Fuming that they are talking of taking away pensioner bus passes and the triple lock

[jdoe8]

I'm still 40 years before I will get these, but I think we need to fight to keep these for future generations.

For many people they will have left school at 16 and worked until they were 65. Now after all those years of paying their taxes they aren't getting much back so the very least we need to do is allow them to travel and guarantee that their income will rise every year.

One point of the free bus pass was to cut the accident rate and lower the number of cars on the road.
As usual the tories know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

I live in one of the richest boroughs in the country. Pensioners here have one of the highest standards of living and disposable income, and are sitting on (frequently) multi million pound assets that have appreciated by god knows what % since they bought it for peanuts way back when and long since paid off the mortgage.

Yet the local authority continually bangs on about "protecting" the services they offer them while cutting everything else for everyone else (apart from their own pay and allowances that is).

It must be pure co-incidence that OAPs are the group who vote most prolifically; and our council is desperate to keep them on side

This is just the result of the government pitting us all against each other.

This. We're engaged in a race to the bottom, and that's never likely to end well. I agree that there is vast intergenerational inequality, but the answer isn't to raid pensions. For one thing, the generations who will actually lose out are those currently in work, not those already retired or about to retire - so the baby boomers, some (not all) of whom benefited from house price rises, final salary pensions etc etc, and against whom the rage about 'wealthy pensioners' is directed probably won't suffer. On the other hand, the generations that come after them will find that not only have working-age benefits been cut to the bone in an era of zero hours and insecure contracts, but they face a precarious old age as well. Is this really what we want to aspire to?

Tangerine, the triple lock is not unfair, it is a way of ensuring that the fixed state pension keeps pace with rising prices.

A bit like increases on the minimum wage.

I would also like to point out that the old child allowance was a lot less than current child benefits, that there was no such thing as 15 hours free child care, or universal free meals for under 7s. OK child benefits are reduced for better off parents (very much better off parents!) but other child related benefits, including free child prescriptions, are not means tested. I am not saying I don't agree with these being free, just pointing out that many 'benefits' are free for many groups, not just pensioners.

I think playing one group off against another group is a cunning ploy to divert attention away from the real winners in our society. we ARE a wealthy country, perhaps we need to consider why it is that our government chooses to support the very wealthy at the expense of the poor, and why for example they waste billions on failed IT systems with no one taking the ultimate blame, are prepared to spend more billions building railways in the wrong places .Other examples of government mismanagement , partiality and waste are available on request.........

Could I just say that I am glad fewer pensioners are living in poverty. That is a good thing, and I want fewer and fewer people of every age living in poverty.

Intergenerational inequality is huge, and it will get worse. The issue of care is going to devastate us. The currently healthy 60+ year olds are going to be scuppered when they become infirm. And it will be those without means that will suffer, the JAM s of their generation, of whom there are large numbers. Pensioners as a group may be exceedingly wealthy, but like all other demographic groups, that wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few. Aside from the very poor (and there are still large numbers living in poverty in those age groups) most are just getting by, tightening their belts as food, fuel, housing costs are all ever increasing.

The problem is, all of us are subject to this, and ever-increasing income for one specific group is not right, it's at the expense of all the other groups.

I could write an essay on this.

I'm supposed to be of the baby boomers generation, born in 1953. I have to wait another 11 months before I get my pension & bus pass, and it will be Dec 2018 before I get the Winter Fuel allowance (if the govt hasn't abolished it by then).

I just feel that they are continually moving the goal posts and making it harder to catch up. For the only time in my life, I actually wish I was older, then I wouldn't have all these worries about what things are going to be like for me in the future.

I have a poor employment history & don't qualify for a full pension. The latest estimate is about £110 per week. I've had crappy poorly-paid jobs where I didn't earn enough to pay NI, jobs where women weren't allowed to join pension schemes, jobs where I had to have a refund of my pension contributions when I left. My private pensions estimate, if I leave it till I'm 65, is around £290 PER ANNUM.

There are women who were in my year at school who retired at 55 with a cushy index-linked final salary pension. There are women in my year at school who are currently getting their full state pension. There are even a couple of women in my year at school who are widowed and doing quite well out of their HUSBAND's pensions. None of which is going to apply to me, and thousands of others like me.

