If we all in this together what cuts have oaps faced?(273 Posts)
As my title says im struggling to see any.
Winter fuel allowance -stays universil-too expensive to means tesrt
same with free bus passes.
part of their social care is paid so they can leave wealth to their families
They excempt from bedroom subsidy so they allowed to under occupy and biggest group.
Pensions I think went up
This new married couples allowance maybe another additional benefit to them if they large proportion of this group.
Housing-they brought at right time probably paid off mortgage and have lots equity.
They moan about interest rates but they fortunate enough to be able to save.
If social-how many homeless pensioners are there? Are they always band a?
Maybe im being harsh and some pensioners have it hard.
But locally they have several holidays a year, holiday homes, brand new cars.
wondering how exactly we all in this together ad should there be mass turnouts under 60 to vote at next general election.
Georgette - yes, cheap shot, I know. Actually, totally agree with your last post and I'd reintroduce some form of rent control. Never gonna happen, though.
I agree to get rid of universal benefits, although that would hit me personally as I would lose my child benefit and as a sahm (who successive govts seem to detest) that is not good.
Benefits should be means tested, and that means pensions too.
Also winter fuel allowances. I know some rich people refuse theirs, but not many! My pils who are very comfortable take theirs each year gleefully.
I would like to see more support for sahps/carers. More funding for gp surgeries which wouldn't sme the pressure of a and e units, more funding for schools, including specialist units for children with behavioural difficulties. More support for oaps and 15 hours free pre school from 2 across the uk.
Get them when they are young. Make a difference early.
It's not rocket science.
But no...keep giving tax breaks to the rich.
I actually support universal benefits. They are symbolically very important. The original idea behind the cradle-to-grave welfare state was that at every point in one's life one would be either paying in or taking out of a collective social provision, eg. child benefit when one was a child, then working, then in receipt of the state pension when not working. I think universal benefits are an important glue that holds together our sense of being in it together.
People erroneously think of child benefit as a benefit for the parents - it's not; it's the child's benefit, in recognition that the child is part of the state too. It's not means tested because children don't earn.
I support a basic state pension for all - it's important.
Both WFA and travel passes are discretionary benefits, not part of the original welfare state entitlement - WFA was introduced by John Major's govt IIRC, as a sop to a situation where pensioners were genuinely a low-income cohort as a whole. That was the wartime generation.
I would retain free bus passes if children in education also got them, for example.
The real problem in the UK is that our economic system is disastrously unbalanced in generational terms and in terms of assets versus income: housing in particular. So many of these problems would not exist if only people had not taken to speculating wildly in housing during the last twenty or thirty years. Successive govt and financial sector pixies encouraged it; the whole economy was allowed to run away based on it; we had golden opportunities to use globalisation and technologisation to our benefit to create massively higher living, leisure, education and healthcare standards for all and what did we do?
We ruined it by selling the same houses to each other at more expensive prices each time, and spending the fake money - effectively borrowed from future generations' earnings - on cheap tat made overseas, holidays, etc etc.
I bet most oaps have paid in a hell of a lot of NI and tax in their lifetimes, it is theirs to claim. They were promised that their welfare was cradle to grave. Now that is impossible because the welfare isn't used as a safety net anymore. I hope they get to keep it. Taking it would be theft.
*pixies, WTF? Was meant to be policies. Must stop now though my phone clearly likes the idea of economic pixies.... v appropriate in the cases of Alan Greenspan and Eddie George maybe. Evil pixies.
I don't agree with getting rid of basic pensions. Many people, including me, pay into a private pension on the understanding there will be a state pension. If it didn't exist, there would be no point for most people paying into any private pension, because there are unlikely to save more than the means tested amount.
WE DO NOT NEED TO BUILD MORE HOUSES
There are 1 million empty homes in the UK
and over 1 million second homes in the UK
and 400,000 houses worth of land with planning permission
as it costs the owners nothing to leave their property and land empty, they do so.
- Make the council tax on an empty house five times that of an occupied house
- Make all properties owned by companies be liable for business rates (yes Mr Geldof that includes you)
- Abolish renewal of planing permission
and the housing crisis will solve itself
and only the super rich will get hit.
All the pensioners I know shop at Waitrose and travel abroad twice a year. No such thing as a poor pensioner these days.
All the mums I know shop in Boden and live in big houses. No such thing as a poor mum nowdays.
Georgette, your 14.08 post is absolutely true and heartbreaking.
In my head this pissing-opportunity-to-be-happy-up-the-wall problem is related to a sort of macho pro-extreme-work culture. Which affects everyone, although it is pleasant for a minority. (in the same way as "having a non-smoking section in a restaurant is like having a non-pissing section in a swimming pool")
Also: see what we did with North Sea Oil compared to Norway.
This is what I mean: we are, or should be, so so rich - modestly rich, by the standards of all the retirees with 2 houses and new car every 2 years, but massively rich by global standards, meaning: not having to worry about food, fuel, education, health care. We should have it all. We really fucked up by being greedy, stupid, and short-sighted; refusing to recognise the social contract. And fucked up the planet too.
