Andy Burnham’s chronicles

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Damien

What threshold? Nothing is being means-tested here.

I think a tax wouldn't be an income tax increase but an additional universal insurance scheme. Sorta like NI but ringfenced for social care. You make sure people know this is insurance in case they go into care and, if they do, it has been paid for and you don't have to sell the house.

how much do you imagine a 75 year old would be paying for this insurance

[nomadking]

The triple lock only costs extra money when wages are above inflation and/or inflation drops below 2.5%.
Wages increase lag behind increases in inflation, so sometimes the wage part of the triple lock gives false double increases. Eg When inflation was 10%, pensions got the 10%, then inflation dropped, but meantime wages had increased above inflation because of the previous 10% inflation. Pensions had a partial double increase.

[papa smurf]

before the new messiah can scrap the triple lock he'll need to win the next election,i can think of a few people who won't be voting to be poorer

Originally Posted by papa smurf

how much do you imagine a 75 year old would be paying for this insurance

It would have to be only for those in work.

---------- Post added at 18:07 ---------- Previous post was at 18:04 ----------

Originally Posted by papa smurf

before the new messiah can scrap the triple lock he'll need to win the next election,i can think of a few people who won't be voting to be poorer

Politicians will promise it, but if they decide to actually bring it back, when suddenly have to budget for it is another question.

The triple lock is something a politician would have to get rid of eventually because it's unsustainable. You can't have a pension scheme that will always go up higher than wages to pay for it. It will become a bigger and bigger percentage of the budget irrespective of how well or badly the country is doing economically.

---------- Post added at 18:08 ---------- Previous post was at 18:07 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

The triple lock only costs extra money when wages are above inflation and/or inflation drops below 2.5%.
Wages increase lag behind increases in inflation, so sometimes the wage part of the triple lock gives false double increases. Eg When inflation was 10%, pensions got the 10%, then inflation dropped, but meantime wages had increased above inflation because of the previous 10% inflation. Pensions had a partial double increase.

Well, exactly, but that's what makes it stupid.

Inflation goes up, and the pension goes up. Everyone is pretty happy with that. Eventually wages will catch up, but under the triple lock, then it goes up even more.

It's a timebomb.

[Carth]

You can't have a pension scheme that will always go up higher than wages to pay for it

A 2.5% increase on £240 a week is nowhere near a 2.5% increase on £500 a week, which is being reported in various places as the 'average' UK wage (some say it's over £600)

If you want more people of working age paying tax to fund things you need to create jobs, not give the ones you already have to AI or scare businesses into moving abroad.



edit: make that £750 a week average

[Taf]

Originally Posted by Damien

Triple lock gone in 2030 with the money going to a National Care Service instead

State Pensions "less generous" to pay for "Social Care" in ENGLAND. Did he mispeak?

And I'll bet it'll be Means Tested.

Originally Posted by Taf

State Pensions "less generous" to pay for "Social Care" in ENGLAND. Did he mispeak?

And I'll bet it'll be Means Tested.

I don't remember the England bit, but I suspect the same happens elsewhere but the care is devolved so each nation chooses how to do it?