Keir Starmer

[metalblue]

I didn’t say that either. I’d have been happy as it as a first step had they given it six months to implement, given plenty of pensioners in the absolute lower levels of poverty will be much better off by getting pension credit as well as the WFA. I’d have then liked to have seen them tweak the limits on pension credit, given that’s the gateway to more benefits than just WFA too.

The WFA not being blanket-applied to everyone, particularly given there’s 40% of pensioners in the top half of income of the whole population, and it being linked to pension credit is a good policy if they’d sorted out everything else first.

Hence why in my very first post I said it could end up a good policy if they change their reasoning (I.e don’t see it as a potential saving and instead see it as a fairer way to implement a benefits policy ensuring more gets to the people that need it, which then leads to increasing the limits for those eligible for PC) and also said they’d implemented it shockingly.

Appreciate the clarity. Only issue with tweaking limits on pension credits (in principle a good way of doing it) would be uptake. But if you said you were bringing it in next year and changed PC then it could work, certainly better than the current cluster fuck.

 

[metalblue]

With Rayner, Reeves and Cooper in three of the top five jobs, it sounds like bollocks from a bitter backbencher who lost her job on the opposition front bench a couple of years ago.

Ah is this is how the lads are going to brief it?

 

[metalblue]

£17k of tickets gifted to Starmer.

Can i have my heating allowance back, please sir.

You’ll get a lump of coal and be grateful

 

[metalblue]

So long as he's not relying on an invasion of the Falklands to regain popularity.

Only thing they need to do to stop the rot is reverse the WFA decision and come up with a plan that is fair and comes in next winter.

From a messaging perspective they just need to shut up about gifts etc and let it run its course and stop feeding the story.

 

[hilts]

I didn’t say that either. I’d have been happy as it as a first step had they given it six months to implement, given plenty of pensioners in the absolute lower levels of poverty will be much better off by getting pension credit as well as the WFA. I’d have then liked to have seen them tweak the limits on pension credit, given that’s the gateway to more benefits than just WFA too.

The WFA not being blanket-applied to everyone, particularly given there’s 40% of pensioners in the top half of income of the whole population, and it being linked to pension credit is a good policy if they’d sorted out everything else first.

Hence why in my very first post I said it could end up a good policy if they change their reasoning (I.e don’t see it as a potential saving and instead see it as a fairer way to implement a benefits policy ensuring more gets to the people that need it, which then leads to increasing the limits for those eligible for PC) and also said they’d implemented it shockingly.

So it could be a good policy if they changed it and did it later, so a different policy, haha

So it is currently a bad policy, gotcha

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I’d rather we didn’t assess policy by pitting sections of society against each other (young v old, public sector v private sector) and just worked towards a fairer society for all.

However to your question, I suppose if you had to pick one or the other then you can’t stop becoming old if you can’t afford it but you can stop yourself having a baby if you can’t.

Such sentiment might explain why we have a falling birth rate.

Young families and children are the future, with fewer babies born, there will be fewer people to pay into the system or wipe arses.

We seem to have a societal assumption that old people are more important than the young. That's not normal.

What happens when we're too old to be 'useful'?

Can we afford to pay pensions, given the huge demographic challenge of our ageing population?

www.google.com

 

[meltonblue]

Appreciate the clarity. Only issue with tweaking limits on pension credits (in principle a good way of doing it) would be uptake. But if you said you were bringing it in next year and changed PC then it could work, certainly better than the current cluster fuck.

Yes that’s why I said I’d rather have seen a delay in implementation.

 

[Chippy_boy]

So long as he's not relying on an invasion of the Falklands to regain popularity.

LOL, you've had to go a long way back to dig that one up. Presumably getting Argentina to invade was all part of a Tory plot? Do you want to throw the sinking of the Belgrano into the discussion?

 

[meltonblue]

So it could be a good policy if they changed it and did it later, so a different policy, haha

So it is currently a bad policy, gotcha

I didn’t say it wasn’t. All I said was I think it will end up being a good policy and I meant in terms of linking it to pension credit. I don’t want them to change that, I think it’s the right thing to do.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Building a migrant processing centre there I believe:) whaling station conversion.

And they have to row there themselves in inflatable dingies.