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.

I agree if should be means tested

We used to send ours to a favourite charity so DHs went to the salvation army and mine to a children's charity. To be honest we still sent the money even though it wasnt WFA money this time. I wonder if any charities saw an effect?

Fair point on the admin.

But I also know lots of comfortable pensioners who will admit they don’t need WFA but felt aggrieved when it was taken away. They are ordinary working class boomers.

But yes it probably costs more to administrate means testing

also if pensioners made to apply then the ones who don’t quite have all their faculties will slip through the net and possibly freeze to death

I with pensioners but the thin fb I feel would stop excusing fenake pensioners from accessing their full pencsiob would be a rabe of feminist subjects that prevent women from accessing services: full child benefit as a result if abusuve court processes, full access to employment as a result of birth injuries, lack of access to basic toilets (again due to birth injuries - women’s public toilet provisions is dire), access to proper health due to birth injuries (thd nHS Actuallg provides disclaimers to most info bevause of the sheer lack of access to peer reviewed studies surrounding injury due to reproductive labour)

and on and on and on.

The cut off was far too low. They should have said pensioners who get less than £20k to live off each year.

I agree to a certain extent. The reliance on the benefits state has got completely out of hand and should be reserved for those in real need. We need to find a way to hold people accountable for their own financial situation - this applies to those of working age and retired.
We are prioritising the wrong things. Education for instance is in an absolute mess. Under funded to a criminal degree and (from the conversation I had with our head teacher this am) schools/academies a
couple of years away from financial implosion. We need to prioritise educating the children that will be our future rather than protecting the triple lock. But successive governments focus on chasing votes.
We’re in a mess - I wish someone would come up with some radical ideas for real change.

The majority of pensioners I know do worry about fuel bills, they're at home most of the time and so need to heat their homes for longer than working people who are out of the house 9 hours a day.

Even those who can manage without it or are very wealthy and definitely don't need it still spend it on something whether it's towards a cruise as someone mentioned or christmas presents or meals out so it ends up back in the economy supporting businesses.

I did exactly the same. It went to the foodbank. The threshold was too low, maybe it should have been at the same point as the tax personal allowance.

Of course it should be means tested.

Its the young people i feel sorry for, paying a fortune in rent and never getting on the housing ladder. That's what we should be looking at, not giving well off older people money they dont need.

I just saw the panaroma show on this - once you give a benefit, politically you can't take it away again. It made me a bit angry too.

Perhaps it should be means tested to the same income level as CB.

I don't understand this argument. Why is it the same as CB plus when my parents where raising a family CB wasn't means tested...

A woman after my own heart. As for pensioners, I presume some people have a good pension because they had good jobs and consequently paid a lot of tax

Where do you stand OP on disability/PIP being means tested too? Because if winter fuel allowance is to be means tested, then it should be something applied across the board. I think PIP not being means tested is equally bonkers. In fact any benefit given to people should be means tested. I know some is, but some definitely isn’t.

Means-testing just discourages people from fending for themselves. What's the point of working extra hours if it will just count against you when it comes to benefits? What's the point of paying into a pension if all it means is that you end up with less than those who haven't? Or if others decide that you don't 'need' a few quid towards fuel because you have saved for your dreams in retirement.

Just as some younger people resent the fact that some pensioners have the audacity to live in houses they have actually paid for with years of work, some pensioners resent having subsidised things like childcare and tax credits that were not available to them when they worked from 16 to 66 and paid tax and NI when some others were 'choosing' to stay at home with their children.

It'a all swings and roundabouts. None of it applies across the board, and nobody has the right to decide what others need. If they do, they should be very confident that they wouldn't suffer if the same were applied to them. Do teacher/nurses/accountants/guitarists/call centre workers 'need' their salaries? Who's to say?

One thing is for certain - unless we die prematurely of something we will all get old. We can write off older people as grasping and entitled, and thus ensure that when we are old we will get nothing, or we can push for decent treatment of those who can't easily fend for themselves.