My mother and step father, both in their late 80's are the ones who are really getting the best deal out of all this. Quite frankly I'm jealous of their lifestyle and I'm thoroughly disgusted with this govt for making ME pay for it.

Yes they can scrap the triple lock, but don't forget that a 2.5% rise on not-a-lot is far less in real hard cash than a 1% rise on a 6 figure salary. a £1000 a year pay rise for an MP would be 12% for the average pensioner.

No. Pensioners have been very lucky. They have seen their house prices rise enormously. They had free education. They have been able to retire much earlier than other generations will be able to. In the future nobody will be able to get anything like the kind of perks that current pensioners get and it is unaffordable. If anything it should be the younger generations who are being helped as they are the ones suffering with high house prices, crazy cost of education, will never be able to retire. And most elderly did not pay anything like the amount of tax/NI which it costs the state to provide them with a pension/healthcare/free bus passes/winter fuel etc. The country is hugely in debt because not enough has been put aside by the older generations to pay for their retirement and perks whilst they were in work.

Itslikerainonyourweddingday well- I refer you to the parable of the prodigal son. It's okay to squander what you have, because daddy will welcome you back, give you a feast, support you even further.
Christian country, Christian values.

(Yeah, I never really 'got' that story, I think. Or the talents one)

I don't know which I way I fall on this debate. On the one hand it does seem unfair that pensioners are seemingly untouchable when it comes to austerity measures, however I don't know what the antidote to that is considering any form of means testing is likely to cost more money than it saves.

One thing I do know for certain is that I am well and truly fucked off with successive governments playing political games with peoples lives. They stopped representing us and started representing themselves a long long time ago.

My parents come from big families (11 siblings between them). My parents worked all of their life, literally in my fathers case, he worked on a Friday and died on the Sunday. Fewer than half of the siblings have ever worked. Yet the non workers get more state pension than my mother. All of these relatives own their own homes, have £200 per winter, free bus passes and have been able to be supported by the state when they actively chose not to work.

Fast forward to now, house prices mean little choice in both parents working, child benefit is means tested past a certain income level, childcare is extortionate, as is public transport.

I think they should be means tested. It is mad that wealthy pensioners get free buses while workers on minimum wage have to pay full fare!

Weresquirrel (fab, intriguing name!)
Education is something to leave out of the equation. People left school at 14, the majority did not get to School Cert/O Level in those days. A very small percentage did Higher School Cert/A Level, even fewer actually went to university.
Free education to 14 is still universal in UK. In fact it's free up to 18 in England, and I am assuming in the other three nations (but don't know for sure, because Scottish Higher are at a different age, 17?)

The problem is 'jobs' now require 'qualifications', not because they're difficult, but mainly so that companies do not have to weed through so many applications, and in order to keep the jobless figures down, children need to be kept in 'education' for as long as possible. This problem is exacerbated by raising retirement ages, as it cuts down on the rate of natural redundancy.

The education my parents and MIL received sixty years ago was if a narrower focus, but at a much higher level, and in greater depth than children receive today. They were not typical, however, as all were privately or grammar school educated.

When people talk about 'not working' do they mean women who never went back to work after having children? I think it's unfair to hold decisions made in a very different social climate against women. What I will say, though, is that in the frequent 'should I give up work?' thread posters will occasionally mention pensions (and future earnings in general) as an important consideration, and I've seen them frequently get shouted down by the 'but they're only little for a little while!' and the 'why have children just to palm them off' brigade. Giving up years of pension contributions isn't a minor thing - and it really makes me shudder when I see women doing it for men they aren't married to.

How is it possible to own your home if you've never worked?

i would like to see some way that property equity could be released for OAP's. I know there are companies that have done this, but the older schemes all sound a bit dodgy. The thing that comes out in all these type of threads is that OAPs are property rich. It would be good to see some of this going towards their caring costs, bus fares etc etc. Then they wouldn't have to rely on the struggling younger generation so much to fund their lifestyles.

When I talk about not working I mean that my father had 6 sisters and only one of them has ever had a job. That includes pre children. Yet they receive a bigger state pension than my mother who worker until she was 65 after leaving school at 14 with no qualifications.

