You didn’t answer the question posed are you happy to pay more tax for fewer services and work longer - probably around 75? There isn’t a third choice in our lifetimes. You could in the medium term somehow hope that people have more kids and chuck loads of money at them to achieve that. But in this country giving kids a bit of toast causes a national melt down and the level of costs associated with that approach are eye watering.
" They can sell up and downsize or release some of the equity" So basically you're happy to see elderly people, often infirm, have to sell, or give away to money grubbing equity release companies, their home and possessions and everything they may have worked and saved for over the years... move away from their family or circle of remaining friends and support network just to keep warm in their final days. I hope you remain as happy if you're ever put in that position.
that’s quite a long piece highlighting the aspects of equity release when many many millions of older people have happily sold up and moved to a smaller property willingly and with glee.
And many haven't or can't " happily sell up with glee" What a vile position to take. You're lacking in personal ethics if you're good to see that forced on old people.
Neither of them need that winter fuel allowance. They both lean left, and are happy to give it up if it frees up money for those who are in a more difficult situation. However expecting people in their 70's move from their homes where they've lived most of their lives is neither reasonable nor practical in many cases.
Yep, 100% before they get a single penny from the state. Also I have to say I think you're a bit ageist. Not every old person is a frail, doddery old codger. People have plenty of time to downsize and get their affairs in order.
If you've paid off your mortgage and have both a state and a private pension - probably not. If you don't own your home and your only income is the state pension - it's probably the difference between freezing in winter and being vaguely comfortable.
I think you're lacking in personal ethics if you take money from the state and by extension those who are more in need when you have the resources to get by, only you'd prefer to cling on to the wealth you've hoarded.
You seem to be an apologist for Starmer, apparently he can do no wrong... to some old people it really may, you're clearly not in a position like some people where £300 does matter.
" only you'd prefer to cling on to the wealth you've hoarded " So if Govt changes the rules and comes for your pension,or any tax allowances or benefits you enjoy you will be pretty relaxed to lose it..as let's be honest you were only taking money from the state.
You're clearly the ' Ageist' to suggest I am is deeply disingenuous....you're painting a picture of healthy, rich old scroungers, living perfect lives without illness or concerns, people almost defrauding the exchequer, have you any other sections of society you and your prejudice pin the target on?
I was merely pointing out that Brexit is one of the reasons net migration has increased. That, and successive Tory governments’ refusal to address many issues and thus, the need for migrants has continued. Social care being the most pertinent example. You don’t need to ask me what is high or otherwise in terms of net migration. As I’ve stated earlier in the thread, I don’t see it as an issue. At all.
To be honest I asked the question 1st he answered a question with a question. So for you is it better to have a higher net migration figure? Say a few million?
Any BBS business owners been told to be wary of a potential VAT increase scheduled for October? Was hoping for summer transfer rumours, not governmental policy ones.
Glad to see you've nailed your colours to the mast, straight from the Trump playbook....who is the next on your list of people dipping their bread in your gravy.... disabled leeches?, ethnic minority scroungers, people struggling with mental illness or long term sick?
wow. Excuse me a minute? I haven’t stated a position nor given you reason to have a pop. Vile? Really? I pointed out you’d written a long piece about the bad equity release brings without considering some people are quite happy to sell and downsize.
I find it disgusting that you'd try to compare the plight of those groups with millionaire pensioners. Absolutely beyond the pale.
Good attempt at turning an argument on its head...you're the one who wants to see the removal of an existing long accepted benefit with no thought or consideration to the circumstances or difficulties of thousands of vulnerable people.
