Election Year or Fear!

[Andy_Faber]

I’ll accept that the communication hasn’t been great and Mick Lynch’s stance unhelpful…but as a principle - that such support needs to be properly targeted - I believe the government action to be correct.
If, as you suggest, ‘some people will lose it and miss it’ for genuine reasons then I understand that needs addressing, but the notion of a universal ‘benefit’ where the very wealthy receive the same £300 towards the cost of their winter fuel as the little old couple who receive nothing more than their monthly pension is seriously flawed.

But that logic is inconsistent, because you who don’t need a generous tax free allowance get one anyway to the same level as those with only state pension. This is a result of dogma by Labour, an income tax raid in all but name (it is an income, they’ve taxed it at 100% for most) because they vowed not to touch ‘actual income tax. I’m just being devils advocate here I am not old enough nor have relatives old enough to have actual skin in the game

[ramAnag]

But that logic is inconsistent, because you who don’t need a generous tax free allowance get one anyway to the same level as those with only state pension. This is a result of dogma by Labour, an income tax raid in all but name (it is an income, they’ve taxed it at 100% for most) because they vowed not to touch ‘actual income tax. I’m just being devils advocate here I am not old enough nor have relatives old enough to have actual skin in the game

I’m sorry AF…I just don’t ‘get’ any of those arguments. I suppose we just look at the world in different ways.

As for the ‘no skin in the game’ aspect…that’s a bit like saying I don’t care about schools because my children have left, I’m not bothered about the NHS because I’ve never been ill, or climate change is of no concern to me because my life is nearly done.
Surely every one has ‘skin in the game’ of seeking to ensure a well educated society where the sick and elderly are well cared for and the future is secured for our grandchildren and beyond.

[Andy_Faber]

I’m sorry AF…I just don’t ‘get’ any of those arguments. I suppose we just look at the world in different ways.

As for the ‘no skin in the game’ aspect…that’s a bit like saying I don’t care about schools because my children have left, I’m not bothered about the NHS because I’ve never been ill, or climate change is of no concern to me because my life is nearly done.
Surely every one has ‘skin in the game’ of seeking to ensure a well educated society where the sick and elderly are well cared for and the future is secured for our grandchildren and beyond.

Just the opposite. No skin in the game means I can look at it objectively rather than think ‘I should believe X but that would disadvantage uncle Bert (or whoever) so I’d better think Y.

[ramAnag]

Just the opposite. No skin in the game means I can look at it objectively rather than think ‘I should believe X but that would disadvantage uncle Bert (or whoever) so I’d better think Y.

Okay…again we’ll have to differ. To me it means no material interest or investment in the outcome of an enterprise or activity.