UK PENSIONERS. A BURDEN ON THE STATE.

[ivanhoe]

It is clear that many of you on this site believe that the UK's elderly people are a burden on the State.

So, what you anti- elderly people are doing is descriminating against basically the old in our society, and our country.

You are saying that our elderly people are unaffordable.

That they must endure a low State pension and means tested handouts.

And while you are descrimating against our elderly people, you are full of yourselves to the point of banality.

I read somewhere recently on the internet, that the people living in the 30's and 40's were more mature and sophisticated than the people living today.

This I can believe.

Ok, no idea where you got your information from but so noted.

Any ideas yet what you think is a fair amount to raise the basic state pension to?

How much my taxes should rise by? Specifically which tax? NI? Income Tax? Assuming that's how you will find the money? Or if not which other areas of government expenditure would be cut to fund it?

Not asking you to cost it out to the nearest million. Just the broad strokes will do.

Hansard political records, that's where. Britain is a very wealthy country. We have no problem funding money to send abroad and fight foreign wars.

So we shouldnt have any trouble finding money for a decent State pension for our elderly people.

this is a good source of data. (for 09/10, couldn't find a later one)

"Pensioner units on average received £442 a week in gross income in 2009-10 . This compared with a gross income of £644 for the working age benefit units. After deduction of direct taxes, pensioner units received an average of £366 a week in net income, compared with £470 for the working age population. After deduction of housing costs, average income stood at £338 a week, compared with £405 for working age benefit units. These comparisons are with working age benefit units which may also include children."

On average "pensioner units" do okay when you consider that they also get free prescriptions, free bus passes, TV licence (75+ I think?) and have no work related costs, when you compare them to the only slightly better off (after housing costs) average "working age unit" with a couple of kids to clothe and feed, child care costs, travel to work costs etc.

Yes some pensioners "must endure means tested handouts", but then so do an awful lot of "working age units" in the form of tax credits. In an ideal world no one would rely on "handouts" - if you could come up with a fiscally sound plan as to how we could achieve that I'd be the first to back you.

Please provide a link for the Hansard report supporting your claim "means testing pensioners on their pittance, is costing 15 to 20 times more in beaurocratic form filling, than it would cost to restore the State pensions link with male average earnings." as I'd be interested to read that (I couldn't find it in the Hansard archive, but perhaps I'm using the wrong search terms)
What I did find was this. Using the 07/08 figures, £182m in admin costs to pay out £7,394m in benefits. I don't think there is any way that £182m/15=£12m is anywhere close to what is needed to restore the earnings link...

Well Betsy's managed to find some figures. Ivanhoe, you still haven't come up with a single number yet.

You are right, Britain is a wealthy country and I agree we should never have gotten involved in the wars we have been recently. But let's look at some numbers. Libya is/was estimated to have cost us £300 million. Hardly peanuts I know but then we spend £70 billion on basic state pensions each year (excluding pension credits, TV license, winter fuel etc.). So in that context, we could have increased state pensions by 0.04% if we'd avoided the war. Libya was a one off (hopefully) so it's hard to justify funding annual expenditure off the back of one off events.

If we shouldn't have any problems finding the money, perhaps you can tell us where we should be looking?

As I said before mr niceguy, you aint so nice, but your best friends wont tell you.

When it comes to the livelyhoods and dignity of our elderly people, people like you will dig up the steets just to find some reason not to pay pensioners a decent State pension.

In short you would pull the wings off butterflies if you thought you could make a quick buck doing it.

Anyway this site's crap, its full of no hope people, probably Tory's who dont care about anybody but number 1.

So adios amigo.

To be fair, the Pension Credit minimum income guarantee is £900-ish a month for a couple; allowing for sensible housing benefit and council tax that's the equivalent of about a £24k pre-tax salary to support a couple, even if they've never worked a day in their lives.
Not too shabby IMO, what do you suggest it should be raised to?

If this site is so crap, why do you persist in posting on it?

I've said I don't mind paying. I'd just like to know how much. Such a simple question yet you don't have the answer.

So adios. (Although I suspect you'll be back)

Pensioners are not all poor. Some pensioners on final salary schemes are very well off and a few have higher incomes and fewer costs than the average family. Pensioners pay less tax than a working person as they do not have to national insurance. Pensioners do not have to pay for childcare or travel costs in going to work

A family with 2 two pre schoolers a SAHM and a father who earns 45K are being vicously hit by cuts in child benefit and child tax credit. Yet wealthy pensioners have not had to make ANY sacrifices with the credit crunch. I feel this is very wrong.

My father has a pension that is more than many working families. I feel that the income tax system could be used to tax wealthy pensioners a bit more. I am not in favour of means testing winter fuel allowance as it puts off poorer pensioners who feel ashamed. Prehaps pensioners should have a higher income tax personal allowance, but have higher rates of income tax start at 25K.

I also think the governant needs to encourage more part time working, prehaps with national insurance breaks for employers who employ part timers. Many people in the sixties would cope quite happily with working 10 to 20 hours a week. If you have already paid off your mortgage you might not need to work full time. A little bit of part time work keeps the brain active and would help with mental health.

The elderly are a burden on the state because the state itself is too fearful of losing their votes to change anything for the better, I'm talking means testing here, in a country where there are at least 3 million unemployed, people getting food parcels from charities and people living on the street how can this government justify giving all OAPs winter fuel allowance regardless of income?,

why should the current OAPs moan about the level of state pension when they had opportunities people today don't have, like the ability to get on the property ladder before the market prices went insane and the ability to save money for a rainy day.

Why should OAPs get free travel on public transport (and children shouldn't get free travel and all) when it just means everyone else is paying for it, transport should be cheaper for all that way the poor of all ages will benefit.

The unfortunate fact of the matter is the state pension is a safety net for people to fall back on so they don't end up with nothing at all, just like JSA and just like the NHS, the safety net to stop you falling into the gutter, not an aid to a nice enjoyable lifestyle, if you failed to gain enough for your retirement well shit happens, thats life, be greatful you life in a semi-socialist country where you get some help rather then nothing.

It is really right that an elderly person who has made no provision whatsoever and maybe has never worked in their life get more than someone working full time on the minimum wage? (Ie. when you throw in pension credits, housing benefit, free bus passes, TV licence etc.)

We need a society where there is a sensible balance between the needs of the working and those who cannot work. As a country we are struggling financially and we have to think laterally. (Otherwise known as thinking the unthinkable!)

I don't want anyone to suffer in old age or at any age. However there is no such thing as a money tree and we have to work out how we afford to support the country.

reallytired - agree with everything you say except OAP's paying higher taxes to subsidise SAHMs. I could never afford that luxury and have worked all my life. This will, however, mean i get a decent pension.

My IL's are on pension credit - so i imagine their basic pension is relatively low. But because of all the extras they get they are actually better off than when my FIL worked. They give money away periodically or they go over the savings limit. this seems madness.