to hope the government has the guts to tax WEALTHY pensioners more

[ReallyTired]

The Fabian society has suggested that wealthy pensioners pay more tax.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22220345

Some how I can't see a conservative wanting to tax wealthy pensioners more when they all vote Tory.

I find it unfair that pensioners with an income more the average family's income get free bus buses, winter fuel allowance, TV licence as well as paying less tax and national insurance. It is about time that the the wealthy pensioners took their share of the pain of the cuts.

I am in favour of well off pensioners having free bus passes, winter fuel allowance as these things encourage independence and improve health. I would like to see the money for these things clawed back by WEALTHY pensioners paying more income tax.

square - you mentioned two types of pensioners:

(1) their choice of mothers not working ever whilst claiming years of CB/ uni fees/ grants, WFA,benefits and not paying enough NI as a family etc,etc

(2) childless pensioners now relying on the children of others to fund and care for them.

I cannot see you mentioning wealthy pensioners.

Not sure what you mean.

My stance is wealthy pensioners/those that can afford it should not get benefits,pay NI and contribute to any other plan the gov could come up with.

Again who should pay the shortfall ?

What is the definition of a wealthy pensioner? I expect Jeremy Paxman is genuinely very wealthy - but what is the definition?

I'm thinking that most pensioners aren't really wealthy, they are probably comfortable & I doubt that most of them have lived lives quite like Jeremy Paxman either.

I still don't get what extra tax you are expecting them to pay, given that their savings are taxed as are any extra earnings they might still be getting?

Ok, so if we are looking at making up the short fall this is what I would do:

1. child benefit for only 2 children

1. 2 bed house only for people obtaining more than 50% in housing allowance

1. Any EU immigrants to be sent back to the county of orgin if they committ ANY crime regardless and vice versa for Uk people. It stops the rot setting in and this country (or any other country having to house them in jails)

1. grants not available if you 'accidentently' become pregnant yet again on benefits. Hostels for girls under 18.

1. Tax relief for people who have private insurance (tin hat at the ready for this one!)

What about pensioners who are cash poor but who are in houses they often struggle to maintain and heat yet are worth £500k plus. Do we force these people to move because they wont make the decision themselves?

This is one area where I think we could do something tbh. The houses wouldnt then be freed up for other families because the prices are probably well out of their remit. I am thinking of the old person themselves. Often they struggle to think about moving. Around here there are tons of them in musty old houses crammed with stuff and perhaps the house is worth £700k.

I ocassionally watch the hoarding documentaries on TV. I have a close relative who I am often expecting to see on there! Big house but just full of rubbish, someone told me it is a illness. I cannot see it myself tbh, how people can live like that is beyond me

Square. Wealthy pensioners get wfa because giving it to everyone is cost effective as its such a low (relative) amount. Bus passes are issued to all in recognition of failing health as one gets older so may need to surrender licence. Again free tv licence only kicks in when older and is low cost. Those are the only benefits a wealthy pensioner would receive. They do pay tax so are hit if that is increased but they don't pay ni even if the age was increased for ni very few would pay because pensions are classed as investment income not earned income.

Changes like cb still apply to them and it may surprise you to know that some pensioners get it. Bedroom tax doesn't affect them because the wealthy don't get hb. They also pay the increase in vat etc. They are in it with us.

Thankyou jacks most of my friends are pensioners and we are still in receipt of CB and CTC. We are comfortable but not well off

It might be worth noting - apropos Paxman - that not all pensioners are baby-boomers. As I understand it the baby-boom generation is that born from 1946 on. Thus, only people under 67 are baby boomers.

Pages back I tried to bring a note of balance in by saying that all generations have it hard/easy in different ways and we should all share the burdens.

But Square has been so dogmatic that I feel obliged to point out that I too earned money from 13 on, worked full-time from 18 until a year ago (doing my degree part-time in my own time) and at 70 I am still doing part-time (and voluntary) work.

Oh, and despite two children I never had the luxury of taking five years off.

Perhaps I should also mention that the tax rates for higher earners was as hell of a lot higher in the 1970s than he is paying now, while benefits were considerably lower. So higher earners of my generation will have been paying a bucket more income tax that 40-50 year olds do now.

I can see both sides of the argument - but I am not sure that Square can.

I would certainly restrict CB to two children (with the exception being naturally conceived multiple pregnancy) as a help towards paying off the deficit. That's a perfectly equitable policy

Jeesh Jeremy Paxman went to Cambridge. It might be an idea to say that all those v privileged people who attended Oxbridge should pay extra tax.

Have looked up stats and in 1970 50,000 students got uni degrees. In 2009 350,000. So those complaining about the baby boomers having it so good should remember that they had it good without a degree, which many younger people will have, the opportunities having opened up vastly.

