Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

The election thread may have had 52,000 views but I'd be prepared to bet maybe 10,000 of those are you! Its still a tiny audience even if looked at a lot by some members. A million views on Brexit - well maybe 50 individual contributors on that thread over the years and perhaps a few more casual viewers. If you want to change the world, this isnt the place to do it!

Lol…for 10,000 of them to be me wouldn’t I have needed to visit the thread around 40 times per day every day? Seems highly unlikely you’d win that bet…and who mentioned changing the world?

[Trickytreesreds]

oh dear, this could come back to haunt them.
Like I said, no difference between this lot and the last.

https://inews.co.uk/news/labour-pens...-check-3267416

[MadAmster]

oh dear, this could come back to haunt them.
Like I said, no difference between this lot and the last.

https://inews.co.uk/news/labour-pens...-check-3267416

not read the article but thanks for agreeing with something I've posted in loads of posts/threads on here over the past 2 years. You can, indeed, just about get a Rizla paper between the two.

[Andy_Faber]

not read the article but thanks for agreeing with something I've posted in loads of posts/threads on here over the past 2 years. You can, indeed, just about get a Rizla paper between the two.

So that’s three of us agree on a subject. Consensus breaks out!

Its interesting to watch/listen to the dynamics of HMG/HM Opposition communications with the change in administration. Labour appear well briefed on what to say when stating the case for policies, but are in some cases pretty poor (to useless) in defending the indefensible or even the defensible, I think some HMG spokesmen are making a complete Horlicks of responding to probing about the winter fuel allowance. The Conservatives reached the stage of being difficult to believe even when telling an obvious truth, it'll be interesting to see if Labour descend to the same depths

[ramAnag]

There’s a whole lot of mischief making going on about the winter fuel allowance imo. Those in the greatest need will still receive help.
Speaking as someone previously in receipt of the allowance I have to say I don’t actually need it and I doubt very much that I’m amongst the wealthiest 35% of pensioners.
Amongst my friendship group are those who donate the money to charity, give it to their children, add it to the grandkids’ present fund or buy the Christmas booze with it. That’s not what taxpayers’ money should be spent on is it?
Amongst our local community are pensioners living in properties worth a million pounds or more. Why, in such circumstances, shouldn’t it be means tested. As long as those in the greatest need continue to receive the allowance what’s the problem?

[Andy_Faber]

There’s a whole lot of mischief making going on about the winter fuel allowance imo. Those in the greatest need will still receive help.
Speaking as someone previously in receipt of the allowance I have to say I don’t actually need it and I doubt very much that I’m amongst the wealthiest 35% of pensioners.
Amongst my friendship group are those who donate the money to charity, give it to their children, add it to the grandkids’ present fund or buy the Christmas booze with it. That’s not what taxpayers’ money should be spent on is it?
Amongst our local community are pensioners living in properties worth a million pounds or more. Why, in such circumstances, shouldn’t it be means tested. As long as those in the greatest need continue to receive the allowance what’s the problem?

If you're saying 'what's the problem?' in an offhand way thats not like you, if its a genuine question there are two problems IMO - first, a genuine problem 'on the margins', where because not everyone's circumstances are the same, some people will lose it and miss it and not have any other allowance to replace it, and second a problem of message delivery, its not been great, not helped of course by HMG (as ever was), by the unions and cheif string-puller Mick Lynch coming out against it.

[Trickytreesreds]

There’s a whole lot of mischief making going on about the winter fuel allowance imo. Those in the greatest need will still receive help.
Speaking as someone previously in receipt of the allowance I have to say I don’t actually need it and I doubt very much that I’m amongst the wealthiest 35% of pensioners.
Amongst my friendship group are those who donate the money to charity, give it to their children, add it to the grandkids’ present fund or buy the Christmas booze with it. That’s not what taxpayers’ money should be spent on is it?
Amongst our local community are pensioners living in properties worth a million pounds or more. Why, in such circumstances, shouldn’t it be means tested. As long as those in the greatest need continue to receive the allowance what’s the problem?

