To worry that the conservatives are going to target pensioners next

[Sjdorset]

Have anyone else noticed the anti pensioner stuff out this week? Firstly about getting rid of the essential tripple lock (2.5% so not a huge increase) and the talk that pensioners are supposedly getting more than working age people (why shouldn't they after all they have worked their entire life and don't have options available to increase their earnings).

I'm worried they maybe next on the target list, quite frankly I think this is a worrying trend building up.

www.express.co.uk/finance/retirement/445956/Fears-for-pensions-as-government-s-crucial-triple-lock-guarantee-faces-axe

venus, I certainly don't begrudge pensioners a free bus pass.

But perhaps 16 to 20 yo could have a reduction in fares, commensurate with the reduction in wages employers are expected to pay them? Or they should pay the same in transport costs as their younger siblings who are also in full time education?

I am wary of stoking intergenerational strife, not least because I don't think that the baby boomers did any of this deliberately.

But yes, it will be unaffordable. So pension age is rising and it's quite likely that T&Cs will get tighter.

The triple lock was brought in by the coalition. Was it a mainly Tory policy?

I think it will be removed by Labour, but in the guise of bringing in something better/fairer. But which will be far less robust and will crumble.

If you're under about 50-55, the it won't be the same for you.

And I think that most final salary pension schemes have already changed to 'career average' (or something like that). Of course those already retired or close to retirement are not affected. But expectations have had to change all round.

In 2014, 5 billion pounds' worth of benefits went unclaimed.

This is what means testing means. The weakest, the least well-informed lose out.

My dad was 6 when the war began,and was brought up in total poverty, with rationing. He was evacuated to Wales. My grandad was away fighting and he scarcely saw him for 6 years. He left school at 16 and gave ALL his wages to his mum (4 younger siblings). She gave him back a couple of shillings a week, just enough to take my mum to the cinema and buy some sweets (still rationed).
When they got married, my parents lived in a caravan for 5 years as they couldn't afford a house.
I could go on, but stop eulogising about the free university, golden life, no hardships all pensioners are meant to have had. They didn't.

It wasn't such a big deal to implement when they stopped my child benefit.
The millions saved in giving benefits to those pensioners that don't qualify, could be spent on implementing strategies to ensure more are distributed to those that do. Even then, the mindset of many elderly is that even when they have the money, eg for heating, they won't spend it.

The super rich must cheer when they see threads like this.

Does anyone on this thread really believe that the government intends to re-direct saving on pensions(ers) to others?

It is the winding-down of welfare.

I hope I was clear with my post.
Many pensioners, my parents included, really really NEED their benefits.
Some grafted all their lives, some didn't.
Some benefited from a 'golden age' and some didn't.
Some don't 'need' their free benefits now and it may 'cost more' to sort than it saves (but surely that would be the case for working age benefits too?).
But really, it is more 'divide and rule' from those in power, tossing a bit of bread and watching us scrabble and squabble

But, yes, it will be visited on pensioners too and the only ones who can sit back and cheer, as we all get poorer and 'divide and rule' gets even more effective, are the super rich and those in Power.

They could do some things to save money. Bus passes are not available until the date you get the State pension, so why are prescriptions still free at 60? I don't know how much it would save of course, but no-one gets the State pension at 60 any more.
The winter fuel allowance isn't huge but wouldn't it be better to target it at over 70s for whom keeping warm might be a problem, rather than giving it to 'younger' pensioners (I'm 63 so it would affect me).
Not all pensioners vote Conservative by the way.

I sincerely hope they means-test all senior benefits, and even more so I hope they extend the bedroom tax to them. It's as clear as day that this is the right thing to do.

I sincerely hope they means-test all senior benefits, and even more so I hope they extend the bedroom tax to them. It's as clear as day that this is the right thing to do.

Explain your "clear as day" metaphor, why don't you?

As for her "partner" and how he can be a partner while living in another house is a mystery, just google the availability of one-bedroomed council stock and see what you get. There isn't any, hence the insanity of the bedroom "tax".

That depends entirely on where you live echt. In the City of Manchester, where I am, there's a huge shortage of one bed SH properties except those which are specifically for over 55s. For those, supply and demand are broadly matched. Basically, if you want one, you'll get one soon enough. There's also a shortage of two bedroomed properties full stop, and these are in great demand now from families because of the bedroom tax. Meanwhile, pensioners exempt from the bedroom tax are able to under-occupy two, three and four bedroomed properties while families rot on the waiting list. Single pensioners or couples can even be given two bedroomed properties as new lets, because as there's a shortage of one beds (even though there isn't if you're a pensioner) HAs allow people to bid for properties with one extra room. There's something very, very wrong with that picture.

I'm not a huge fan of the bedroom tax, or not as a national policy at least. I can see that it perhaps needed doing in London and the south east, but there are plenty of areas of the country where it wasn't needed at all. But if it's staying, it needs to apply to pensioners too.

My parents have two houses. One of the them sits empty because they "don't fancy" renting it out, and don't need the money. They are hanging onto it because they don't want to sell it at £180k profit, accrued over fifteen years. They think it is not enough. To buy their two houses (one in London) by the way, my dad had a cushy 9-5 job in local government, while my mum never worked more than 15 hours per week (and retired at 50). They would simply not be able to buy a home now, on the jobs and hours they had.

They get a free tv license for both houses, unneeded winter fuel allowance, plus have a new car but take the bus with their free passes so that they can have a drink with their lunch when they go out.

