The Labour Government

[bluenova]

Obviously his detractors will pitch it as a U turn and his supporters will pitch it as an adjustment to the criteria which is what many of his supporters objected to the time even if they agreed with the policy in principle.

Either way it will probably be enough to make it a non-issue within a few weeks and certainly before the winter.

There was some polling last week suggesting that most voters would see them in a positive light for the U-Turn.

Politicians like to screech about stuff, but ultimately, most normal people would rather get the outcome that want.

I'm curious as to why they've let it out so early, then said the details will come in the Autumn budget. My first thought was that it just leaves them open to six months of being asked for the detail constantly. The only positive reason I can think of, is that the attacks may still come, but they'll be a lot blunter. The most positive spin would be that they think any attack on the WFA now results in a narratives of "listening" and an "improving economy". Given how the last ten months have played out, I doubt the positive spin will get through, but we'll see.

 

[Scottyboi]

Should stay means tested loads of other benefits are already just adjust the criteria or taper it based on income.

 

[Vic]

You want people to trawl a thread for the people who thought it was great to remove WFA off pensioners and only those on pension credit to receive it?

Do me a favour and trawl it yourself. Loads were at it.

You're on here every few minutes arse licking Labour ....don't you do any work?

Whoever makes the accusation should provide the proof. That's usually how it works.

I think the comments distilled to:

1. Most pensioners don't need the WFA. And most of them would say they don't need it.

2. The cut-off meant that. those who didn’t quite qualify for pension credit ended up much worse off than those who did qualify.

3. After 3 triple lock increases worth £2300 a year, when better to take away a £300 a year benefit that was always temporary.

4. Pensions are still low compared to most other European countries - but all of them will struggle to ask the younger working population to keep funding pensions for people living longer than the system is designed for (and those who live longest tend to be the ones who come under point 1).

4. Millions of pensioners would not freeze to death.

5. It was a political mistake (the amount saved wasn't worth the bad publicity).

6. Remedying point 2 would be good (and that at least seems to be the first aim of the U-turn).


U-turns aka "listening to the people" can be popular. The Tories won in 1992 on a platform of abolishing the poll tax - their poll tax.

 

[tweety]

Under 16's dont get PIP

I know that people get extra money if their kids are diagnosed with ADHD etc.

 

[Scottyboi]

I know that people get extra money if their kids are diagnosed with ADHD etc.

Yes via DLA and a big fuck off form that requires evidence from medical personnel it's not just granted for fun. It all depends on how a condition effects your childs life.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Whoever makes the accusation should provide the proof. That's usually how it works.

I think the comments distilled to:

1. Most pensioners don't need the WFA. And most of them would say they don't need it.

2. The cut-off meant that. those who didn’t quite qualify for pension credit ended up much worse off than those who did qualify.

3. After 3 triple lock increases worth £2300 a year, when better to take away a £300 a year benefit that was always temporary.

4. Pensions are still low compared to most other European countries - but all of them will struggle to ask the younger working population to keep funding pensions for people living longer than the system is designed for (and those who live longest tend to be the ones who come under point 1).

4. Millions of pensioners would not freeze to death.

5. It was a political mistake (the amount saved wasn't worth the bad publicity).

6. Remedying point 2 would be good (and that at least seems to be the first aim of the U-turn).


U-turns aka "listening to the people" can be popular. The Tories won in 1992 on a platform of abolishing the poll tax - their poll tax.

WTF have they got to complain about.... a £6,900 increase in 3 years... ungrateful bastards

 

[hilts]

WTF have they got to complain about.... a £6,900 increase in 3 years... ungrateful bastards

Most are loaded and have houses and give their kids loads for deposits, the poor ones voted Brexit so serves them right.

I think that was Vics general musings.

Balanced:-)

 

[blueinsa]

Most are loaded and have houses and give their kids loads for deposits, the poor ones voted Brexit so serves them right.

I think that was Vics general musings.

