To think free bus passes for the old should be abolished?

[Bumpitybumper]

Statistics show that on average wealth peaks at age 65-74 in the UK, why then do we give these people free bus passes? It makes absolutely no sense at all and is just an unnecessary expense. The idea that 'young' pensioners are a relatively poor group of people is completely incorrect and it only serves to enhance the already massive intergenerational wealth gap between baby boomers and everyone else.

Given that I have four granddaughters, of course I know. I've seen it. My point was simply that so-called 'boomers' didn't have it so easy then either. It's a myth that we're all rich and sitting on multiple pensions. We aren't.

Well, tbf, I did experience it. I just didn't have it in my house. Couldn't afford it. And no, I wasn't a complete outlier. Today, central heating is the absolute norm. Then, there were many houses that didn't have it, certainly in the areas where I lived.

Maybe if you read my post properly then you would understand that I was calling people that are desperate to use the term 'ageist' in any debate regarding pensioners and benefits is lazy. It is also hypocritical as most benefits disproportionately impact certain demographics so arguably any discussion on Child Benefit, free nursery hours or even in work benefits are ageist.

I also never said that all pensioners under 75 are anything like what you describe. There is poverty in all groups. The graphs that you scoff at provide objective evidence regarding the distribution of this poverty. Of course though, you aren't interested in facts like that. Much easier to misrepresent what I'm saying and insult me.

Means test it fine, but absolutely stupid, maybe , actually presumably so, to assume all pensioners are rich.

Also just to add to your argument regarding people over 65 and their situation regarding their health and wealth etc. You do know that the government are expecting younger people to work until at least 68? Clearly the government does think that over 65 year olds are in good enough health to do this and have merrily slapped more and more years onto younger people's pensionable ages to reflect this. They won't have a state pension, let alone a bus pass at 65. What's good for the goose is good for the gander surely? Or do you think only people that are 65 now matter?

Nobody has said all pensioners are rich. This sentence has not been written on this thread.

Ours is just over £100 a month, funnily enough many drive. It did used to be free but it was decided the catchment school was too far to qualify (which makes zero sense to me!). Even pupil premiums have to pay.

Wow.

I think you will find in your many posts you have made reference to pretty much everything I have mentioned.

I clearly understand what you think of me (and others who disagree) with you just by your response and choice of words.

I have read your posts properly - most of them more than once, as I could not quite believe what I had read in the first place.

I have insulted no-one. You have by referring to pensioners as "these people" in your opening post - and as a result of this you have instantly rubbed people up the wrong way. I am not the first person to say this either.

You know absolutely nothing about me, but you have decided that I have half a brain cell and am obviously incapable of stringing more than a sentence together. Think what you will - but I do have the utmost respect for our pensioners and that will never change.

Oh lay off, I never wrote or even implied any of this;
And according to you (and your graphs of course) until pensioners reach 75 , they are all fit, healthy, doing some sort of work, living in a mansion, counting their pots of money, whilst working out which bus to take just for the fun of it
Ironically the graph I shared was about pensioners living in poverty so this would have been completely incongruous with what you're suggesting that I believe about all pensioners being universally wealthy. I don't mind you disagreeing with me but I absolutely will not accept being misrepresented like this. I have written about 65-74 year olds as a group because this is a universal benefit targeted across the whole group. I have (correctly) asserted they are the wealthiest group in the country but I have never claimed this wealth was evenly distributed within the group and that there weren't people suffering from bad health or poverty.

Nor did I ever write that you had 'half a brain cell' and couldn't string a sentence together. I haven't insulted you at all! I simply wrote that you mustn't have read my posts properly as I never mention all pensioners being in great health, mansions or so called pots of money. You have extrapolated it all incorrectly and would be completely unable to directly quote me on any of this because it was never written.

Central heating was definitely the norm in the mid 90s!!

Do you seriously believe everyone over 60 is wealthy?

Literally no one is assuming all pensioners are rich but it’s an undeniable fact that as a demographic they hold more wealth than any other.

