To wonder why child benefit is now means tested but winter fuel payments aren't.

(201 Posts)
ImagineJL Mon 03-Dec-12 22:52:18

I can see the argument for reducing and removing child benefit for high earners (despite the fact that I am losing money myself), but why not apply the same principle to winter fuel payments? A colleague of mine is a hospital consultant, earning over 100k a year, so has just lost all his child benefit. But he still gets his winter fuel payment.

It seems a bit strange.

Abra1d Fri 07-Dec-12 16:03:35

I'll say this for the gilt-edged pensioners, too: some of them were lucky to be in the right place at the right time, but they didn't waste some of the money I see squandered. In the main they saved.

Until a year or so ago you could read threads on MN where women on quite average salaries, or below average salaries, were talking about hen weekends to Europe, expensive bags, hair and beauty treatment. Or expensive kitchens or wooden floors. Some or all on credit cards. Did they really not think they'd have to pay for it all one day?

I have a lot of sympathy with people who saved and were frugal and still find themselves in difficulties now and couldn't have possibly have saved for their pensions. Or did manage to squirrel some money away for their retirements. Why should they be treated less favourably than the squanders who preferred Mulberry bags to ISAs or pensions?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now