t keep going on about your ridiculous argument that the only way such services can be sustained is by ever increasing population or immigration. We’ve had this debate before and you have still not provided a solution to what happens when the newcomers get old themselves.

[emmie]

jom, seems some confusion here, not all pensioners get free prescriptions, my mothers friend doesn't, her deceased husband pension means she gets nothing off the state. She pays full whack for everything, she is over 70.

[jake-the-peg]

//what makes you think the Poles, Latvians, Afghanis are working, or indeed if they are going to stay long enough to put much into the pot. //

You're absolutely right

I've said for a long time that we need to encourage the "right sort" of immigration.

Temporary workers who come here for a few years and send all their money home should be discouraged and talented and hardworking people who want to come here and settle down and contribute should be encouraged.

Right now we're doing exactly the reverse - It's a lot harder to get indefinite visas than temporary ones that just last a few years

Result: temporary workers sending their money home

[emmie]

from my observations of people in the capital, there are a damn sight more Asian, West Indian, African elderly, than there are white, many considerably disabled. No one can say they have worked on not, whether they contributed, but that is not the point, if they came here with say one person in the family who got a job, he may well have brought the relatives along with him, then the state is paying for all those relatives who may not have been able to work due to age or being unable to speak the language. now their children are ensconced, if they stay they will be the ones who will be putting money into the pot, what on earth happens if some decide to upsticks back to their home countries. Many newer arrivals have no ties to Britain at all, they are economic migrants, so they could work for a few years then go home.

[Sqad]

Jake, please forgive me if i am incorrect and ignore my post but I always assumed from your posts that immigration had little or no effect on the economy and the EU door should be left wide open.

Now you say:

\\\\Temporary workers who come here for a few years and send all their money home should be discouraged and talented and hardworking people who want to come here and settle down and contribute should be encouraged.\\

If i am misrepresenting your position then I aplogise.

I cannot see many immigrant Barristers,Neurosurgeons or Professors of Physics pleading to enter the UK, in my experience the majority are temporary workers and indeed should be denied a long stay visa.

[emmie]

but that has been the problem, you would be truly amazed at the amount of poor people we have here in the capital. poorly educated, and forgive me but not the type of people we actually need or needed. Though i am unable to verify the figures, they came from a local paper, they are pretty good at getting their facts straight, our borough has close on 12/15 thousand refugees, asylum seekers, that is a lot for one borough, and they must get financial help some how. We can't be feeding, looking after the worlds poor, Britain needs it own people to be well educated and forward thinking, the entrepreneurs, business people of the future to make us viable, as we all know we are struggling, and the more than land on these shores the more money goes out the ever decreasing pot.