Funds Insider - Opening the door to funds

Welcome to the Citywire Funds Insider Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error

Benefits for pensioners
xxxxx
Posted: 14 June 2012 17:02:24(UTC)
#1

Joined: 22/04/2010(UTC)
Posts: 50

In the Sunday Telegraph there is a letter from Saga, the National Pensioners Convention and Age UK as follows:

"SIR – We are concerned to hear that Iain Duncan-Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, has suggested restricting the number of older people who receive important universal benefits, such as winter fuel payments, free television licences and bus passes. We fear denying these payments to better-off pensioners would be unfair and bureaucratic. It also risks leaving those most in need worse off.

First, many of those entitled to means-tested benefits do not claim them. Paying the benefits to everyone ensures that all those who need them will receive them. Any move towards more means testing or targeted support would risk many of those in need missing out.

Secondly, in a means-tested system, exceeding a cap by a few pounds could leave someone worse off by many hundreds of pounds a year. Thirdly, any increase in means testing of pensioners could act as a disincentive to save. Fourthly, means-tested systems are often complicated and expensive to administer.

There are therefore a range of social justice and efficiency reasons not to tinker with the universal benefits system. To do otherwise could also represent a first step down a dangerous path. Today the talk is of restricting access to universal pensioner benefits. Tomorrow could the same argument be applied to the state pension?"

Since the letter there have been further reports suggesting that IDS is indeed considering restricting the State Pension to poorer pensioners to help meet the cuts in expenditure required of the DWP.

I was wondering whether people consider it is fair to focus benefits only on the poorest pensioners. IDS is on record as saying that universal benefits are "daft" and need to be addressed.



Rose G
Posted: 15 June 2012 09:04:10(UTC)
#2

Joined: 26/11/2009(UTC)
Posts: 112

Universal benefits are daft - how can it do any good to give well off pensioners more money they do not require?

Those who are well off and receive these universal benefts, they usually or probably donate it to charity, at least that's what they are saying.

We are living in cloud cuckoo land if we think we can go on supporting the welfare system make life easier for older people, but only in the UK.

Look everywhere else in the world, people look after their own, because the state does not provide this comfort.

I believe our taxes should be reduced, national insurance should be abolished, & people should make their own arrangements for their old age - take a look at what it is costing us to keep people alive at any cost - this may sound cruel, but how on earth are we supposed to keep people in comfort from the cradle to the grave, when many of them no longer contribute to the system - not only the work shy but how about the millionaires who can and do keep their money in tax havens, paying little or no contribution to the UK!

I believe that keeping people alive at all costs is what has got us where we are - it is costing millions to treat dementia, alzhemer's and other chronic debilitating diseases - the medical profession should come clean over what they have become responsible for - keeping people alive on costly medication & other technology, only for the survivors to end up in care homes, most of which are mainly private - not accountable to anyone, where care is if not sub standard, then criminal in the cases we have had reports on. CQC are not fit for purpose, because then do regulate but private companies only have to change their names & continue trading, provided they have the paperwork to prove that they are tackling the problems.

We have an overburdened public sector, trying to play god, & not succeeding very well. Let people take care of their own & it is quite possible, they will be less reliant on others sorting out problems created by those with vested interests.

I have told my son repeatedly, please do not take me to hospital, if possible. Trusting clinicians to do the right thing everytime is unrealistic - these are just ordinary folk like you and me, with a little more experience in cutting up people (surgeons anyway) & sewing them up again - mistakes are made time and again, inspite of the bureacracy created to prove the right paperwork is in place, but the systems are the same old.

The backbone of the NHS and most emergencies are handled by junior staff, sometimes without the experience, training or supervision necessary to undertake procedures with consultants off site, with on call protocols that frequently let very ill patients down.

We are at risk of trusting officialdom inspite of being let down time and again - no man is an island, but making sure you have a supportive family is half the battle. The state should not be providing everything from nappies to incontinent pads to its population - there are some things which the family should take care off!
Bill lawson
Posted: 16 June 2012 11:59:20(UTC)
#3

Joined: 18/11/2009(UTC)
Posts: 6

Universal benefits probably cost too much to administer , a small increase in pensions would be far more ecconomic to administer which would make those entitled to a state pension a little better off . Bus passes must have to be applied for,I am 73 and have never received one .
Most people would not apply for extra benefits if they did not need them and some that do need them are too ashamed to do so. A clamp down on the ones that claim fraudulently is very important some taking many thousands they should not receive. Dual nationality helps to carry out these fraudulent claims.
I think we should all be responsible for our old age but inflation makes planning almost an impossible task ,thank god it makes the junk we collect more valuable than we ever expected .
The thing non of us want is to be a burden on our relatives and friends , memory loss is not too bad as it is a gradual proccess but old timers desease is point of exit for me
john brace
Posted: 16 June 2012 16:34:48(UTC)
#4

Joined: 03/02/2012(UTC)
Posts: 284

Surely the State pension is taxed?! That levels the playing field somewhat, without going into the ethics of penalising people who have been thrifty.
Regarding the ' freebies' of winter fuel allowance , bus passes and TV licence ,I agree the fuel allowanceand free licences should be stopped, but bus passes give pensioners the freedom to go out and about without worrying about the cost, and must be a healthy option, Alsos i guess very rich pensioners never use a bus!

One answer would br to make them taxeable - but that would cost too much.
Jeremy Bosk
Posted: 16 June 2012 19:38:46(UTC)
#5

Joined: 09/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,316

Means testing is very expensive and always creates unfairness. The simple answer is to raise the state pension and scrap all the extra universal allowances. Universal meaning given to all regardless of need e.g. television and winter fuel allowances. State pension is taxable so the richer pensioners will pay for the poorer ones.

Those with exceptional needs e.g. mobility scooters or home help should continue to be means tested and assessed as now. But the tests and assessments should be a lot less punitive and humiliating than they are currently.
Mr Mr
Posted: 17 June 2012 22:37:24(UTC)
#6

Joined: 07/06/2012(UTC)
Posts: 4

It is wrong to tell those who contribute more to the state during their working life in tax and NI that they will be helped less in their retirement. Where is the incentive ?
To scrap NI and tell people to provide for themselves is to perpetuate poverty for the less fortunate into old age: bring back the soup kitchens and workhouses ? Let the problem of poverty resolve itself ? Our society has progressed beyond that approach thankfully.
The current system is open to abuse through fraud, but it is fair. To improve the situation for pensioners and workers, benefit fraud needs to be stamped out, not by more bureaucracy but by harsher penalties including total asset confiscation and imprisonment, not just for culprits but for their families also as they benefit from the crime. This should be extended to tax evasion by small businesses and individuals.
Let the criminals suffer and starve, not the elderly.
Geoff Harrop
Posted: 18 June 2012 08:19:01(UTC)
#7

Joined: 08/04/2010(UTC)
Posts: 5

Our local fraud has pretended to be an invalid for many years - she shops, cooks for lodgers and digs her garden BUT on top of the extras paid to those on extra benefits [other than the state pension] she tells me she does NOT have to pay Council Tax which to me is my largest expense. Where is the fairness in that? She has never been so well off in her life. The system is a cash cow to those who dishonestly milk it and once you've got yourself on it you are unlikely to be found out.
Johnwg
Posted: 18 June 2012 08:23:21(UTC)
#8

Joined: 18/06/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2

Waste of time and money trying to means test the "universal benefits" easiest and best way is just to tax them. Then the poor who pay little/no tax anyway will not be deprived and those with more income receive less.
Agreed that benefit fraudsters should be routed out and stopped.
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets