State pension.

[DonnyNoel]

  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.
 

Historically, your last sentence is b*llocks. Plus you're just talking about incomings, anyone who can't recognise the massive discrepancies between the rises in costs/house prices and wages won't really contribute much to a thread like this.

[drfchound]

Syd, 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.

Does it matter when we are discussing principles? Too much detail too soon is no way to explore options.

BobG

Well yes of course it does.
Syd appears to have a strong view on this so I would think he has something in mind as to what level of wealth would be appropriate and whether the wealth should be measured in property value, income or even cash in the bank.
It is a fair question of mine and as such a shrewd politically minded person I would like to know how he measures wealth and whether a certain level would prevent those people from having a state pension.

[ncRover]

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?

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.

[SydneyRover]

sprot when you get hold of the wrong end of the stick try not to poke yourself in the eye with it.

[Sprotyrover]

sprot when you get hold of the wrong end of the stick try not to poke yourself in the eye with it.

Blinking Aussie Govt, wot a set of Backstabbers eh Skiprat?

[normal rules]

Greenwich uni did an interesting paper on wealth tax. They did put figures on wealth thresholds. The issue with this kind of policy is that wealthy families could vote with their feet and leave the uk.

This paper analyses the revenue potential of a progressive annual net wealth tax in the UK. A progressive net wealth tax is a tax on the stock of net wealth that is designed to raise revenues primarily from the wealthiest households. We present a baseline progressive net wealth tax that only taxes the top 1% wealthiest households. Households with net wealth above £3.4 million (the top 1%) are taxed at a marginal rate of 1%; above £5.7 million (the top 0.5%) at a marginal rate of 5% and above £18.2 million (the top 0.1%) at a marginal rate of 10%. We estimate that this tax would raise roughly £70-130 billion a year after administration costs and tax avoidance/evasion: £70 billion if 50% of the tax is evaded and £130 billion if 15% of the tax is evaded. This is equivalent to roughly 9-16% of total tax revenues taken by the UK government each year.

[danumdon]

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?

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.

[SydneyRover]

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?

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

[danumdon]

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?

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.

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?

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

Rich 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

[SydneyRover]

Showing ignorance again dd

[roverstillidie91]

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?

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.

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?

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

Rich 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?

[danumdon]

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?

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.

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?

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

Rich 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?

[roverstillidie91]

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?

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.

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?

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

Rich 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?

I have no idea as I'm assuming you mean being self-employed which I am employed directly with a company. However what you say if that is happening is morally wrong however the corruption further up the food chain you go in unacceptable

[danumdon]

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.

[SydneyRover]

Show the proof you have and I'll make sure it goes to the right people dd,

[danumdon]

Have you "shown us" yet how would you draw the line at which a pensioner would be classed as being wealthy?

[BobG]

No proof then dd?

BobG

[roverstillidie91]

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.

I agree in the sense that there are career benefit claimers and would be better served working as would raise more revenue for tax claimants, obviously you have the other end of the scale where single people or couples go to work with children and then are worse off working than being on benefits which isn't right in my view. You've also got a mental health pandemic as well on our hands, it's a complicated time.

I agree with what you say in terms of the railway, those clearly playing the game need to be rooted out and whether any whistleblowing policy applies then it should be raised definitely.

In terms of incomes at whichever spectrum you look at the more they keep wages driven down and that's not only the public sector but the private and this in turn means that the richer gain and get richer and the poorer get poorer. This is Tory ideology.

[SydneyRover]

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.

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/1617781231625830401

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1617609190989787137''

How does this fit with your lack of logic dd

[danumdon]

No proof then dd?

BobG

You 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.

[danumdon]

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.

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/1617781231625830401

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1617609190989787137''

How does this fit with your lack of logic dd

As far as i'm concerned fraud is fraud, be it tax or benefit, it should all be rooted out and any government should make this a leading priority and senior politicians/business people should be made an example of.

Im just wondering what the Tory's are doing differently to when Labour was last in power, would these be the same laws that allowed a Labour PM and senior politicians to game the system for their own self aggrandisement or have the laws been changed?

Are you trying to tell me that tax accountants are more professional these days.

[SydneyRover]

But aren't you another economic rationalist dd, resources should be where the best returns are, no?

[SydneyRover]

No proof then dd?

BobG

You 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.

You're full of river water dd, direct facts and questions inevitable result on insults and a change of subject.

[ncRover]

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?

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.

I’m backing you up. I’m saying enough is never enough with the world view that leftists have. It’s a race to the bottom zero-sum game

[ncRover]

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?

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

“You don’t share my worldview therefore you must be brainwashed”

What has say a hardworking middle class person with a good income got to do with the ruling elite anyway?

[SydneyRover]

nc, my reply is to dd

[ncRover]

nc, my reply is to dd

I know and I’m picking it apart

[SydneyRover]

nc can you explain this world view, how it works, what it means and how you live by it?

[ncRover]

nc 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.

[SydneyRover]

nc 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.

So agency over his opinions or your opinions about what he thinks and what I think? it sort of contradicts your above world view, in fact your world view sounds very small, very me.