Diddle, one of my aunts inherited the family home (my grandparenrs money when they died was split between the children than hadn't worked so my father didn't get a penny). I live in one of the poorest areas of the UK and house prices are still very low. The house may have had one wage earning in some cases or some of my family live in council houses.

Nathanbarleyrocks. So would you charge the children of the wealthy for their prescriptions? Not allow three year olds from well off families their 15 free hours? Once you start means testing one group it makes it logical to means test another. the only ones who would benefit are the companies who would leap on the means testing bandwagon, just as has happened with disability assessment.

where i live they have raised 20 million in parking charges. yet they are having to make cuts....because that money has to be used for bus passes.
how the hell can that be right.

PhilODox, I think you could still get a grant to go to uni up to around 1994 or so? Can't remember when fees were introduced, but it was later than that.

Bus passes. The cost of providing the service has to be paid somehow. The contribution from Local Authorities (who fund the scheme) doesn't cover the costs of the transport companies who provide the services. In many rural areas, the services are running at a loss and are being cut DESPITE it being the only way some older people can get around.

Would also comment on the "valuable properties" that many pensioners have. I'd include myself in that, by the way, as my house is probably worth a quarter of a million. Only 5 times what it was bought for, 30 years ago, so hasn't appreciated anywhere like as much as (eg) London properties. It was bought and paid for out of our own earnings, as a place to live, not as an investment. I could probably sell it now and move someone where smaller & cheaper, but why should I be expected to uproot myself at my age, with all the stress, expense and disruption it will entail? And if I do downsize now (its only got 3 bedrooms) I will have less equity in the future to fund my future care fees, so no inheritance for my children.

I have a final salary pension and we have no mortgage. But, my lump sum helped out my children and is now gone. So we are now living on my pension, which is considerably less than average wage. We haven't had a proper holiday since 2008.

Foxyloxy1plus1, have you asked your children to return the favour? Are they in a position to repay what you gave them from your lump sum?

The governments tactic of getting the struggling and the struggling-not-quite-as-badly to turn on each other is really working in how this argument is framed.

If we really want to affect wealth redistribution from wealthier pensioners, why aren't we addressing inheritance tax rates?

My parents are comfortably off pensioners- they have a house in what is now a very expensive area worth a lot, but their income isn't very high. I know full well if they didn't have bus passes they would simply go out less.

As it is, they will nip into the Debenhams cafe for their lunch once a week, go to check out an exhibit. They should - and can-
Have the money to pay for these things, but the reality is, they are frugal, they're concerned about unexpected expenses, and they simply don't use their money to treat themselves.

Enabling pensioners to travel for free increases the likelihood of their engaging socially, improves their health and wellbeing, and I suspect reduces their cost on the NHS by more than the cost of their transport.

In reality, my parents will continue to live a frugal existence, and if there is a health crisis will hopefully have the assets to pay for extra care. If not, I will inherit a house worth a lot of money, having done nothing to deserve it. If inheritance tax kicked in at a lower rate, it would have much more of a positive impact at reducing Intergenerational inequality than taking away bus passes.

Why should wealthy pensioners get bus passes? Yadda, yadda they may have worked all their lives but they will have and still are taking from the system.

The education my parents and MIL received sixty years ago was if a narrower focus, but at a much higher level, and in greater depth than children receive today. They were not typical, however, as all were privately or grammar school educated.

My parents were grammar and privately educated. I would strongly disagree with that statement. My mother's school was truly awful and my dad coasted to achieving really crap A level grades (and don't go on about grade inflation when he failed them, he didn't read all of the books for English literature). He then went on to have a successful, well paid career in accountancy after this.

A difficult topic - while I will be 60 in a few months and can get a bus pass, there are hardly any buses where I live in rural Scotland (but that's another inequality), so won't bother. I used to live in a touristy historical city and the buses were FULL of well-heeled pensioners riding around all day, enjoying the sights, going to the seaside etc, and good for them, but it was being paid for by my council tax, and as a single working person at that time felt that I belonged to the demographic that was subsidising everyone else! It would be interesting, and I suspect horrifying, to know what percentage of our council tax goes to pay for the bus passes ...