Can’t just be me who is sick of the moaning about the private school VAT and winter fuel payments

The people who are so keen to see a return to it that they are already complaining, criticising and scaremongering with increasing hyperbole about the alternative.

I think this is really true. I claimed PIP not because we were desperately in need of the money (although we are by no means well off either) but because of the doors it opens, the main one being 'queue jumps' at concerts, theme parks, holiday venues etc, which means I can take my children to these things and they don't miss out on more than they already do with having a mum with a disability. If I could access these without the PIP at no cost to me, or if places had better disability access (for example we have to pay an extra £240 for early access passes at Butlins as I cannot queue) at no cost, then I wouldn't claim it. But whilst the support for those with disabilities is patchy, the PIP enables me to pay for things which give us equivalent access to those without a disability. It is what it says on the tin, it makes me more independent. It funds a car so I can still get to work, and I then put more in to the system in tax than it costs the taxpayer each month. For many PIP claimants, it's a really cost effective benefit in terms of cost- benefit, as its a benefit claimed by many working people.

It took a huge swallow of my pride for me to claim it, and I didn't for the first 3 years following developing a disability, as I had been brought up to never claim benefits, and also struggled to admit I had a disability, the whole process was quite traumatic. If another hurdle had been added in of means testing, I probably wouldn't have claimed, and our lives would be much more limited.

Absolutely agree - I have no idea where my students went to school, I don't care and frankly wouldn't dare ask in case I was accused of discriminating in some way.

Gordon brown didn’t tax pensions they were always taxable as part of income, well at least as far back as I remember and that’s way before the last labour governemnt.

What he did do was change the tax credit system on dividends paid out by companies so the tax credits could no longer be claimed back. This effected anyone who was in receipt of dividends and didn’t pay tax but the main investors in the uk are the pension schemes so they were the most effected.

But pip and dla are gateway benefits, there is no official registration card to prove you are disabled in this country so most places where reasonable adjustments are required require proof of pip or dla, if it was means tested it would need to be possible to have a nil award. Also pip/dla is supposed to put the disabled person in the same position of a non disabled peer by covering the extra costs of being disabled, this actually enables many pip claimants to actually work.

Yes no more 25% tax free pension withdrawal.

The same person willing to tackle the NHS,
probably.

The triple lock pension has to be dropped at some point otherwise pensions will consume the entire UK spending at some point. Not a debatable point but a mathematical fact. Who is going to be brave enough to do it?

No, of course not. Occupation is not a helpful way to categorise people into demographics for the purpose of the points I and the poster I was responding to were making, given its quite obvious that train drivers may be represented in many demographics, as may junior doctors. Given the context of the thread I'd have thought it fairly obvious I'm referring to those occupying a certain position of wealth/privilege that they feel was better preserved under a Conservative government, and who are now anxious that Labour will prioritise the less well off to their own disadvantage. People who have lived for years in a society with a very obvious division between those concerned about school fees and those concerned about paying for food. Yet are now trying to suggest it's the Labour government who have created division.
I'm not sure why you think that's a naive thing to say?

Pensions aren't benefits, but Gordon Brown taxed pensions and it has been suggested that taxes on pensions will increase (both putting money into pensions and taking money out).

I have no issue with migration - providing they are not simply economic migrants. A points system similar to Canada and Australia would be a good start.

How? We cannot cut back on pensions can we? or do you think we can remove the triple lock?

Most of the rest is spent on in work benefits. people in PT work will often be PT because of child and caring responsibilities or can afford, due to a partner or savings, not to have to work FT.

The biggest component of ‘annually managed expenditure’ or ‘AME’ is cash transfers through the welfare system, expected to cost £315.1 billion in 2024-25. 55 per cent of these are paid to pensioners, with state pensions the largest item at an expected £141.6 billion
Other big items include universal credit and the tax credits and benefits it is replacing (£92.0 billion) and disability benefits (£47.0 billion, around two-thirds paid to people of working age)

I hope they seriously look at benefit reform. I think Liz Kendall will. the current system is totally unsustainable.

Oh i thought you were asking a specific poster, not me, i'll make a note of that!

In which case, the taxpayer should support, to avoid poverty issues, however many children families decide to have.

We cannot punish children for the life choices of their parents, we did that in the Victorian age and that worked out well didn't it.

So how would you solve labour shortages, without having significant numbers of migrants?

Backfired?

That's the Telegraph moaning that they'd been relying an a decent proportion of the most needy people not knowing about a benefit that the qualify for and deserve, and now some of them are going to have the nerve to apply to get it.

That article made me shudder when I read it this morning. The newspaper of wealthy Tories actually wanting poor people not to claim what they actually need, while fighting the battles of those on the highest rates of tax. The Telegraph is evil.

You chose to swerve the question.

Noted.

So in one post you moan about "unfettered immigration" but now find something else to moan about - too many families having too many children.

Yes many in Europe have more disposable income.

At a stroke we could do something to improve that, build council housing, far cheaper rents, more money in the local economy, less in work benefits.

A new housing development nr me, 1000 new homes, the council is shouting from the roof tops that 90 will be "affordable" so either to buy as a shared ownership or to rent, the "affordable" bit means below market rate, so may not be affordable to many at all.

Why has the UK got the most expensive childcare and dentistry in Europe?

Some people are doing very well in the UK.

There may be others coming, but you are one datapoint.

And how many children are you happy to subsidise, per family?

Why should a childless person or couple subsidise those with children

As a childfree person who has paid (and continues to pay) tax for the past 40+ years I can answer that one.

I am happy to subsidise other people's children. This is because I understand the importance to society of all children having a good education, good healthcare and whatever other support they need.

And of course, some are ‘needier’ than others.
How is a disabled child ‘needier’ than an OAP who is unable to heat their home. Why should a childless person or couple subsidise those with children.

I could go on but the point is this - penalising those who contribute most to tax receipts will have consequences - including capital flight and others simply retiring early or cutting their productivity.

Your ire would be better directed at the flabby and mismanaged NHS.

By all means kill the golden goose, but please don’t whine when your services and support are cut.

No. It's about the politics of privilege. For the few, not the many.

And to be crystal clear, from my own POV, we could have afforded to send our DC to private schools. But we didn't. Because we don't believe in the system.

OK?

Quite.

And I'm sorry, but the comment I've also worked in universities and academic staff are usually well aware that a student with straight As from a state school will usually be a lot better that a student with straight As from a private school is laughable! A. I am 100% sure academics don't know or care what school their students went to once they are on the course and B. Literally who cares whether they make a judgement on you or not.

Unlike lots of posters on here, I really DO know university staff, and they do not have the time or energy to make snippy judgements about where kids went to school.

Your next fight will be with this Government when they decide to slash support for your child. Who do you think pays for that? That’s right, the taxpayer

Well yes. That is what a decent society does. Supports those in need.

I don't think Labour will "slash" PIP. Many on MN will be disappointed.