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.

I really don't agree with the policy that pensioners should not move. Like everyone else, they might have to, to move to sheltered accommodation or a care home. If not with Hb to move somewhere cheaper. Sad but has to happen. I don't really want to see pensioners deprived of their life savings but yes, they should give up the family houses when living in council/HA accommodation.

I didn't fight in the war :) I was born in 1944.My dad did but he is dead. I grew up with rationing but didn't notice it.I was vaccinated against tb.diptheria and tetanus.I had whooping cough,measles, chicken pox and chronic bronchitis,I grew up in a council house in a declining pit village.My gran had a house with an earth closet in the yard and gas lamps in the living room.I played hopscotch on the pavement and sledged down the middle of the road as no one had cars.I remember the Coronation.I went to Grammar School.My grandad's instruction for life was;"You bow your knee to no man and you shake the hand of any."
If you want equality it has to mean equality-no very rich,no poor,no handouts,no private schools,no mansions,no slums.You cannot decide to want to take twice from the elderly because you see them as an easy target for greed and entitlement.
Parts of this thread are making me feel ill.You [some of you] don't only want to take our savings and our homes you also want to take away our self respect at arriving in old age at a point where we can finally look back at our lives and say,"We achieved that-we earned it."

Thegreylady, I agree with you. I grew up with no central heating, tin bath in kitchen thing. That is what is was like 40 years ago. The previous generation had it hard if they were working class especially. Houses and capital assets are the thing of envy now. So either the money will cascade or go to care home people. It's them I would be watching.

Grey lady - ignore the ignorant ( there are a few on here). I might not be a pensioner yet but I have listened to some those that are and what they lived through after the war . However the ignorant can't believe it was true .
You enjoy what you have worked hard for - you and others deserve it.

Did you not listen to the news yesterday,did you not see the trillions of debt figures?

So what else should be taken away from the younger generations and how much exactly?

How can you justify wealthy pensioners contributing nothing to getting rid of a debt they helped to create and are contributing more to than younger generations?

Head.in.sand and if that isn't ignorance what is?

Ok, I have just read the Fabian report (belatedly) and I do not agree with its conclusions. If we have to be in it, we should be in it together. But randomly taking people's savings off them for no reason other than that they have them and are old is not the way to go (we may as well emulate Cyprus and grab 10% out of all bank accounts).

Reducing subsidies to pensioners should be done first as that is what we are doing all round. Moreover this is a numbers game - you can't just pick on a small section ( eg the wealthy, the young, the old whatever) - everybody has to contribute for this to work. Pensioners are not yet sufficiently contributing to this crisis, especially given how little they have paid in vs how much they expect to receive back (I am thinking final salary schemes that have been a windfall for them). Perhaps the viability of pension schemes should be revisited and the amounts of pensions being paid out should be trimmed to what the actual funds paid into the scheme dictate can be afforded. Yes, that would be retrospective but only to the extent that it is correcting a big accounting error that has resulted in a windfall for this group.

Once again, what do you mean by 'wealthy?' Someone on a good pension which they accrued by working for 40 or more years and paying in the amount they were instructed? Or someone who owns a house worth a few hundred thousand? Don't worry, when they die the govt will be taking shed loads in inheritance tax, so that should satisfy your desire to take money off pensioners. And once again, these pensioners didn't 'help ' create debt. They have paid their dues, it isn't their fault if their pensions were miscalculated or mismanaged

I still find it the supreme irony that you admit your husband earns at least £52k and you haven't worked for 5 years, which many many people would consider extremely comfortable, yet you obviously feel hard done by.

As for the sufferings of the younger generation, like we keep saying, swings and roundabouts. They may find it harder to buy a house, but those on low incomes have tax credits, subsidised childcare (up to about 70% in some cases) and a year off work in maternity leave- things our parents and grandparents (and indeed many of us ourselves) never benefited from.

You just come across as very resentful and envious and it's still hard to see why... Obviously you find life such a struggle on £52k but its a joke to whinge that pensioners should be subbing your life style

That was to square pebbles.

Errrrm somebody on here had years of CB on 2 salaries for 5 children!!! Given that CB for 3 children alone over 18 years will be a staggering amount- 50k -really that alone should be taken into consideration given many are losing it now.

Oh and plenty of families earn the same joint as my dp but pay less in tax so do quit with your single woman crusade against women taking a short break in a lifetime. I worked and saved for it.

She didn't - read the post again. Unless blended families should also be taxed more??

Oh I missed that bit about your dh earning 52k whilst you stay at home... lucky you those pensioners you go on about had no option but to WORK in order to survive.

And younger generations are and have been subbing the lifestyle of plenty of wealthy pensioners who don't need it.

Same hymn sheet as others have said is what I expect.