@Bumpitybumper there you go again.

I am not stupid. Of course I know about the proposed and definite changes regarding retirement ages. I also worry about my children and their future - that is why we are doing everything we can to help them along the way.

So the government thinks it is okay to raise the pension age? Great if you are sitting behind a desk and / or have a healthy life with no major setbacks all through your working life. Or you can retire early on a massive pension.

What about those in manual jobs who will struggle due to the role itself, or because of the impact of the ageing process? There are many issues that could prevent them from working longer. But, according to you they will be okay to carry on because the government says so.

Jesus.......I give up.........😩

No, of course I don't. There is poverty in all ages groups in society. Wealth is never evenly distributed. My point is that this age group is the wealthiest at a group level (median) so it seems an odd age group to target for a universal benefit like free bus passes if you aren't extending it to other less wealthy groups too.

This is compounded by the fact that poverty in pensioners is no higher than poverty in the working population and working people with children are much more likely to be in poverty. Surely we should be targeting assistance at those most in need?

I have not said that I think over 65 year olds are ok to carry on working! I have said that the government has assessed that the retirement age must rise because it is unaffordable to keep it at 65. The implication is that the government have to believe that the vast majority of us will be able to go on working until then.

These are the hard economic realities that will be pushed onto generations after yours, partially because we have accrued so much national debt in the past two decades paying for benefits such as these bus passes that we have not funded properly. We are living beyond our means.

You’re right, it hits those who’ve worked in lowish paid jobs who couldn’t save much, but put a little into a pension! Thinking they were being responsible hasn’t done much for their retirement. If they’d not been frugal, they’d now be entitled to Pension Credit, and the add ons like the WFA. If the means test for WFA had been at the tax threshold I think it would have been acceptable. It penalised too many, particularly older single person households.

Family allowance as was (Child benefit now) didn’t start til 1946, and the Queen may have received it for Princess Ann and her younger brothers. Nothing for the first child til 1977! My DC1 was 7 by then, I remember thinking how mad it was, as the first child is usually the most expensive. However, the reason for its introduction was to encourage larger families after WWII. The way means testing is applied to Child Benefit is crackers, to have any semblance of fairness, it should be household not individual income, as other benefits are.

This one again.

By all means take them away, then deal with the increased number of isolated older people who are not getting social stimulation, who aren’t getting out and about to support their physical and mental health and who subsequently make more of a call on over stretched services that they otherwise wouldn’t need.

And once you have dealt with them then deal with all the organisations who will lose their volunteers, the food banks, the charity shops, the hospital volunteer shops, the NT, the local schools who like to have reading volunteers, the museums etc etc.

And talking about museums, and libraries and art galleries and theatres and cinemas which many older people use on a regular basis - think about how they would lose footfall, lost footfall means a reduction in the services they can offer, which could lead to reduced opening hours or even closure. Leading to restricted work opportunities and possible redundancies among their paid staff .

Then there are the cafes and restaurants and other commercial outlets that would really miss the grey pound.

By all means restrict older people to sitting at home watching funeral tv if that is what you think is best, but isn’t it better to have a healthy, active, involved older generation supporting local and wider communities and work forces and contributing to the economy?

And, a last point, if you think the bus companies will carry on providing bus services if they don’t get the bus pass subsidies then don’t come crying when you realise that their commercial interests come first.

Thanks for telling me something I already knew @Bumpitybumper 🙄

Going back to your posts - in particular your Graphs.
Yes, you did post one showing pensioners and those with children were most in poverty.

BUT

You also posted one showing the 'Highest Median Wealth' = Pensioners. Although you forgot to mention that one.

ALSO

In all of your posts, you have referred to pensioners being the 'Wealthiest people' in 9 separate posts.

Your style of writing is very condescending and aloof.

Anyway, shouldn't you be working instead of being on MN - someone has got to pay for all these free bus passes for our elderly freeloaders! 😂

A lot of youngsters can't afford a room in a shared house partly because a lot of them start work so late because they go to university. Some start at 21 but many not until older. I know quite a few who started work at 25. Compare that with people starting work at 14, 15, 16 or 17.