It wasn't just the generation of current retirers but they are the ones that trousered the spoils and are now laughing at us
I obviously live in a different income bracket from most MNers.
Kilmuir-amile for me each not far but for 2little people in rain can be tiresome.
All mine were planned could afford.
get cb like every other generation did.
no to tax credits.
made sacrafices we private rent which is pants.
we have a car but they sure are pricy to run.
Housing is key.
social housing is so limited only for those who are homeless or very high need.
Made private landlords very rich housing in hosuing benefits
my landlord this house one of 3houses he rents to boost his pension
we cant even afford the 5%deposit right now.
plus multiples of single salary wouldent go far here.
they keep building excutive 300k new builds never anything affordable.
would love to lease land then build a flat pack wooden home.
but lands so flipping expensive/
2nd home owners make me annoyed parts of cornwall like ghost towns young people not stuck around to look after eldesrly as cant afford to live there fullstop.
Always old people campaigning against new builds and in devon amused me save our gold courses!
Thanks Mildred (and others on the thread) - this is an incredibly important debate to be having and it isn't going to go away in the future: I think those who don't recognise that there are issues here will see this coming up again and again in the next few years.
Young people who can see the writing on the wall are already leaving for other countries (if they can); or tuning out (if they can't). Without jobs and a future for them the older generations won't get far complaining - they will be dependent on young people's taxes and goodwill whether they like it or not.
It's just an extra annoyance on top for lots of us that the generation who seem unable to appreciate their good fortune compared to following generations, is often the same sixties generation who listened to music about creating a better world for the future! And instead we face a ruined planet and a ruined economy. It's desperately sad compared to what we could have done even if the sixties ideal of the welfare state had continued.
I work with older people and would tend to agree there are many living lifestyles that younger people would struggle ever to attain. Despite this they have suffered from the cuts as the rate of interest on their savings is negligible and they tend to pay higher prices for things as they only buy small quantities and have a large proportion of people who cannot use the internet to access the best prices. They have made windfall profits from property, so I can never understand the strong resistance to inheritance tax which at least takes this money back into circulation again.
needaholidaynow, I am guessing that the house belongs to them, if the damp is their responsibility? Can they:
get a lodger and use the rent for repairs
sell up and buy a flat in good nick
Maybe it is a tiny one-bedroom cottage. But if they still live in a family house and their family don't live there any more, why should they expect to keep up a whole house for one couple?
theodora they may FEEL they paid a lot of tax and NI but actually they didn't - that is the point. Their tax and NI went to pay a small population of retirees on modest pensions. The amount that they will in turn aim to be taking out will have to be paid by the current young and is more than they (the current retirees) ever paid in. It is like a pyramid scheme that is about to fail because this next generation is not rich or big enough to support the longer life expectancy of the retiring baby boomers.
Oh dear, needaholidaynow, you sound so wistful. Didn't mean to touch a sore point.
Sorry need a holiday grandparents are strugging.
My grandparents on dads side always have struggled.
One thing that baffles me and we touched upon it earlier
is the way we live in uk.
Im not sure intergenerational living would make a come back as houses tiny , expensive here and lost fanilies live different places as lots do go where the jobs are.
But in usa they have really nice retirement villages.
I see mil rattle round in house thats too big.
she moans about the stairs.
The gardens too much for her.
Then to heat such a big house.
her reluctance to move she would have put fil in a home rather than move.
Im not worried about the money.
But im sure she be happier ina bugalow close to shops and ammenities like libary which she would use.
I think the way elderly people live in uk can be isolating.
So to protect oaps in social housing when there,s so few housing availaible seems odd.
I know theres memories but when you die cant take it with you.
I don't understand why they dont sell up to make their final years more comfortable and easier.
If we had really good quality retirement villages, or sheltered housing with things like communal lounge would they not be happier? bit like uni halls for elderly their own personal living space with some share communal areas.
Why does it have to be stay in huge house or old peoples home.
I have friend looking on right move for house with space for granny annex for her elderly mother but shes having heck of job finding one.
I dont think im being yanbu n few years time when things are harder than they are now.
people will be asking whos a vunerable group and why are all oaps vunerable no matter what their income and other groups like kids and disabled are not protected
I hope we dont see repeat of riots but can see why people get fed up some weeks I think wish I could emigrate but we stay where we are as mil needs us close.
The goverenment either believe in universil benefits or they dont.
They dont with child benefit.
Often wonder if oaps in states have had it as favourable as they have to pay for healthcare over there and don't have welfare state like we have here.
Wonder how many years it will take before its on the political agenda or if the torys ageist policy cost them the next election as media said ths policy of penalising job seekers and no benefits under 25s wll please the elderly tory voters within the party!Why the heck would another groups suffering please then?
I dont want elderly to suffer but do want some fairness.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.