Quote Originally Posted by SinceSept1959 View Post
Too right pensioners certainly had it easier than many other people, leaving school on Friday and starting a 40 hour working week on the following Monday morning aged 14/15/16.
No gap years or 4 year boozing jollies at "Uni " or actually starting work at 22/25 years of age !
In 1967 the average starting wage was £5 per week , which by my humble calculations equated to 30 new pence per hour. Only 3% went to "Uni" of whish only 1% were females. Anyone wishing to progress attended day release if they were lucky or evening classes.
Mortgages were only awarded on a 40 hr flat wage and no overtime earnings or spouses earnings were included. In the late 70's Mortgage Internest rates peaked at 17.8 % ? Not all bad news as meagre savings totals accrued enough interest to take the kids on a week's holiday in an East Coast caravan !
It's not the pensioners' fault that house values are currently ridiculously high.
Paying a mortgage those days was difficult too , although overtime was usually available, that generation would only buy what they could afford not get into credit debts.
The house price spiral is entirely due to Bankers, Estate and Lettings agencies and over population.
I certainly don't envy future generations under these challenging agendas , but the pensioners have also had to live through hard times too !
Many working families would be considerably worse off without the help and support of grandparents, both financially and supporting working parents !
Interestingly , according to Think Tanks , a well off pensioner will have £64k in the bank with an average house value of £328 k.
Again, I am not saying pensioners have had it easy. But whining about how expensive the mortgage was when for most young people there is no ability to buy a house at all isn't a winning argument.

Per the Resolution Foundation about the years of Tory misrule:

"Pensioners have gained an average of £900 annually, while working-age families have lost an average of £1,500 per year. The hardest-hit groups since 2010 include out-of-work households receiving benefits, losing an average of £2,200 annually, and large families with three or more children, who are £4,600 worse off on average."

So yeah, relatively speaking, pensioners have done better. No surprise given they were the Tory core vote.

As for house prices, plenty of blame to go around but the core is we just aren't building enough houses. Several reasons for that including the planning system, the priortisation of golf courses over houses, the lack of intervention with developers who just sit on land, and so on. Much of this due to the policies that pensioners pushed and voted for.

As for that starting wage - maybe, but the average weekly wage for a manual labourer in 1975 was ten times that, or about £1,100 - a week - in today's money. Minimum wage for over 21s today is less than half that.

Quote Originally Posted by cher1 View Post
I don't think its relevant whose fault that is - because the policy has been implemented in full knowledge of the 'lost' 760,000. The fact remains that hundreds of thousands of elderly, likely vulnerable people will be worse off as a result of this action. There must have been a better way to do it. It's so arse about face to start a drive to get people the benefits they're entitled to after the money has already been taken off them.
It's indefensible.
They could have taxed the Winter Fuel Payment rather than selectively withdrawing it. But the money hasn't "already been taken off them". It's paid on November or December. Still time to ensure those who need the help end up better, not worse, off.