There should be a u-turn on it as the current cuts are missing so so many people who actually do need it. To only allow those who receive pension credit is wrong. what about those who only have the state pension to survive on? My mum and dad are in this position. Both worked low wage jobs all their life’s until retirement, so payed full ‘stamp’ never claimed any unemployment benefits, paid full rent, council tax etc. Both entitled to full state pension so no pension credit therefore no WFA. They’re not any better off than those on pension credit as now that they get housing benefit and council tax benefit the ‘minimum income’ kicks in so month by month they get the exact same as those who get pension credit - except now minus the WFA.
they are now worse off than those who never worked, never contributed.

I don’t think they should have u- turned. I think they should have phased it out gradually if they were going to get rid of it rather than the sudden stopping and it should have been in the manifesto. Why u turning means on this and not act on the waspi women or farmers - every group will understandably step up pressure . It appears as weak government

I couldn't agree more, @MyNameIsAlexDrake. This is why Reform is gaining support.

People like your parents work all their lives and expect a pension and things like free prescriptions because they have paid for them for others out of their wages when they had them.

The benefits culture we now have was not available to today's pensioners, They weren't paid full-time wages to work part-time, or given credits toward childcare.

It's just not fair to resent them now. Yes, some old people are rich - so are many young ones it MN is to be believed. SAHM's with husbands on six figure salaries were not a 'thing' when today's pensioners were young.

🏆 🏆 🏆

Exactly
I voted yabu as they will probably still withhold from wealthier pensioners so your argument is pointless, even though we agree on its principles

When I had mine it was family allowance not CB. None for the first child reduced amount for second child, full amount from then on. So a completely different system that doesn't compare quite so simply.

That was in reply to moremoremores but the has disappeared.

I think it’s bonkers that a wealthy pensioner can get the winter fuel payment yet those without 4 points on pip will soon have it taken away! They’ve u-turned on the wrong thing!
My family have some pensioners and they all moaned about it yet aren’t struggling at all. It’s a joke. Boomers are some of the best well off people in the country!

Its all about keeping as many voters as possible happy for the least cost. A couple of hundred pounds is a pretty low cost and keeps a lot of people on happy. On the other hand reducing eligibility for PIP pisses off far fewer people for an equivalent saving even if those it does affect are affected much more severely. Never mind they can all get jobs making bombs.

I didn’t see this programme. Did they happen to mention that before the 1990s -so for the baby boomers when they were parents - benefits were given out unconditionally? Or that the single mother would have been given a council house even as late as the 1990s and given full housing benefit? Go back to the 80s and things were even better on benefits. Funny how they could afford these things then isn’t it? Along with a public sector that included not-for-profit utilities and an education system that was fit for purpose?

I hope it fully explored that it’s privatisation that broke Britain, empowering private individuals to accumulate all the wealth of an entire country, and the growth of billionaires. I also hope it explored the role of a massively expanded buy to let housing market for the baby boomers and how generational inequality started at that point, historically.

Sadly you’ve made it sound as if the once-noble art of journalistic investigation has been entirely corrupted into supporting government agendas, including yet more neoliberalist economics, by blaming it all on the young and poor.

The baby boomers have been quite happy to watch everyone younger than themselves freeze in mouldy rental flats and work for nothing for themselves. I very much resent the proposed u-turn on winter fuel allowance. They’re the most selfish and grasping generation in history and they’ve taken far too much of the country’s wealth already.

I doubt those baby boomers care less about your resentment, given your bitter description of them. Love how stereotyping is pulled up on MN, when it comes to certain groups but others are fair game.

^ That was supposed to quote @Bowlandbillow ’s early post about the Panorama programme featuring the crying part-time-working mother blaming the benefits bills for all of Britains problems. If I had to point to one factor that’s caused our economy to break it’s the huge over-inflated cost of land and housing. Privatisation is right behind it though.