• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Keir Starmer at it again..

enjoy the holidays. you clearly need the pension

EDIT - that sounds horribly mean. What I should have said is that you clearly have a lifestyle that would not be dramatically affected if the state pension wasn't there in your case. Your other provisions provide a good standard of life.

There is an argument for distinguishing between those lucky enough to be in that boat, and those for whom the state pension is their absolute lifeline.

However, such a move would be a surefire vote loser.
 
Last edited:
Well off pensioners will have long since made sound financial planning which will have factored the state pension into their revenue streams, and one considered a return on an entire working’s lifetime of NI contributions etc.

If you want people to take care of their own financial future and not rely on the state then by all means offer some alternative incentives, but letting people contribute for a lifetime and then suddenly introduce an arbitrary line based on asset wealth, home ownership or whatever criteria meets your political leanings is, whilst understandably very appealing to some, frankly ridiculous and political suicide.

Just get them to lay off the Starbucks and Avocados, they'll be reet.
 
Don't forget final salary pensions were closed to new entrants in the mid-nineties. Those retiring with that type of private pension are likely to be a lot better off than those saving for a current scheme.
 
Is 'sound financial planning' code for bought council houses for peanuts?
That group were handed a golden ticket no other house buyer has ever seen the like of.

The irony there is many of them were Thatcher-hating hardline socialists who were up the council offices signing the papers quicker than rats up a drainpipe. Few better examples of people abandoning their principles when there’s a few quid in it for themselves than that.

I suppose from that point onwards at least you’re right. Whether that opportunity was then used to secure a future, provide the springboard for greater wealth or simply pissed up the wall or given to the bookies would determine whether any financial planning proved to be sound or not.

Strange group to single out but yeah, happy to get into that one. Would be interested to hear how many of those beneficiaries think they shouldn’t qualify for a pension.
 
I’m hoping that comment from @ROVERT47 is in jest as there’s a reasonable discussion to be had/being had.
Surely, there is a line to what is acceptable in terms of the state handing money over to
folk based on their yearly incomes when resources are tight.
Making pensioners such as @Del Woppio ’s dad less comfortable wouldn’t be where I’d draw the line but if pensioners have yearly incomes in the 100’s of thousands?
 
That group were handed a golden ticket no other house buyer has ever seen the like of.

The irony there is many of them were Thatcher-hating hardline socialists who were up the council offices signing the papers quicker than rats up a drainpipe. Few better examples of people abandoning their principles when there’s a few quid in it for themselves than that.

I suppose from that point onwards at least you’re right. Whether that opportunity was then used to secure a future, provide the springboard for greater wealth or simply pissed up the wall or given to the bookies would determine whether any financial planning proved to be sound or not.

Strange group to single out but yeah, happy to get into that one. Would be interested to hear how many of those beneficiaries think they shouldn’t qualify for a pension.
Are we talking Rayner here?
 
Back
Top