Also when I was young none of my friends went abroad every year and very few had their own car. We also, obviously, did not have phones. Now youngsters all seem to need the latest phone and they are not cheap.

So he's probably not using his free bus pass then? So it doesn't matter?

Op, id imagine it's just the pensioners who need free travel who are using it. No, I don't think it should be removed.

This theory was debunked a long time ago. Even if young people lived exactly like previous generations then housing would still be far less affordable.

Please stop misrepresenting me. I have posted one graph on this thread. I have also linked to an ONS report that contained the statistics I used in my OP as I was asked for evidence to substantiate my claims. The report might have contained graphs but I didn't post them.

Pensioners between the age of 65-74 are the wealthiest group. Those over 75 aren'. This is just a fact and doesn't imply that all people in the richest group live in mansions and sit around counting their money. It's like saying men are generally richer than women so are the wealthiest group by sex. It obviously doesn't mean that all men are millionaires or that no men are poor.

Thanks for the completely unsolicited feedback again. You might not like my writing style but I have been far more polite to you than you have been to me. It's a shame people can't disagree without getting personal.

I think there's a country that has made public transport free for all, I'd be up for trying that, but I've worked with CEOs who pull out their freedom pass despite earning twice what I was earning and it was outrageous.

You really are coming across as an unsympathetic, narrow minded person OP. Your “essential services” might not be the same as someone else’s “essential services”, but what we have now is keeping those who need help the most going. Some school children for example qualify for free transport to and from school, so that’s a young persons subsidy. I have no children or Grand children, but am happy to see this carry on as I know it’s of benefit to some. Unless I am mistaken, students (older young people) can get subsidised bus, rail fares to keep them going. Happy to support this. But the really big funding spends go on dealing with dysfunctional families, children’s services, and mental health via the NHS, plus of course vulnerable older or disabled people who would simply die as they have no one to look after them properly. If society has shifted away from quality parenting, children so badly raised they are under social services, disabled and older vulnerable people left to fend for themselves for whatever reasons, then it says more to me about the society we live in rather than how the funding is allocated. It’s more complicated than taking away a bus pass from the small minority who actually use one.

But your point was that you had it hard because you had to house share when you were young, as if that's not something everyone has to do. It's not a generational hardship. When I was in my mid 20s I remember being shocked that one of my friends had her own apartment - it felt like a massive luxury (and when said friend moved to London she moved into a flatshare). Again I'm in my 40s - i'm practically a millennial and no where near a boomer.

I will accept that standard of living was lower for your generation (that's sort of how standard of living works) and obviously if you compare same age then yes it was more normal in the 90s when you were 40 to not have central heating than it is now. Equally you had a house and I suspect that if you were 40 in the same job now you wouldn't be able to afford that house (and many people would probably to happy to take the house without central heating if they got to pay the same price adjusted for wage inflation - I'll take that deal in a heartbeat!).

I am not saying your generation had it easy. But your examples of what means you had it hard are a joke.

People on this thread have repeatedly said that they know not all boomers are wealthy. No one is claiming that. Of course there are pensioners living below the poverty line. The point that is being made is that they're not poorer than many other groups (eg young families). Overall this group of young pensioners are on average one of the wealthiest age groups. And it's fair to question whether it's right they should be a benefit just because they've hit an arbitrary age.

I am happy for the bus pass scheme to stay. If starting from scratch I'd not be ok with it, but I don't feel strongly it's bad enough it's a problem, and I suspect that the cost of building a system to make it means tested wouldn't justify the actual savings and I equally wouldn't want it taken away in favour of all of another aged group regardless of means.

But I do have a problem with people claiming they're entitled to it just because they happen to be old as if being old gives a special status just on its own. No one on this thread has come up with a ood reason why someone who is 61 inherently deserves a free bus pass just because they're 61.