Ian H
Legendary Member
It has far fewer readers than The Sun, but they probably have a greater total IQ.
Benefits Again
- Thread starter Bromptonaut
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
It has far fewer readers than The Sun, but they probably have a greater total IQ.
A
albion
Guest
I am not too sure about that. 'Putins useful idiots'
Last edited:
Rusty Nails
Country Member
I can't believe the readership of the Sun has a total IQ lower than 10. Even the Mail beats that.
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
You are quoting figures for those who reached retirement age 2016 onwards. There are still a reasonable number of pre 2016 retirees. https://www.gov.uk/new-state-pensio...te of new,Insurance qualifying years you have
Pension Credit entitlement is not quite as straight forward as “if you have less pension than £x” https://www.gov.uk/pension-credit/eligibility
Last edited:
Ian H
Legendary Member
Ah well. Prejudice will out.
A
albion
Guest
It is still a minimum income guarantee of £218 for those of pension age. It matters not if you retired before 2016.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
Unlike your comment on the combined IQ of the Sun readership?
Ian H
Legendary Member
Merely satirising your own comments.
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Nowt like a good old stereotype is there?
Rusty Nails
Country Member
And there I was, based on your response to my earlier posts, thinking you knew nothing about satire.
We live and learn.
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Unions and media not happy with Starmer and WFA. We need @multitool back to defend him
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg5rl612n5o
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg5rl612n5o
icowden
Legendary Member
The Unions were never going to be happy. It's literally their job to not be happy. The media will just jump on any bandwagon that might get clicks.
Winter fuel payments to wealthy pensioners was always daft. The main issue is where to set the cut off threshold. The only "wealth" determining mechanisms already in place are whether or not you get benefits. The whole point of benefits is that they are given to people that don't have enough money to not need benefits. Thus, people on benefits still get it.
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Since State Pension is classified as a benefit, are you advocating means testing that?, what about the other non-means tested benefits?
Winter Fuel Payments were paid to all State Pensioners, they were, effectively part of the State Pension, they were simply paid out in November/December, rather than weekly/4 weekly. So, the proposal is effectively reduce State Pension by £200 - £250pa (double that for single pensioners, since the rate is £400-£500 per annum per household).
Entitlement to benefits is NOT the only "wealth" determining mechanism, what about Basic rate tax threshold, higher rate tax threshold? The Government (HMRC) presumably know the taxable income of each Pensioner, in order to deduct the appropriate amount of income tax.
I am just mystified that the several million Pensioners affected meet the criteria of "broadest shoulders".
I note we are back to the vague term "wealthy", and talk of a "cut off threshold" but, no figures.
icowden
Legendary Member
Obviously not because they aren't means tested.
True. Hadn't thought of that, It doesn't matter where you put the threshold, people will still complain.
Well yes. Many people would have started with properly taxing Amazon, Apple and Google for example.