Balanced:-)

Don’t forget the best one which is they will be dead soon anyway so fuck em attitude along with they don’t normally vote for my side!

 

[Vic]

WTF have they got to complain about.... a £6,900 increase in 3 years... ungrateful bastards

Good grief. £2300 a year after the 3 increases, not each year.

A 24% increase in 3 years... how many workers have had that?

 

[Vic]

Most are loaded and have houses and give their kids loads for deposits, the poor ones voted Brexit so serves them right.

I think that was Vics general musings.

Balanced:-)

Not quite what I said!

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Good grief. £2300 a year after the 3 increases, not each year.

A 24% increase in 3 years... how many workers have had that?

Unless people didn’t want to understand it, most understood it.

 

[hampshireblue]

So you're more of a I'm alright Jack kind of guy?

No, far from it. But when someone comes on moaning about how he's personally worse off because of Starmer and is asked in what way, it's fair enough to expect an answer as to how that is the case. If they said it's because my taxes have gone up and stated how, then fine. But just to make scathing statements on a public forum without the ability to back up the claim just makes them a moaning gobshite.

 

[hampshireblue]

WTF have they got to complain about.... a £6,900 increase in 3 years... ungrateful bastards

No Joe. Read what he said. not 3 x £2300.

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

The average state pension is between 9 and 11 thousand pounds a year, how many of you think you can pay rent and fuel, water and food on that ? The inland revenue knows exactly how much money pensioners have. It would be easy to work out all the rich pensioners as they pay income tax they have tax codes.
No need for all this fuss in the first place

 

[Vic]

No Joe. Read what he said. not 3 x £2300.

Daftest would be the "ungrateful bastards" sarcasm at £6900 increase in pension.

 

[Brewster's millions]

Good grief. £2300 a year after the 3 increases, not each year.

A 24% increase in 3 years... how many workers have had that?

The increase in pensions has been determined by wage growth in the past two years, so it’s a bit silly to suggest that pensioners have done far better than workers recently.

 

[BigJoe#1]

No, far from it. But when someone comes on moaning about how he's personally worse off because of Starmer and is asked in what way, it's fair enough to expect an answer as to how that is the case. If they said it's because my taxes have gone up and stated how, then fine. But just to make scathing statements on a public forum without the ability to back up the claim just makes them a moaning gobshite.

Read what was said around the end of March where I clearly laid out how I have been affected.... I can't be arsed to spoon feed you, not even to humour you.

 

[threespires]

They do these days. I heard it first hand from a senior teacher friend this weekend past. Perhaps it's the parents that get it as their children "qualify".

Your teacher friend is misinformed or maybe you misheard him? How it works is children receive either DLA (or CDP depending on their circumstances), they do not receive PIP.

At 16 years old they stop receiving their DLA and then have to apply for PIP. One of the arguments is that as they move towards adulthood they may become capable of managing their conditions themselves and so their needs and any allowances might change. The PIP process as has been discussed in other threads is pretty onerous and requires a variety of medical evidence. .

The data is sketchy but there's more evidence of young people losing out in the PIP transition than there is of parents looking to use PIP to get a new benefit. Disability charities like SCOPE are challenging the current process. I don't doubt there's the occasional person trying it on but I would suggest if your friend is characterising this as a major issue for the school then either they have a very unusual school or they're misrepresenting the situation. It could just be frustration at other pressures schools are under like the current SEN crises or the fact that social care funding cuts means schools have been left to be the front line of child social services but without the resources to do it.

 

[metalblue]

I recall a few debating the reasoning for it perhaps, i don't recall anyone taking delight in it and thinking it was great as you describe.

they wasn't aware of the 22 billion black hole the Tories have left the country in. sacrifices need to be made.

You seemed at ease with it cocker.

 

[BlueHammer85]

You seemed at ease with it cocker.

Good find, but not quite the gotcha.
There’s no sense of delight but more of a necessity I felt.