To resent the U-turn on winter fuel allowance?

[BlueEyedStarling]

Perhaps I'm existing in a bubble, but all of the pensioners I know, are pretty well off, or comfortable, at least. I live and have older family in the South East, but my dad and his elderly partner, live in the North. Literally, all of them say they dont need the WFA, but happily accept it regardless and shouted from the rooftops when it was taken away from them. Just how long can the working age population keep paying for this increasing, triple-lock section of society who are, as a whole, the wealthiest amongst us? Personally, we fell through the gaps of being able to receive any child benefit (only just!), but have always been willing to accept that we didn't need it and therefore shouldn't have it. Is it that our middle-aged generation just dont shout as loudly about things that affect us? I do want to add that I am very aware that there are many pensioners who should be in receipt of the WFA and that the cut off was too low. Also, that our pensioners fair pretty badly in comparison to much of Europe. It seems criminal that it can't be means tested to benefit those who really do need it.

Such a waste of money. Why should I pay taxes for well (enough) off pensioners to heat their homes. They can heat them themselves.

I'd much rather my taxes went into schools or libraries or new rail links.

Not in ISAs, not the first £1k, not if you qualify for the extra £5k savings allowance.

And no nic on interest either.

As a pensioner who pays taxes but is not well off, why should I pay for schools, free childcare and rail links? Because I live in a society that has determined that collective responsibility for certain things is the way to go.

I pay my taxes so your kids can go to school, borrow books from the library. I’m a pensioner.

Yeah and we paid them too so CsptBirdsEar could go to school, hospital, catch a bus etc.

People can debate and have different opinions on what our taxes are used to pay for.

Of course they can. I could say I don’t want mine to fund child benefit for people whose income is multiples of mine.

Didn't say they couldn't, did I? I was debating and having a different opinion. And your problem with that is?

The money is for the child. And it used to not be means tested at all.

The biggest cost is the NHS and something like 80% of life time spend is in the last few weeks of life, for the majority of people.
If the NHS were to go, it would be bad news for the elderly in particular. We cannot take the NHS for granted either, anymore.
Instead of capitulating to the angry pensioners, perhaps Labour should have pointed that one out. We are not sure what Reform’s intentions are with the NHS! Very obvious one to point out.

Of course and vote for whomever gets closest too.

No one is disputing that

I agree OP its ludicrous. It's also convenient how this benefit can be worked out for each member of the household whereas with child benefit that is of course impossible and so families just over the threshold lose out.

That would be the most sensible and logical solution for everyone.

This though, it pits people against each other. People are hating on the disabled, others are hating on the pensioners. This divide and conquer tactic has worked for decades, they won’t change their agenda now.

Yes, you are living in a bubble.

TBH I don’t know anyone who actually needs it - dh and I don’t - but nor do I know anyone who was complaining about it being stopped. Consensus was, presumably, well, fair enough.

Regardless of anything eise, if he thinks your reduced maternity pay doesn’t mean he should pay more temporarily then your increased salary shouldn’t mean you pay more long term either. He can’t have it both ways. Either the one receiving less money pays less or they don’t. It can’t apply to you and not him. So I think when you’re back to work you should make him increase his contributions to 50% - by his own logic! If you manage to stomache him until then that is 😂

Yes, but Rachel has fixed the foundations remember!

Pensioner here 🙋‍♀️
I am on the new state pension, £921 per month. I have a small work pension £450 after tax. My husband also has the new state pension, plus a decent work pension. We will now qualify for the WFP. We DO NOT NEED it.
Most of the pensioners I know DO NOT NEED it. Im sick of hearing pensioners say, well I've paid into the system I should benefit. They should get their state pension, agreed. But top ups ? FGS, stop being greedy! There's more important things to give the money to.

BTW, I agree that poorer pensioners should have help. But 35k is way too high.

It was a mind numbingly stupid idea that cost Labour political capital that it could ill-afford.

Pissing off the one cohort in the electorate who can always be relied upon to vote made no sense.

Pensioners don’t vote Labour so what did they have to lose?

That’s a generalisation, you can’t possibly speak for all pensioners!

I wasn’t speaking for all pensioners but as a generation we lean right. I’ve voted Labour all my adult life since the early 1970s but I’m now in a minority in my age group.

For the over 50s the proportion voting Labour decreases more steeply with 34% of 50-59s backing Labour, 28% of 60-69s and just 20% of those 70 or older.

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49978-how-britain-voted-in-the-2024-general-election

Are there facts to back this up though?

edit as I see you’ve edited.

thanks for the link.

My MIL moaned when she lost her WFA. She is now moaning that she is getting it back "because Starmer looks weak." She didn't even bother to vote last election- because the Reform candidate she planned to vote for got removed at the last minute. No use Labour bribing her for votes.