Here comes the tax rises

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Not as easy as you think - where we live, 3 bed bungalows cost as much as 4 bed detached houses (because developers can build a 4/5 bed house on the bungalow’s footprint).

Not even because of that, my mother-in-law is downsizing (I said that in a Bernard Manning impression)

Just sold her three bedroom bungalow for £470,000. And not to a young family (because a young family couldn’t afford that) but to another couple of similar age who are also downsizing.

And if you’re downsizing to £470K, I doubt any young families are buying the property they’re leaving either.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Paul

I assume hes basing it off a similar claim made in 2021.

https://fullfact.org/economy/millionaire-pensioners/

Most are not really 'millionaires' in the sense its normally referred to.

You might not refer to this in this way but it is a common definition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire

Millionaire

A millionaire is an individual whose net worth or wealth is equal to or exceeds one million units of currency.

Originally Posted by ianch99

You might not refer to this in this way but it is a common definition:

A millionaire is an individual whose net worth or wealth is equal to or exceeds one million units of currency.

Did you even read it ?

The whole point is that is not how they are defining it.

Their definition is an individual who lives in a household whose total value is over a million.

.. where the main householder (the person responsible for household finances) is over 65, have a household wealth of over a million pounds.

They even give you a simple example which you ignored.

So a household with two 70-year-olds and a combined wealth of a million pounds would fall into these millionaire categories

Each could be "worth" £550,000, not millionaires.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by ianch99

You might not refer to this in this way but it is a common definition:

Doesn’t make it accurate.

I remember watching a tv movie years ago about a kid that had a bet with his friend that he would be a millionaire, or have 10 million, or something, by a certain time, a week or something like that.

And he engineered a way, by blagging test drives in expensive cars etc, to get to an auction on a house.

His plan was to bid on the house when it reached £1M or more, he was convinced he would be outbid…..but those few seconds he would own that house and be worth it’s value.

So, it just shows how measuring on that basis is pointless.


As it happened, he won the auction and couldn’t pay for it……….and much hilarity ensued.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Paul

Did you even read it ?

The whole point is that is not how they are defining it.

Their definition is an individual who lives in a household whose total value is over a million.


They even give you a simple example which you ignored.

Each could be "worth" £550,000, not millionaires.

I did read it. Not all pensioners are in a couple which is something you ignored. I think around 40% at the last count. Bottom line is that there are many pensioners who are wealthy and this should not be dismissed out of hand. It is part of the equation.

Originally Posted by ianch99

I did read it. Not all pensioners are in a couple which is something you ignored. I think around 40% at the last count. Bottom line is that there are many pensioners who are wealthy and this should not be dismissed out of hand. It is part of the equation.

So now you're just making it up as you go, because you got it wrong.
I didnt say "all" at any point, nor did they, so clearly we didnt ignore anything.
I also never said there were no "wealthy" pensioners or that it should be "dismissed out of hand".

[ianch99]

As we have concluded that there are many millionaire pensioners, maybe things like the Winter Fuel Payments should be means tested or somehow linked to their HMRC status. These payments should go to those who literally cannot afford to heat their home.

Originally Posted by ianch99

maybe things like the Winter Fuel Payments should be means tested .... These payments should go to those who literally cannot afford to heat their home.

Yes, on that we can agree, but isnt that basically how they will work for 2024 ?

The full eligibility as currently listed: https://www.gov.uk/winter-fuel-payment/eligibility

---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:21 ----------

Also, unless I missed an announcment, the Warm Home Discount (£150) is still being paid in 2024.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by ianch99

As we have concluded that there are many millionaire pensioners, maybe things like the Winter Fuel Payments should be means tested or somehow linked to their HMRC status. These payments should go to those who literally cannot afford to heat their home.

But Labour themselves have said implementing this policy will kill people.

They know, they are killing pensioners with this.

I’m not saying that, a Labour Shadow cabinet are saying that, they’re no longer a shadow cabinet, they are the government but are now implementing the very policy they said would kill people.

How do you reconcile that?

Relatively even-handed article on the Winter Fuel Payment issue.

https://eastangliabylines.co.uk/news...t-winter-fuel/

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Pierre

But Labour themselves have said implementing this policy will kill people.

They know, they are killing pensioners with this.

I’m not saying that, a Labour Shadow cabinet are saying that, they’re no longer a shadow cabinet, they are the government but are now implementing the very policy they said would kill people.

How do you reconcile that?

Torys do it = bad
Labour do it = good

---------- Post added at 09:19 ---------- Previous post was at 09:07 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Relatively even-handed article on the Winter Fuel Payment issue.

https://eastangliabylines.co.uk/news...t-winter-fuel/

I'm a little confused here

the article states The allowance is a single annual payment of £200 a year for people over 65 and £300 for those over 80, paid in November to everyone receiving state pension.


last year i got £ 300 i was 67 back then .

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Relatively even-handed article on the Winter Fuel Payment issue.

https://eastangliabylines.co.uk/news...t-winter-fuel/

Well, not sure about even handed.

This statement raised my eyebrows

But most pensioners will either not miss the allowance, or will be keeping it.

That's quite an opinion, if my employer was to reduce my salary by £300, I'd miss it.

I think anyone would miss £300.

and on the second point...... "most will be keeping it"

The writer of the article itself states

he plan is to withdraw the allowance from 9.3 million people who do not currently receive Pension Credit. It would continue to be paid to 1.5 million

So most will not be keeping it, around 84% of pensioners will be losing it.

All this to save £1.4B, when asylum seekers cost us £4.3B

Why bring Asylum seekers into it, I hear you ask. Because it's a waste of money that could and should be sorted out before taking money away from pensioners

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Pierre

That's quite an opinion, if my employer was to reduce my salary by £300, I'd miss it.

I think anyone would miss £300.

[Yet another stupid trolling comment removed].

.

Originally Posted by Pierre

That's quite an opinion, if my employer was to reduce my salary by £300, I'd miss it.

I think anyone would miss £300.

This I more akin to them increasing your salary to £900 but taking away an annual bonus you got of £300 if we're making that comparison.

Anyway, I think Labour should delay it a year. This takes us past this 10% increase in energy bills and allows another year of triple lock to kick in.

[Sirius]

Today i am so glad i did not vote for the bunch of muppets in power now. I can sleep easy knowing that i have not contributed to the eventual deaths of pensioners this winter, i await the response from the labour supporters who believe that Labour have done well by voting in this cut. The train drivers will be loving all the extra money at the expense of the pensioners.