So Paxman was an elite member of an elite group (ie those going to uni)

He also 'He attended Malvern College, a public school whose fees are almost as astronomic as Eton's' according to the DM. Perhaps all former public school pupils should pay extra. I mean there is a reason parents pay so much for the privilege and it is often so that they can have a high earning career.

Grimble makes a good point - 80% tax rates anyone....

I could see a gov bringing in no more benefits for more than 2 children, guess they would have to make an exception for the ones already here.

I agree as well that all generations have it good and bad. I am personally quite tired of people's entitlement to things that were unheard of many years ago and the view that if you have them so should they.

Having a baby without a partner and no visible means of support is acceptable now. Having a baby very young is also Ok, yet birth control has never been so freely available.

I went to a talk at my DS's private school about A level options a few months ago. In 1970's 5% of people went to univ, now due to Labour's view that as many as possible should go it is now 50%. With all the mickey mouse degrees and poly's now turning into universities.

I would bring back proper techincal colleges where people can learn a trade. I pay nearly £100 to get my hair cut in London and you cannot get a plumber around here easily. Those trades are in short supply.

What more tax would I have pensioners' pay?

-equalise their personal tax allowance with the rest of us (currently it is £2,500 greater - currently this represents a gift of about £500 per annum for almost every older pensioner. That adds up.

• means test WFA and TV licences (again this adds up as we have a lot of pensioners and TV licences are expensive these days)

-subject pensioners to the same housing benefit cap as the rest of us

• amalgamate income tax and NI and charge the same rate (say 35%) on all income, instead of levying especially high taxes for those who are in work (income tax PLUS National Insurance). The pension contributions were not taxed on the way in and so should be fully taxed on the way out, including NI. It is nonsense to try to pretend that NI is anything other than tax by another name.

• ask for a proper contribution to end of life health care rather than providing it mostly paid for by the young.

• pay for prescriptions and tv licenses unless on pension credit.

• back charge all graduates for their university education if they did not pay for it at the time (at a reasonable rate of say 9% of income per annum)

I wish none of the above needed to be done but we must tackle the deficit and cannot ringfence such a large portion of the country's spend.

undercoversahm you can't possibly suggest backcharging for university. That is ludicrously unfair and surely must be some contractual issue too.

If we are scrapping universal benefits (child benefits) and all having to tighten our belts , then I don't see why this shouldn't apply to pensioners. I have a relative who has almost I MILLION pounds in the bank and still gets her winter fuel allowance, tv licence and bus pas. Ridiculous.

justinBsmum JP is a high earner so is paying an awful lot of tax (probably 50% or so of his income). We already have a progressive tax system: you earn more, you pay more (both absolutely and as a percentage of your income).

I think trying to means test TV and WFA would cost more than it would save. I do agree however than older people on HA should not be allowed to stay in large houses just because they are old and dont want to move. Its not like that for the rest of us!

I pay for my prescriptions but apparently 90% dont. and I believe there are no charges in Wales and Scotland. Change that...

I dont agree with back charging graduates from what 40 years ago and also what is a proper contribution to end of life health care? What if you dont need care and are fit and healthy and just quickly go with a heart attack?

If you leave too much the government takes that too....

growsomecress no, I am not really advocating back charging for university but think it is equally unfair to be charging current students. If you have to do the one, then you should also do the other. We are crushing the next generation with debt and the pensioners are not taking their share of that. Personally, I think education is one of the few areas that should be government subsidised (ie free) as it is investment in our human capital.

I went to Oxbridge years ago for free. I feel so sad that my DC (and yours) cannot do the same. There is no way I could have paid.

Your £1 million relative will leave lot of it to the goverment anyway or use it to provide long time care in a home without needing the government to pay. My PIL's have bus passes but drive everywhere so although they might have one they never use it!

If you think back charging for uni fees is OK, then so is removing child benefit for existing families of more than two children.

But 30-40 years ago only 5% went to uni. Now under Labours rule we are all entitled to go which waters down in my view graduates. There are just so many more now.

I also think by charging (and I believe you dont need to pay back until you earn xxx). It makes you think - do I really want to do this degree, am I going to take this seriously. Will I put the work in. After all I am paying for it...

If you think back charging for uni fees is OK, then so is removing child benefit for existing families of more than two children.

what about clawing back CB already paid to people?

The idea of back charging university fees is ridiculous. Today's pensioners went to university at a time when very very few people went, and those who did, needed degrees to enter certain professions . Nowadays half the population go. Hell- I'm not a pensioner yet, and when I went to university only 8% of people went . Why hammer people for doing what society wanted them to do? We needed those graduates to be doctors, teachers etc. If they are on a good pension it will
Be because they worked for 40 years. FFS anyone would think these people weren't just handed fabulous pensions as some sort of brucey bonus !

I dont think anyone can start to backdate things from 40 years ago. What nonsense. As Echt says we could go even further and remove child benefit for more than 2 kids and even further - backdate it so that you end up owning the government £1000's