Mischief making?
In 2017, Labour, with Starmer said that 4000 pensioners will die if May cuts the wnter fuel payment. Theyw ere outraged that she even might consider it.
Starmer said quite catagorically, that there was no plans to touch the payment or any other attack on pensioners. What changed, apart from the obvious lie?
Remember the rants pre election? NO DIFFERENCE IN THE TWO- EXCEPT WE WILL ALL BE PAYING MUCH MORE TAX.

Keir Starmer accused the Conservatives of plotting to cut pensioners’ winter fuel payments just weeks before the election was called.

The prime minister urged Rishi Sunak to “rule out” scrapping winter fuel payments in May, and suggested the then-government wanted to use the money to abolish National Insurance.

Rachel Reeves, who this month axed the payments for 10 million state pensioners, also repeatedly criticised the Conservatives for reducing the support while in her role as an opposition frontbencher.

In 2012, she accused the party of “hitting pensioners hard” over a decision to not raise winter fuel payments for retirees. A year earlier, she sought “assurances” over the future of the payments.
Gareth Davies MP, the shadow exchequer secretary, accused Labour of hypocrisy over the claims. It comes as figures show the raid is set to backfire at a cost of £490m to the Treasury.

Mr Davies said: “Labour’s hypocrisy knows no bounds. Not only has the Chancellor invented a fictitious black hole to try and justify her true economic agenda, but she has also done the very thing Labour baselessly tried to accuse the Conservatives of considering – cutting winter fuel payments – in a desperate attempt to lay the groundwork for tax rises.”

[SithHappens]

I personally think it should be means tested. My concern is that while those most in need will get, what normally happens is you have that percentage of the population that fall in between, not able to claim pension credit but still struggle to properly make ends meet, it those where the concern is.

It's the lateness in the year that I don't like, those that have been expecting to be in receipt are being told at very short notice they won't get it, for those in that 'gap ' had they had notice they could have put a bit more away or topped up their DD extra through the cheaper spring and summer months. If the government had said we are removing it from next year or at least staggered the removal so it was only reduced slightly this year then fully next year.

[swaledale]

I personally think it should be means tested. My concern is that while those most in need will get, what normally happens is you have that percentage of the population that fall in between, not able to claim pension credit but still struggle to properly make ends meet, it those where the concern is.

It's the lateness in the year that I don't like, those that have been expecting to be in receipt are being told at very short notice they won't get it, for those in that 'gap ' had they had notice they could have put a bit more away or topped up their DD extra through the cheaper spring and summer months. If the government had said we are removing it from next year or at least staggered the removal so it was only reduced slightly this year then fully next year.

It has been handled very badly, though I don't remember many pensioners protesting over things like 2 child cap on benefit, bedroom tax and the like so maybe its time the older generation actually had some pain?

Lets not forget that when Gordon brown brought it in, it was because the state pension was so low and inflation wasn't uprating it. Since then we have had the "triple lock" which has massively uprated state pensions. So means testing it seems a good move to me. BUT I am concerned that we seem to be heading for a repeat austerity orthodoxy, which history shows doesn't work as intended. There are many ways the funding gap could be bridged, revising Council tax so million pound plus properties pay more, 1% higher tax on the very high earners, capital gains tax etc. etc.

[ramAnag]

It has been handled very badly, though I don't remember many pensioners protesting over things like 2 child cap on benefit, bedroom tax and the like so maybe its time the older generation actually had some pain?

Lets not forget that when Gordon brown brought it in, it was because the state pension was so low and inflation wasn't uprating it. Since then we have had the "triple lock" which has massively uprated state pensions. So means testing it seems a good move to me. BUT I am concerned that we seem to be heading for a repeat austerity orthodoxy, which history shows doesn't work as intended. There are many ways the funding gap could be bridged, revising Council tax so million pound plus properties pay more, 1% higher tax on the very high earners, capital gains tax etc. etc.

Agree with that…and let’s also remember that as things are at the moment - and I know this could all suddenly change - our domestic fuel is significantly cheaper now than it was 12-24 months ago.

As regards the U.S. elections…is there a danger that Harris v Trump will soon turn into Swifties v Muskovites?