To think that with over 1million pensioners in poverty, removing the WFA makes Labour the nasty party, who tell blatant lies?

[TealTraybake]

And hypocritical lies at that. Just a few months ago Labour ‘vowed to be the party for pensioners’

‘Nearly 1 million people aged over 66 in the UK are living in deprivation, according to government statistics, the highest number since comparable records began.
Labour, which analysed figures from Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) records, has vowed to be the party for pensioners, with plans to insulate millions of homes and reduce energy bills. It has also “committed to retaining” the triple lock which guarantees annual rises to the state pension’

I understand the WFA should be means tested - but the current threshold is far too low. Food prices have gone up. Energy prices have gone up. Some pensioners need that WFA 🥺.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/16/nearly-1m-uk-pensioners-deprivation-official-figures

I think that part of the issue is , that when a state pension cane into existence, it was expected that it might be paid to someone for around the last 10 years of their life.
The blanket rule on WFA and a lot of the comments on the thread are talking as if "pensioners" are one and the same. Soneone in their late 60s who recently retired is most likely not going to be having hospital appointments every week, carers coming in or difficulty getting around. Someone who retired 25 years ago might do!
My NDN occassionally refers to himself as a poor pensioner, because he shops at Aldi.....while living in a house that's value has gone up by around 25x since he bought it, buys a new car every 3 years, and gifts his children 6 figure sums of money. I'm pretty sure he doesn't need 300 for his wfa, but I'm under no illusion that he's representative of all pensioners!!

Let's not forget houses were cheaper to buy and salaries were in a line with mortgages back in the day.

You have to remember that life was a lot different and simpler back then. People spent more of their weekly wage on food than we do today, but they didn't have additional costs like the internet, tv subscription packages, mobile phones etc. Most people didn't holiday abroad, only one family car, very rarely had takeaways.

A car was a luxury, most people used public transport or walked, a TV was a luxury, so was a home phone, all things that people today just expect to have.

I do think making the pension credit threshold higher might be the answer.

Let’s not forget that taxes were more than 50% higher and so were food prices.

Seriously what year do you think you’re talking about? By the early 70s over half of households had a car and it rapidly increased from then onwards.
A car was not some unattainable luxury during the adult life of most pensioners today.

With the picture you’re painting you would think it every pensioner was a crippled frail person who trekked 5 miles in the snow to work every day with a potato in their pocket to keep them warm warm and didn’t do anything but work, eat gruel and sleep.

Let’s stop this tittle tattle fgs.

This is about today and approx 1million pensioners needing money to help pay their heating bill. This is about Labour having just taken that money from them. Starmer Starmer pensioner harmer etc. That is all. Why anyone has an issue with that, is frankly, shocking.

Well arent they needed Especially when twunts like Starbucks et al want to go cashless and banks are closing all over the shop. Plenty of people on this very board cheering on the cashless society.

@JenniferBooth I am never going cashless. In SE Cornwall, I buy most of my fruit, flowers, eggs and veg from stalls, via a cashbox. If I don't have the right money, I can overpay or underpay, and leave a note saying I will make it right next time I pass by.

On WFA, I think the cut off point should be £12,570, which is the point at which income tax starts. Below that, you get WFA, and after it you don't... unless you can make an extra special extra needs case.

I agree that this would make sense.

Me neither. I use cash as often as i can.

£12570 is not a lot when you have rent, council tax etc to pay.

Same. My mum draws out a sum every week and uses cash where ever possible.
What is infuriating now is having to use a bloody app to pay for parking. Parking machines being card only was bad enough.

What’s wrong with using the app? You can add time on from wherever you are if you need to and also don’t have to have that moment where you have the correct money but the machine just does not like one of your coins or the machine is out of order and you have to search for the working one. You can also use the app to find parking before setting out.

The only time that cash is useful to have is if the card reader is not working, in my opinion only of course, but that doesn’t even happen often.

Rent will almost certainly be covered by housing benefit.

But there has to be a threshold somewhere, and the point at which income tax starts seems the obvious point.

Because not everyone has a smart phone, and not everyone wants to fill their phone with silly apps when a perfectly good parking meter should suffice.
It is annoying to go up to a parking meter that is taped up, with some notice about an app on it.

My mum often puts a note in her windscreen, as the parking app in use where I live (and there are loads of the bloody things too), just sends her on a "your email is already in use" loop, when it isn't... and in some places, she can't even get a signal.

Yeah, that’s not great if the signal is crap. I’m not advocating for the app company by the way. I just personally find it much more convenient as I have my favourites in the app and can be paying as I walk up the road trying to look all cool before walking into a lamppost because I was staring at my phone.

Cut off is harsh but the nonsensical cut offs are all over the taxation and welfare system. A couple of pounds over? You can be 100s to 10,000s of thousands worse off. Pensioners are traditionally Tory voters. MN excluded but voting data backs that. Pensioners are also most likely to vote. Labour will be one term - I expect the triple lock to be next. One group can no longer be shielded when not enough working to pay for it all. Disabled and sick to follow. These are not priority Labour groups and never have been if you pay attention.

We have a ticking time bomb when it comes to affording our welfare state and not enough people paying enough tax. Relying on a tiny, shrinking minority on PAYE to support the whole country is backfiring. We are an upside down pyramid and it’s collapsing.

The real shocker is that anyone thought Labour would be any different. It will be even worse if they tax employers out of basing their global positions in the UK.

I agree. That’s where I’d have made the cut off. Martin Lewis is advocating giving it to pensioners in council tax bands A, B and C but that would be more expensive administratively.

You can be in D band house and still be broke as hell. Asset rich, but money poor.

Why should the tax payer subsidise someone maintaining their asset at the expense of not being able to pay their bills though?

Well quite. A parent posting on here and struggling to pay their bills would be told to downsize.

They are not really maintaining their asset though.
Some people are living in these homes and the buildings are crumbling around them. The resident is living downstairs.
There are few houses like this near me. The gardens are just brambles, and they have smashed windows upstairs.
The house I am in now was a builder's refurb from an elderly lady that was living in one room.