Westminster Politics 2024-2029

Nogbadthebad said:
Its also important to remember that the BoE is not actually independent. It is wholly owned by government, and when the government needs something done, it can still order it to be done. That is how the banks were bailed out in 2008.

The whole 'independent' narrative is simply a device to allow politicians to blame 'market forces' for decisions they don't want to take responsibility for.
Click to expand...
The BoE is independent but naturally was in constant dialogue with the Treasury through 07-08 - Darling talked a lot about it.
Ask Truss if the Bank is independent- the bailout after her Budget totally screwed her.
Similar to the Fed in the US and Trump getting really pissed off Powell wasn't cutting rates.
 
930zwp.jpg
 
Nogbadthebad said:
Its also important to remember that the BoE is not actually independent. It is wholly owned by government, and when the government needs something done, it can still order it to be done. That is how the banks were bailed out in 2008.

The whole 'independent' narrative is simply a device to allow politicians to blame 'market forces' for decisions they don't want to take responsibility for.
Click to expand...
Narratives aside, what really matters is whether.the markets think it's the BoE or the government setting interest rates. If they believe the Bank is operationally independent and can set rates according to its judgement, then thats.what matters. Similarly for the OBR. That is nominally independent too but if the govt ignores it because it is owned by the government, the markets will punish the govt, as we saw with Liz Truss.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
Click to expand...

Seems to me this is the government trying to claw back some of the very large state pension increases - nearly 20% - that the triple lock gave them over the last 2 years. Why is this especially bad, particularly if those who most need it continue to get it?
 
nickm said:
The first thing labour does is apply a means test to the wealthiest demographic in the country. I mean, not so bad when you put it like that...?
Click to expand...
If Labour really wanted to go after the wealthiest demographic they'd implement some sort of wealth tax but that seems to be one difficult decision they won't make
 
Mogget said:
If Labour really wanted to go after the wealthiest demographic they'd implement some sort of wealth tax but that seems to be one difficult decision they won't make
Click to expand...
It's the budget in a few weeks, and thats when governments talk about tax. Why don't we criticise their tax policy after, rather than before?
 
Sweet Square said:
Click to expand...


Unfortunately, my Labour MP voted with the government. So I have emailed him and asked him to tell me how many of his constituents have informed him that they agree with bringing in means test and how many told him that they were against it. And as he was elected to look after the interests of his constituents, he should have voted according to the views of his constituents.
 
Buster15 said:
Unfortunately, my Labour MP voted with the government. So I have emailed him and asked him to tell me how many of his constituents have informed him that they agree with bringing in means test and how many told him that they were against it. And as he was elected to look after the interests of his constituents, he should have voted according to the views of his constituents.
Click to expand...

I understand that Labour are trying to get pensioners to claim unclaimed benefits. If all these pensioners do claim all these unpaid benefits then the net gain from the savings for the government will be zero.

What's it like being a wealthy pensioner in the UK? (I am joking)
 
Last edited:
Paul the Wolf said:
I understand that Labour are trying to get pensioners to claim unclaimed benefits. If all these pensioners do claim all these unpaid benefits then the net gain from the savings for the government will be zero.

What's it like being a wealthy pensioner in the UK? (I am joking)
Click to expand...
God forbid pensioners should have their benefits means tested, just like everyone else.
 
nickm said:
God forbid pensioners should have their benefits means tested, just like everyone else.
Click to expand...

That's not the point - firstly it raises peanuts in financial terms, secondly it depends on what level the means test is set at. Thirdly, a UK pension is a pittance.

Fourthly what's wrong with raising taxes on the really wealthy and if that includes pensioners, so be it?

Fifthly I don't think Starmer has a clue what to do.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
That's not the point - firstly it raises peanuts in financial terms, secondly it depends on what level the means test is set at. Thirdly, a UK pension is a pittance.

Fourthly what's wrong with raising taxes on the really wealthy and if that includes pensioners, so be it?

Fifthly I don't think Starmer has a clue what to do.
Click to expand...
It is the point. It is a welcome signal to everyone that pensioner interests are no longer paramount after a solid decade of their needs being put first, because the costs of super serving an ageing population will flatten us all if we don't start to get a grip.

Second the UK pension is a pittance compared to what? I see this said all the time yet it is due to misleading comparisons with differently funded systems in other countries. In the UK there is an expectation that people will save some money privately to supplement the state pension. Other countries extract that money in different ways.