I absolutely believe that we should support those who are struggling in old age, and that our society should make sure that everyone is comfortable after retirement. But there are aspects of our public services which are already slashed to the bone, and facing another 40% of cuts in the autumn review. The NHS is on its knees, and we do not have enough school places in parts of the country. Disabled people have already been targeted in the government's programme of cuts. In these circumstances, it is wrong to make a sacred cow of wealthy pensioners. The only possible reason for it is to appease the tories' target voters.

Only in the UK will you ever find threads like this. This is the only place in the world where elderly people are despised. We leave them to live on their own, begrudge

Utter nonsense. Firstly people don't despise old people, but some people are questioning why cuts are falling disproportionately on the young whilst pensioners are shielded from most of them. It is a legitimate question to ask especially when it is done for nakedly political reasons.

Also there is a profound debate and resentment as to the way state benefits are paid in Italy as they are predicated on the outdated notion that people live in multi generational household headed by an elderly male of pensionable age who would distribute the family money - so save us the 'only in this country' piffle.

Not rtft, but in regards to the OP, yes. I agree that this propaganda has been aggressively peddled of late. As a pp said, it is preparing the next generation of pensioners to get nothing from the state. That is why the work place pensions are being so heavily pushed. Makes me want to vomit that these millionaires are making these decisions for our future. And the fact that £8.5 MILLION POUNDS has been spent on the advertising campaign for the stupid fucking fluffy monster creature, makes me sick to my stomach. The tories are a peverse party. Helping hard working people my fucking arse. They want the state to be responsible for the sum total of fuck all. My dh works for the now privatised probation service and the stuff going on there is shocking. People would be up in arms if only they were aware, but they are so blind to what is being fed to them by the media, no questions asked (feeding back to your OP), yes, pensions/pensioners will be next.

I'm looking at this from a selfish point of view - I'm only 28 but I figure the only chance we have at still having a state pension by the time I'm 65 (or 70... who knows) is by protecting the one we have now.

Being fatalistic and saying "we might as well cut it because I'll never get one" then that's the guaranteed way of there not being one in a few decades.

I also don't think it should be a race to the bottom - pensioners being treated better than U25s means that U25s need to be treated better, not pensioners treated worse.

The only possible reason for it is to appease the tories' target voters. or maybe it is that there has been some effective lobbying by charities such as Alzheimer's Society, or maybe the government still has a shred of compassion left for some of the elderly....

There is an increasing number of people with dementia - somewhere around 1 in 14 of people over 65 (and increasing). Remaining in familiar surroundings helps these people to stay relatively independent and in their own homes for longer - the cost of causing massive disruption which might result in an increased need for residential care is massively more than the cost of paying the bedroom tax.

We need long term solutions - YES more housing for younger people and families, YES changing expectations so that older people plan for a move to smaller properties (but while they are still able to cope with the move, not when they are frail or in their 80s).

Echt yes if you means test pensioners you have to tell them what they CAN claim for not what they might lose so you may save some money by means testing pensioners but not as much as you think if other pensioners suddenly realise what they can claim and go for it.

When ever we have a discussion about pensioners someone ALWAYS tells a story about rich pensioner relatives who go to Florida go on cruises and have more money then they know what to do with as an argument for cutting all pensioners state pensions and/or pension benefits. But what does that prove, you could argue that all JSA claimants are work shy scroungers because you happen to know someone who prefers a life on benefits rather than actually working and will do everything in their power to live a life of idleness.

You could argue that disability benefits should be stopped or claiming made more difficult because you know someone who has been faking a bad back or depression for years.

In fact as everyone knows (or should know) that for every story about rich pensioners, workshy scroungers bad back scammers there are 1000s of stories about extreme poverty amongst pensioners, draconian measures against job seekers and very disabled or sick people being forced to look for work.

Winter fuel allowance and free bus passes for the rich elderly are topics which inflame (everyone seems to know at least one 'undeserving' old couple!) and which serve to set groups against each other. The combined cost of the free bus pass and the winter fuel allowance is £3bn - so how much would really be saved by means testing it? By comparison the change that has already been agreed of increasing state pension age by 2 years from 65 to 67 saves £76.5billion and potential generates additional tax and NI of £11 - £13 billion.

Fuel allowance, bus passes, bedroom tax and red herrings in the face of the potentially massive savings to be made by increasing the state retirement / pension age even more.

I actually don't mind the free bus passes, purely because they act as an incentive for people to stay out of morning rush hour public transport if they don't need to be on it. Means testing them, as well as not necessarily saving very much, potentially reduces this.

Depressed by some of the attitudes on here - there does seem to be a lot of hate out there for old folks. With a bit of luck those spouting it will never get old.

When ever we have a discussion about pensioners someone ALWAYS tells a story about rich pensioner relatives who go to Florida go on cruises and have more money then they know what to do with as an argument for cutting all pensioners state pensions and/or pension benefits. But what does that prove, you could argue that all JSA claimants are work shy scroungers because you happen to know someone who prefers a life on benefits rather than actually working and will do everything in their power to live a life of idleness.

Well, that is exactly what the government and media has done, isn't it, in relation to those out of work?

I don't think it is the same, thing, though. There is a high proportion of wealthy pensioners, not just the odd exception. If the Telegraph article linked to in the op is to be believed (it's based on IFS research), and pensioners are outearning those of working age (plus, in most cases, not having to pay housing costs) then why are free bus passes, prescriptions, tv licenses, fuel allowance necessary for those in that category?

Depressed by some of the attitudes on here - there does seem to be a lot of hate out there for old folks.

I agree.

I hope it isn't the same people who complain about other 'groups' in society being 'scapegoated' or given 'a bad name' --otherwise how hypocritical

Op I am a wheelchair user with arthritis. The cold affects me greatly and I am not very mobile. I don't have a winter fuel allowance. Why do you think only pensioners are affected by the winter, what nonsense.