0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.
Yep Billy, we have the returns of our fathers the best generation that this country ever had, its not our fault your lot have made a mess of it since the 1980s, buck up get going, heads down arses up and you might enjoy the fruits of your labour. If you carry on snorting powder, working from home, less hours, sitting on motorways and stopping people from getting to work and listening to the left loonies its going to get worse buddy. And by the way, if you want a good pension you need to put a lot of money in it over your working life.
Quote from: drfchound on January 27, 2023, 08:11:43 pmSyd, how would you draw the line at which a pensioner would be classed as being wealthy.Come on Syd, I really would value your opinion on where the line should be.
Syd, how would you draw the line at which a pensioner would be classed as being wealthy.
Does it matter when we are discussing principles? Too much detail too soon is no way to explore options.BobG
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
sprot when you get hold of the wrong end of the stick try not to poke yourself in the eye with it.
Quote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
Quote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Quote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Quote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.Quote from: SydneyRover on January 29, 2023, 08:50:03 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheadsRich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?I think you will be constantly disappointed
Quote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Quote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 09:01:05 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.Quote from: SydneyRover on January 29, 2023, 08:50:03 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheadsRich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?I think you will be constantly disappointed what kind of lifestyle do you mean?
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.Quote from: SydneyRover on January 29, 2023, 08:50:03 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheadsRich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?I think you will be constantly disappointed
Quote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Quote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Quote from: roverstillidie91 on January 29, 2023, 09:23:09 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 09:01:05 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.Quote from: SydneyRover on January 29, 2023, 08:50:03 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheadsRich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?I think you will be constantly disappointed what kind of lifestyle do you mean?# Good example for you as you say you work on the railway.How many "contract staff" on the railway pay accountants to "sort out" their tax returns and at the same time claim benefits that they are not entitled to , because they can?
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 09:01:05 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.Quote from: SydneyRover on January 29, 2023, 08:50:03 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheadsRich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?I think you will be constantly disappointed what kind of lifestyle do you mean?
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.Quote from: SydneyRover on January 29, 2023, 08:50:03 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheadsRich enough for what, to give handouts to people who choose that type of lifestyle, not everyone's sick, or infirm.Regardless of who rules the country is that what your waiting for an incoming Labour government to do, hand over other peoples money to anyone who asks for it?I think you will be constantly disappointed
Quote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.
Quote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?
Quote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.
Regardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
Without doubt the further up the chain you go the corruption is magnified but in this instance we were talking about people who make a conscience decision to defraud the benefits system because they don't want the hassle of having to work hard to better themselves. I know plenty of rail staff who work very hard, try their best everyday and don't get no recognition for their dues, these people are playing the game and can go home on a night safe in the knowledge they have earned their pay through their own endeavours and not gamed the system for what they can get out of it. It happens.
No proof then dd?BobG
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 09:52:16 pmWithout doubt the further up the chain you go the corruption is magnified but in this instance we were talking about people who make a conscience decision to defraud the benefits system because they don't want the hassle of having to work hard to better themselves. I know plenty of rail staff who work very hard, try their best everyday and don't get no recognition for their dues, these people are playing the game and can go home on a night safe in the knowledge they have earned their pay through their own endeavours and not gamed the system for what they can get out of it. It happens.A comment from wilts''You are 23 (twenty-three) times more likely to be prosecuted for benefit fraund than tax crime. Even though tax fraud and error costs an estimated £20bn a year compared to £2bn in benefit fraud and error.This is a government of the wealthy run on behalf of the super-rich determined to get the poor to pay for their lifestyles.https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1617781231625830401https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1617609190989787137''How does this fit with your lack of logic dd
Quote from: BobG on January 29, 2023, 10:46:06 pmNo proof then dd?BobGYou may be a pensioner Bob? would you like to have a stab at the same question, i'm sure your pal would love the hands up seen as he's very reluctance to disclose his theory.
Quote from: danumdon on January 29, 2023, 07:44:31 pmQuote from: ncRover on January 29, 2023, 08:28:19 amQuote from: danumdon on January 28, 2023, 12:38:21 amQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 11:44:46 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 10:35:55 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on January 27, 2023, 08:03:32 pmQuote from: danumdon on January 27, 2023, 07:07:43 pmRegardless of that demographic being the "wealthiest age group in the nation"(debatable) i was under the impression that pensioners had the triple lock because as a demographic they were not in a position to be able to deal with inflation rises like the rest of us who can change careers or work harder if it suits, Its not like they can all go back to work and earn some extra!I'd imagine there is a sizable percentage who have no private provision and have to make do with the state handout.Should we all start castigating these people because they got an inflation busting rise?No just do what it says in the article and means test pensions so that those wealthy ones, the ones that don't need the money don't get the money, simple.I don’t profess to know your situation but you are either drawing or in for some pension payments, should you be means tested?Where do you draw the line, do we penalise someone for making prudent decisions decades aga?correct on first count, you don't know, and incorrect on the second I do not. Those that are classed as wealthy which is relative of course are not being penalised, they gained their wealth in a country that has, with some exceptions, educated them with some provided with a better level of education inc facilities and teachers at no extra cost. They are given opportunities to gain further education, access to health services and protection such as it is.Is it asking too much that those that can afford it support those that cannot? You are not being victimised for doing well you are being asked to contribute to a better society.The exact people you quote are being taxed at currently penal rates, these are people who have worked hard all their lives and progressed in their careers to enable themselves to have a comfortable retirement and not be a burden on the state. If we see people like that getting hammered due to their foresight and adherence to strict budgeting throughout their livers then what is the point of us working ourselves into a position similarly to then have the wheels pulled out from under ? remember these are the squeezed middle who try to do the right thing and carry the can significantly with the amount of taxes they pay over their working lives. These are not people who have had fortunes handed to them or left in inheritance to them but have genuinely worked themselves into what should be a good situation.We all understand that their is a percentage of people in society who are not as fortunate for whatever reason and will always require the state to lend a hand, no one wishes to beggar these people and society needs these people to thrive if we are to have a functioning and stable future.Are we to do it by further deductions from this squeezed middle that ultimately will see people wondering if they may as well just bump along and not push or attain their ultimate potential because they see it as not worth it in the long run?When is enough, enough?When you think that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, enough is never enough.Got some evidence to justify that?I would say most poor people are poor due to the life choices they made. Contrary to what some on here would have you believe, very poor people do have options available to them to make a success of their lives but it requires hard work, dedication and a strong belief in themselves.Something that looks like its been lost in this country.maybe if you read something other than the sun and express you'd understand that that the country is well rich enough it's just that it's been ruled extremely badly for 13 years by wealthy nobheads
nc, my reply is to dd
nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?
Quote from: SydneyRover on January 30, 2023, 11:28:58 amnc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?I’m referencing your comment there “maybe if you read something other than the sun or express”. You seem to think that dd has no agency over his own opinions just because they are different to yours.Anyway, since you asked. I felt a lot more powerful and confident in my life since I realised that I am responsible for myself. Rather than complaining that things aren’t fair or are somebody else’s fault all the time.