I'm seeing loads of tory angst, laughable after the last 14 year ****-show... during which time you'd think they hadn't done anything wrong. The correction will be painful in the first few years, if not five. The tories introduced austerity remember. The outing of MPs on Facebook is like the sad herd mentality I'd thought we'd be trying to move away from after the riots.
You seem to think that everyone who negatively comments on the Labour **** show are Tories....on that basis you're ****ing blinkered. But then again you pray to a celestial unknown...fanny
The WFA has nowt to do with state pension rises. Labour gave the train unions a no questions asked pay rise without any productivity conditions. The Labour Party is having all our pants down with the majority of seats they have. It's never been good for the country to have a government with a huge majority whatever the colour of their rosette.
If that’s the case why were the same people defending these ridiculous payrises up in arms over MP’s getting their rise after COVID? It’s just their “earning potential”.
The abolition is OTT without doubt. But it certainly should be means tested Older family members are complaining about their heating bills in the winter, having just bout a brand new car for cash! With loads more sitting in their bank. Rich people complain. Poor people do what they need to to survive. I’m comfortable. Not 50 yet but my pension is sufficient to keep me and the Mrs when I retire (if I live that long!) so we won’t need it.
I disagree, the two are linked. The state pension should be at a level that negates the need for additional payments to cover heating in the winter. The triple lock is unsustainable and I can't see it lasting beyond this parliament, but while it's there it will move basic state pension payments upward. On the train driver thing, I really don't see any other relevance than misplaced envy. No pay rise since 2019, salary levels widely misreported, a multi-year deal below inflation over the period it covers. Hardly utopia.
Which people? You must read different media to me, and I personally haven't got a problem with MP pay but again it just comes back to politics of envy I suppose.
My view. Many pensioners don’t need it or should be means tested as should child benefit. There is a myth created that all are poor old granny who can’t switch the heating on. Many have decent money, don’t have big outlay and rich offspring. Save money for those who need it. Children don’t vote but some need food. They exist but it’s bonkers everyone gets it. I’d do the same for child benefit and the state pension. However the cliff edge is too low for me. A sliding scale would make more sense. There are also things a few people should wake up to. PPE fraud, Sunak donating 100k charitable donation to a fee paying school instead of causes of poverty, Sunaks wife and other MP’s tax dodging, donors donating to political parties for influence instead of poverty, lost income through an ideological Brexit deal under the pretence of ‘taking back control,. Significantly the Tories tax handouts in the last few months when it couldn’t be afforded to try and retain as much power as possible and leave the next party unable to help people. They think that’s clever. It’s immoral. They are evil. I think this policy needs adjustment. I also think some of you are thick or short sighted not seeing the big picture. Tax the rich. It’s the right place to get the money from. Get the owner of the Daily Mail to pay the tax percentage we do. It won’t make any difference to the lives of some taxing them. Will they then start to say ‘cold granny’ is undeserving cos of her lifestyle choices, or is that only thrown at younger families?
A passing thought. My late Father-in-Law had the happy knack of hitting the hail, squarely on the head. I recall his reaction when this was introduced, by Gordon Brown soon after the previous Labour Landslide. ' it's ok giving money away to people, but there will be hell to pay when you have to stop.'
Not sure about that or if that’s true you must get your news from the politicians themselves. There was absolute uproar across all platforms when they gave themselves a payrise of around £6k just last year. Even if what you say about train drivers “misrepresented” wages, which I don’t believe myself, what’s the excuse for bending over and giving junior doctors a huge rise already? It’s ironic that labour voters are calling anyone who states facts “thick” whilst believing the absolute bollocks coming out of their camp the minute. According to the tories the made up “black hole” was future costs ie pay rises for civil servants etc - Labour have agreed that now so there’s £11bn of it accounted for. The train drivers and quite frankly ridiculous junior doctors payrises will take that close to £20bn. Maybe it should be angled at pensioners not having their heating allowance because this pleb who’s LEARNING their profession is now earning 3x the national living wage, rather than you can’t have your heating allowance because the previous government done X,Y and Z. And if the above is true, are those projected costs “the black hole” or are they saying we’re in a £20bn black hole that nobody knew anything about yet we’ve just committed to spending another £20bn on public sector wages? Seems like a sensible thing to do if so..
I don't think there is a perfect solution to any of this and every government has a fine balancing act to perform with regard to benefits versus taxation. A civilised society takes care of its weakest. It is the moral duty of everyone who can to contribute to that society through paying taxes. It is immoral to take from the pot if you don't need it. I think if you've worked hard all your life, consistently paid into the system, you're entitled to something at the end of it. Its immoral to punish people who have worked hard but never been wealthy. It's also counterproductive, and contrary to what we're told, (as well as being immoral to some extent) to punish success. The problem is that people don't fit neatly into 'deserving' and 'undeserving' boxes and so some people who do need help don't get it and some people who don't need help do. So, to some extent, I have sympathy with the government (any government) who have to make decisions such as this. Its not easy. Having said all that, I can't help but feel that taking away the winter fuel allowance is a somewhat performative act. I've seen several commentators say that Labour's plan is to make the first couple of years hard whilst blaming the Tories and then, when things seem to improve, towards the end of their first term, they'll be seen as having improved things, putting them in prime position to win the next election. I don't know how much of that is true but, if it is true, it is a ploy designed to keep them in power. Which makes it completely contrary to Keir Starmer's promise that he would put country first, party second.
We're not going to agree mate, we clearly have different views as to the priorities we face as a nation so I'll leave it there. The only thing I will add is that as a Labour voter (who would vote the same tomorrow if given another go) I've never called anyone 'thick' for having an opposing view. As they say, opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one!
Apologies mate that part wasn’t aimed at you mate, the comment above mine from the knob who’s blocked me
I dont know the circumstances, but perhaps they have saved up all their working lives to provide for themselves in old age, and have just realised that its the wrong thing to do. Perhaps Viv Nicholson was right all along..
Losing the WFA won’t bother me too much, but stopping my 25% discount on council tax will. If it goes ahead as rumoured.