Third, theres nothing wrong with raising taxes, but taxation policy is announced in Budgets so how about we see whats in it before we criticise it?
 
nickm said:
It is the point. It is a welcome signal to everyone that pensioner interests are no longer paramount after a solid decade of their needs being put first, because the costs of super serving an ageing population will flatten us all if we don't start to get a grip.

Second the UK pension is a pittance compared to what? I see this said all the time yet it is due to misleading comparisons with differently funded systems in other countries. In the UK there is an expectation that people will save some money privately to supplement the state pension. Other countries extract that money in different ways.

Third, theres nothing wrong with raising taxes, but taxation policy is announced in Budgets so how about we see whats in it before we criticise it?
Click to expand...

So why not wait until the budget? It's such a tiny amount. It's certainly not going to fix even a tiny fraction of the UK's problems.
How many people does Starmer want to annoy before the first three months are up?
Any savings will be lost anyway if just a small amount of pensioners have to use the NHS because of this over the winter, or any other chains of events not taken into account.

People in other countries save money other than the state pension if they can but also pay more into the state system to pay for it than the UK.

In France we've got the extreme left and extreme right trying to make the retirement age 60 and have a far-fetched way of saying they can finance it but people believe them.

Wonder what the next genius move by Starmer is?
 
We simply need to execute the 50 richest people in the country, claim their estates, and we're golden.

It's what they're doing to everyone else a thousand times over. Fair's fair.
 
nickm said:
The first thing labour does is apply a means test to the wealthiest demographic in the country. I mean, not so bad when you put it like that...?
Click to expand...

I might agree with this if that iswhat they did. They could do that by putting the threshold at £25K or so, but they did not.

They put it at £11, 900. People just above that limit are not wealthy, and its either ignirance or lies to claim they are.
 
Nogbadthebad said:
I might agree with this if that iswhat they did. They could do that by putting the threshold at £25K or so, but they did not.

They put it at £11, 900. People just above that limit are not wealthy, and its either ignirance or lies to claim they are.
Click to expand...
I agree the threshold should be higher. But a lot of people aren't debating the threshold here and are also ignoring that these same pensioners are also receiving nearly £1300 extra per year guaranteed thanks to the triple lock. Did any other group of people in receipt of benefits get such a big % or indeed actual, increase?
 
Last edited:
Paul the Wolf said:
I understand that Labour are trying to get pensioners to claim unclaimed benefits. If all these pensioners do claim all these unpaid benefits then the net gain from the savings for the government will be zero.

What's it like being a wealthy pensioner in the UK? (I am joking)
Click to expand...

Probably a bit different from being a wealthy pensioner in France.

And one thing that often gets missed is that in the UK, if you reached 65 before 2016, which millions did, including my wife and me, you are treated as second class pensioners. Because the state pension is lower than after 2016 by quite a few pounds.
And because the state pension is always a percentage, that difference continues to grow.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
People in other countries save money other than the state pension if they can but also pay more into the state system to pay for it than the UK.
Click to expand...
Indeed they do and yet the generation we are talking about here in the UK refused to pay higher taxes to fund a system like that, when they were working and their own parents were the pensioners.

In the UK there are a lot of tax incentives to save money into personal schemes that as far as I know, don't exist elsewhere in the same way.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
Benefits recipients. the winter fuel payment is a benefit.
Click to expand...

Ok. But you seem to be suggesting that people who receive the state pension are getting something they aren't entitled to receive. Or have I got that wrong.
 
Buster15 said:
Ok. But you seem to be suggesting that people who receive the state pension are getting something they aren't entitled to receive. Or have I got that wrong.
Click to expand...
No, I'm just saying other benefits get means tested, so why not this one too.
 
nickm said:
No, I'm just saying other benefits get means tested, so why not this one too.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I am of the opinion that the level of so called means test is set too low and a much fairer system would have been to align it with income tax. If you don't have to pay income tax, you would still receive the winter fuel allowance. And if you do pay income tax, you won't.
I have suggested this to my MP but no response yet.

Anyway. The decision has been made.
 
Buster15 said:
Fair enough. I am of the opinion that the level of so called means test is set too low and a much fairer system would have been to align it with income tax. If you don't have to pay income tax, you would still receive the winter fuel allowance. And if you do pay income tax, you won't.
I have suggested this to my MP but no response yet.

Anyway. The decision has been made.
Click to expand...

So you're not against means testing the winter fuel allowance, you just want a different test?
 
Why would anyone be against means testing it? My in laws go on about 8 holidays a year and they get it.

Unless the argument is that it costs more to check than the saving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.