Join for free
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Meg's Avatar
Meg
Supervisor
Meg is offline
Worcestershire
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 42,850
Meg is female  Meg has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-11-2011, 07:16 PM
1

'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

Setting benefits by inflation is unfair apparently ...
The increase in benefits and the state pension is usually in line with September’s inflation rate.
However, inflation rose to a 20-year high of 5.2 percent last month following energy price rises.
It will cost taxpayers up to £2 billion in extra benefit costs next year if state handouts rise in line with inflation. That could mean benefits rising by triple the average wage increase.
Last night, senior MPs said this would be unfair and that a lower rate of inflation should be used to calculate next year’s benefits.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/e...is-unfair.html
It looks like the goal posts are being moved again .
How about lower wages and freebies for MPs

I don't think State Pensions should be classed along with other 'benefits' anyway . How can you class those who have worked all their lives and paid their dues along with those who have never worked and don't intend to .
anniemuldoon's Avatar
anniemuldoon
Senior Member
anniemuldoon is offline
N Cumbria
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,862
anniemuldoon is female  anniemuldoon has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-11-2011, 07:50 PM
2

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

It beggars belief, I shall never vote again,I am disgusted.
Aerolor's Avatar
Aerolor
Chatterbox
Aerolor is offline
UK
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 9,380
Aerolor is female  Aerolor has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-11-2011, 09:50 PM
3

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

This makes me really see red Meg. The State Pension is not a benefit. It is not something just to be doled out to us, we have paid in for it all our working lives. I will not be classed as being on benefit because I am drawing my o.a.p. I've b****y well earned it like every other pensioner in this country.
Uncle Joe
Chatterbox
Uncle Joe is offline
Brighton UK
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 25,458
Uncle Joe is male  Uncle Joe has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
04-11-2011, 09:05 AM
4

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

Many, many years ago Benefits and Pensions were increase either by the rise in inflation or the rise in average earnings, whichever was the greater!!! However, this was seen as being too generous and the country couldn't afford it any more by??? - guess who??? - Margaret Hilda Thatcher (phth,phth,phth) as one of her first acts as Prime Minister. Ever since then a whole generation of Pensioners have 'suffered' by the act of this greedy, insensitive *itch who we discovered only a matter of days ago is receiving £500,000 from the Government treasury!!!
Antibrown's Avatar
Antibrown
Senior Member
Antibrown is offline
Cumbria UK
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,608
Antibrown is male  Antibrown has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
06-11-2011, 10:32 AM
5

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

Joe, you are blinded with your obsession about Maggie, Yes she did reduce the pensions as a percentage of the weekly average wage but under Blair and Brown it reduced much further, they did not reverse what Maggie did after saying that they would when they treturned to power, instead they allowed the basic weekly wage to rise a lot faster so the percentage of pensions against it dropped even further.

When Maggie was in power the pension was 22.4% of the average weekly wage, by 2010 it was down to about 14.9%.
Uncle Joe
Chatterbox
Uncle Joe is offline
Brighton UK
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 25,458
Uncle Joe is male  Uncle Joe has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
06-11-2011, 03:24 PM
6

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

Originally Posted by Antibrown ->
Joe, you are blinded with your obsession about Maggie, Yes she did reduce the pensions as a percentage of the weekly average wage but under Blair and Brown it reduced much further, they did not reverse what Maggie did after saying that they would when they treturned to power, instead they allowed the basic weekly wage to rise a lot faster so the percentage of pensions against it dropped even further.

When Maggie was in power the pension was 22.4% of the average weekly wage, by 2010 it was down to about 14.9%.
Typical!!! instead of wanting to level up those on minimum earnings, you want to keep them at that level whilst allowing the upper echelons to continue with their greed and avarice. Yes Blair & Brown failed to keep their promise about increasing pensions and benefits in line with the percentage increase in earnings, and for that I condemn them too, but now we have an even nastier bunch, who instead of allowing benefits to increase in line with RPI, they dream up a different method that excludes rents and housing costs they call CPI which of course is that much lower in percentage terms that RPI and the Government then determine to increase Pensions and Benefits by this lower percentage calculation robbing pensioners and those on benefits of even more money. Now who is worse??? Brown or Cameron??? I know who my vote goes to.

Only yesterday did we celebrate the anniversary of a man who attempted his own revolution, perhaps its time to try that again.
Antibrown's Avatar
Antibrown
Senior Member
Antibrown is offline
Cumbria UK
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,608
Antibrown is male  Antibrown has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-11-2011, 08:24 AM
7

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

Joe, where in my post did I say that I, instead of wanting to level up those on minimum earnings, I want to keep them at that level whilst allowing the upper echelons to continue with their greed and avarice?
I always think it is Jealousy coming out when people protest about others earning money.

Now who is worse??? Brown or Cameron???
We know for a fact that Brown Lies and is a Bigot, Cameron, There is no proof that he lies or is a bigot and he did not sell off the country's assets for a packet of Peanuts.

I am, as my 'login' name says, antibrown, I make no bones about it I really detest the man but I do not let it blinker me as to what else is going on in politics and I judge people as I find them.

I do know one thing though, I will NEVER again vote Labour, I would sooner vote for the BNP and I hate them almost as much as I hate Brown.
Uncle Joe
Chatterbox
Uncle Joe is offline
Brighton UK
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 25,458
Uncle Joe is male  Uncle Joe has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-11-2011, 09:31 AM
8

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

Joe, where in my post did I say that I, instead of wanting to level up those on minimum earnings, I want to keep them at that level whilst allowing the upper echelons to continue with their greed and avarice?

And by attempting to keep the minimum wage where it is, due to inflation it actually results in a pay cut, whereas those Bankers and others who are paid vast sums in bonuses don't actually EARN those bonuses but are paid them nonetheless since it is now considered an industry 'norm'.

I condemn Brown for not FULLY nationalising the banks WITHOUT COMPENSATIONand leaving them nationalised PERMANENTLY!!! as he should have done.
Cookiecate's Avatar
Cookiecate
Chatterbox
Cookiecate is offline
Blackpool
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 21,552
Cookiecate is female  Cookiecate has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
09-11-2011, 03:34 PM
9

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

There you go again losing sight of what is the most unfair issue by arguing about politics. As I have said before we are so busy arguing among ourselves the bloody governments are getting away with blue bloody murder.
Uncle Joe
Chatterbox
Uncle Joe is offline
Brighton UK
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 25,458
Uncle Joe is male  Uncle Joe has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
09-11-2011, 08:24 PM
10

Re: 'Setting benefits by inflation is unfair'

Originally Posted by Cookiecate ->
There you go again losing sight of what is the most unfair issue by arguing about politics. As I have said before we are so busy arguing among ourselves the bloody governments are getting away with blue bloody murder.
No Cate darlin' I haven't forgotten what this Government are doing to us!!! On the contrary I'm way ahead of you all and waiting for the rest to catch me up. When that happens, we destroy the present Parliament entirely, create a Parliament of Delegates (there is a subtle difference between a Representative and a Delegate), abolish the House of Lords and establish a FULLY democratically elected second chamber, abolish the Monarchy and elect a President - who, if we decide we don't want him/her after a while can be replaced.

In the meantime I continue to watch and criticise when and how I can and if that means pointing out a few home-truths on the forum - sobeit.
 
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

Thread Tools


© Copyright 2009, Over50sForum   Contact Us | Over 50s Forum! | Archive | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Top

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.