Also last time I looked we'll all be paying exactly the same when we die,so we'll be paying exactly the same however we'll have less given that we have to bring the debt down and won't have 10s of 1000s of CB in the value if our houses and will have worked a lot longer for less whilst supporting children at uni etc,etc - oh and ensured wealthy pensioners keep their Saga holidays.

Tis not about poor pensioners but wealthy pensioners and to defend the rich helping out when a lot of others on a lot less are losing a lot more and are intriguing is wrong.

Can't believe they're not even kept to the same bedroom rule!

Rosa wealthy pensioners- the clue is in the title!

Undercoversahm- you need to remember though that many of these 'lucky' people on great final salary scheme pensions, took that route as a 'trade off' against other advantages.

To give a simple example: mr A is a pensioner who doesn't have a great final salary pension or any savings. But he earned really good wages during his working life, had lots of foreign holidays and an affluent lifestyle. Mr B is has a final salary pension and some savings, but he worked 40 years in a lower paid profession, didn't have the holidays or expensive lifestyle and lived frugally.

By your reckoning, Mr B is 'wealthy' and it's 'fair' to Take away from him, and mr A is a poor pensioner. That's a far too simplistic way to look at it.
It's non workable to take things off people retrospectively anyway. Where do you draw the line? You may as well say, let's make people pay back the CB they received for 20 years because they seem to be doing ok now. Or how about making SAHM pay their own NI retrospectively?!

The vast maj of pensioner women had time off to raise children or didn't work and have paid nothing like the tax I've paid and will pay in a lifetime.

Oh and I regard anybody who retired from work whilst earning £50k as wealthy given that that is the cut off for CB cuts(even though those on double get to keep it) and clearly going by opinions on here is a fortune!

Anyhoo kids to get to school and jobs to apply for,mustn't keep the rich,feckless work shy from being busy.

That's bollocks- those on double don't get to keep CB. Unless of course you mean families where TWO parents work which is not the same situation!

Oh and some of us thankfully have wealthier family members who appreciate that they have been lucky as a generation,need to contribute more financially to the nation and are willing to help out practically with childcare however that impinges on their lifestyle.

Shame all wealthier pensioners aren't like my parents.I know they are in the minority.

Hmmmm yes 2 on 50k which is 100k a year do keep CB- utterly ridiculous.

1 on 20k and 1 on 30k joint also keep it which is also unfair as collectively they pay less tax than somebody on 50k.

Anyhow time to boot kids out of bed.

So you're jealous of pensioner women who never worked square pebbles? Not sure how you think they're wealthy- they won't be getting a gold plated pension if they didn't work!! They'll be on the frugal state pension!! Honestly, you do make it sound like these wonderful pensions just fall into people's laps randomly. They don't. You have to work, usually for 40 years or so without breaks to have got a full pension. Today's pensioner women who didn't work, or only ever worked in part time low grade jobs are living on the basic state pension!!

A couple on 20k and 30k will have a shed load of childcare costs which the SAHM with a husband on 50k doesn't. Unless of course they are in the very privileged position you are where you get to use elderly retired relatives as free childminders. Oh hang on- you don't work so you don't need a childminder anyway!!

undercoversahm - "we may as well emulate Cyprus and grab 10% out of all bank accounts"

That is exactly what will happen if we dont cut Govt debt.

There is no easy way out of this. Cuts have to be made and taxes have to be raised. It is just a question of how to do it fairly and frankly there is a woman who is often on TV quite often who represents pensioner interests (I cant remember her name) and she epitomises everything I dislike about this debate. She is entirely blind to the issues and speaks about pensioners as a rightfully entitled group who should not share any of the economic pain.

My MIL is on a state pension. Has her own home (not large) and she gets FILs superannuated public sector pension as well. She has income of about £1200 a month and hence pays a little bit of tax. She cannot spend the money she gets and pays nothing for travel in her local area, free TV licence, pensioner discounts on many pensioner services and WFA. There are many many pensioners on much bigger state funded pensions than her and as a country we just cant afford them any more.

MIL is not a wealthy pensioner but she is not facing any hardship either and never will. She did work for some parts of her life but really has not paid anything like enough to cover her state pension and FIL paid virtually nothing to his superannuated pension compared to the payout. MIL could easily live another 20 years.

They did not fight in the war.

yes. your household is in the top 10%.

I don't want 70, 80, 90 year old widows to face hardship.

Faster - neither do I but continuing to pay out huge publicly funded state and public sector pensions based on an 'actuarial mistake' we have known about for at least the last 25 years is no longer acceptable. The mistake has to be rectified and that means cuts in pensions, removal of unneeded benefits and higher taxes at the top end.

The acid test is this.

A pensioner should not have a state funded standard of living that is better than a younger person working in the same job that they used to do before they retired. With wages frozen at the bottom end of the wage scale (or even falling in some cases) but state and public sector pensions continuing to be inflation protected there are many pensioners who now enjoy a better standard of living than the people who followed them into their job when they retired.