How about thinking of the elderly for a change ?

[ivanhoe]

The middle classes have managed to put their case on the media map because of Child Benefit reductions.

Wheras the pensioners cause has never found a media voice.

So middle England are moaning about losing their Child benefit, and the media are picking up on it and discussing it as a topical issue, because the middle classes are making a fuss.

But hang on a minute ?, the poorest people in this country are not the middle classes, they are the working classes who in proportion to income are paying more taxes than the middle class, and the pensioners on a £5,000 a year State pension receiving a State pension which they have already paid for while working prior to their old age retirement are being ignored, even though the oldest pensioners fought for this country during the War years.

Our elderly people are the generation that government?s have run rough shod over for the past 30 years, this is the generation we should all be speaking up for, and this is the generation who have paid into the system all their working lives, but have to endure a basic State pension of £97 a week, and means tested handouts.

Many woman get less State pension due to lack of contributions while raising families.

/////she helped working class voters /////

You dont read so well do you.

She sold off council houses to working class people just to get votes.

But she also stopped building council houses for future generrations.

And this is where the problem is.

I agree that that IS a problem. But that wasn't what you have been talking about for the last millenium. I thought one was bleating talking about the elderly?

I was right 2 pages back. You ARE a loon, and a loon with no proper argument to boot. Have a

I'm not old enough to remember much of Thatcher but I don't get why she is hated/slagged off so much. Most of her principles have been adopted by the Labour party, she won 3 general elections and the policies she pursued have been implemented across the developed world.

Actually you could not be more wrong.

Since the 80's and Thatcher, we have copied the United State and Ron Reagan's right wing Republicans.

And Europe have a Social Democracy which is the envy of the world.

Are you on drugs ivanhoe? You seem to be unravelling.

Private industries and the market economy are key features of social democracy as well.

Yes, Huddspur,most of her principles were adopted by the Labour Party - unfortunately.
Thatcher was hated because of the war she declared on the working class. There was to be 'no such thing as society.'Privatisation. Anti-union laws.De-industrialisation.Removing the link between pensions and earnings.Taking on and defeating the miners in their year-long strike against closures- & miners had regularly supported other groups such as the nurses. The poll tax - under which a duke would pay the same as the dustman.She did not get away with that one- we defeated it by a campaign of non-payment; 18 million refused to pay.
You're right that her policies were copied elsewhere - with privatisation being promoted round the world by Gordon Brown as Chancellor.
In Britain 65% of the national income went in wages in 1975; 35% went on profits,interest and rent.Now it is 53% on wages, 47% to capital.This is the result of these policies- whether under Thatcher or New Labour.The rich are very much richer - and staying so. They want us to fight amongst ourselves as to what to cut- benefits for the unemployed, those in work, the disabled, pensioners, child benefit.We should not fall for it.

"She sold off council houses to working class people just to get votes"

Some working class people did extremely well out of it at the time. My generation didn't vote for Thatcher, your generation, however, did.

////Private industries and the market economy are key features of social democracy as well./////

The Social Democracies of Europe, have State intervention where necessary.

America and the UK are market driven, that's the difference.

Ivanhoe - The fact remains that the current generation of pensioners did do very well out of the long boom since the second world war. They have failed to elect governments that made steps to ensure the security of pension provision and now want the current generation to pay for this. And as the current generation don't see that there is a likely to be another boom of similar duration and size to create the wealth to pay for THEIR future pensions they feel reluctant to do so.

Everyone agrees that poor pensioners should be helped. The idea that you should get more money just as a reward for not dieing is indefensible.

Ivanhoe - There's been quite a lot of state intervention in the Market in the US and UK lately....

///// They want us to fight amongst ourselves as to what to cut- benefits for the unemployed, those in work, the disabled, pensioners, child benefit.We should not fall for it.//////

But we do, and they love it that we do.

It is how the politians get votes, because largely we are a politically docile nation, only interested in number one.

The american economy and our economy are totally different. We are far more similar to other european economies than we are to american.

Ivanhoe - "///// They want us to fight amongst ourselves as to what to cut- benefits for the unemployed, those in work, the disabled, pensioners, child benefit.We should not fall for it.//////

But we do, and they love it that we do.

It is how the politians get votes, because largely we are a politically docile nation, only interested in number one."

This is exactly what you are promoting though by saying that the interests of pensioners are more important that those of other groups.

Inevitably many working class people did take the opportunity to buy their council house very cheaply.Sometimes the mortagage was cheaper than their countil rent.
Thatcher talked of a 'property-owning democracy.' She hated the idea of anything being socially owned.
This sell off - and the lack of new council house building- has led to the huge shortage of council housing today. Yet we are told the answer is to push existing tenants out of houses they've lived in for years, even decades.

/////Yet we are told the answer is to push existing tenants out of houses they've lived in for years, even decades.//////

What do you think ?

What do you think ? //////

People should have the right to remain in their council house.Those of us in owner-occupied houses are not turfed out when we have an excess room are we? And the idea of insisting people move out when they get a bit better off- does the government not know so many jobs are temporary now.
The £95 billion lost each year in tax evasion and avoidance by large companies and wealthy people + the £26 billion going uncollected should pay for the building of quite a few council houses- and a lot more besides.
Though they would save money in the long run by cutting down the cost of Housing Benefit. Council houses let at full rent are not susbsidised at all.

agree with you SharronM1

'Those of us in owner-occupied houses are not turfed out when we have an excess room are we?'

not yet, fortunately we got rid of Labour, so that has been delayed.

Neither of my parents are yet 75. However, they are not in a fit condition to work. People might be living longer, but they aren't necessarily living in good health longer.

My parents would have been around 4 when the war started and around 10 when it ended. I think I had a slightly calmer childhood.

My mother went to grammar school, but only 2 or 3 of the girl's in her class went to university. It was generally accepted that when you got married your employer could expect you to leave.

Unusually, my mother did not marry until she was in her thirties. She did not expect to buy her own house because she was single. Her choices would have been to live in a bedsit or flat share, not necessarily with her own room, perhaps not with a bath, or live with her parents.

There was no maternity pay when she had children and no maternity rights.

It is true that they do have a house that has risen greatly in value. Should they live to be 90 or 100 and not be in good health, they will be lucky to be able to use that fund to pay for care.

Some you win, some you loose.

"A lot of pensioners shot themselves in the foot by voting for that old bag, and thats a fact"

Perhaps, but they wouldn't have been pensioners then - perhaps old age seemed along way away, back when they had young families.

"Those of us in owner-occupied houses are not turfed out when we have an excess room are we?"
Is that not because they own the property whilst social housing tenants don't.

The selling off of the council houses was a huge error (and I say that as a Tory voter) because it has destroyed what was once a very good affordable housing base which offered security of tenure to many families in return for a one off benefit to the people wh happened to be living in those houses at the time of the sell off.

We are now in a situation where we are topping two wage families up with all sorts of "credits" and "benefits" when what they really need is affordable housing.

Lack of social housing also erodes the competitiveness of the economy by inflating wages and distorts the level at which it is "worth working".

eg min wage cant be any lower or people cannot survive. As a contrast, in HK the min wage is

yes, and isn't this why Labour are rightly against means testing? It's the same with pensioners, many are not claiming what they are entitled to.