Triple lock

Or even lock.

I'm not sure people were arguing just for pensioners Rigby. In fact I am sure there has been a great deal of discussion about welfare cuts in general. This thread is called "Triple Lock" so it is likely to be mainly about just that.

I am flattered that you want to know what I would change but currently we are looking at what the parties have to offer. I think your comment "it's not good going for utopia" would stop anyone offering a suggestion as it feels as if it has to fit what you would do not what they would do. It will be interesting to see the actual offers from the parties.

I'd go for universal income so nobody felt hard done by.

There's a huge gap between utopia ie universal income which just will not happen in the foreseeable and a whole range of possibilities that just might - so come on what would you do that is politically feasible - I've mentioned a range of ideas -could NI be changed? Could income tax thresholds be more differentiated? Could the same uprating be applied across all benefits? And yes the thread is called triple lock but the basis of my argument is that you can't look at the treatment of pensions in isolation.There is real poverty in this country - some of it amongst pensioners and there are others who are much more than comfortable, some of them pensioners. I really don't see what's wrong with discussing that situation and trying to come up with some ideas. But actually - nothing much will happen anyway. All claimants apart from pensioners will continue to see their benefits frozen, benefits will continue to be harder and harder to claim and will constantly reduce in scope and coverage and pensioners will lose the triple lock but at least get a double lock. The really hard up pensioners will see no improvements and well off pensioners like me will be just fine and dandy. The next Conservstive government as surely the next one will be, will do zilch to address any of these issues apart from maybe the double lock and will be able to continue to rely on the votes of enough pensioners to help keep them in power. It's quite depressing really for some of us who would like things to be fairer but I can't honestly see any possibility of improvement.

And actually gg there is very little debate about welfare cuts in general on GN - there was hardly any interest in the huge cuts in bereavement allowances and the last thread mentioning benefits was the usual stuff that follows those appalling benefit porn programmes - hardly informed debate or a real discussion of the real issues around benefits.

Perhaps another forum would have a more in depth discussion Rigby. If you are looking for something specific it is often worth going to the forum dealing with that.

How long have you been on GN, Rigby?
There's been lots on about welfare cuts. It's another of those subjects that the rightwingers get annoyed about.
In fact, go on the DWP thread and you'll find it quite up to date.

I haven't looked at the DWP thread but I remember the very little concern about the bereavement benefit cuts - were they mentioned on there? ( I'll go snd look) I remember a lot of negative commens about Daniel Blake and then the recent thread on that thoroughly disgusting and reprehensible C5 benefits programme. The overall sense I get from GN on the subject of benefits is that a few regular posters, you DJ being one of them, care very much but the majority don't

I think a lot of people don't even know about the huge changes to bereavement benefit - I mentioned it to a friend today and she knew nothing about it.

Makes you wonder why doesn't it Eloe? But then I find that most people's knowledge of the benefits system is in inverse proportion to their willingness to pass judgement on it and those dreadful scroungers.

Went on the DWP thread and started reading backwards - some recent interesting posts and then suddenly it's all about Corbyn - at this point I lost the will to live, again. Seriously though, don't you think a thread just called DWP is very wide and that good debate and discussion can just get buried?

Put a search for benefits in the top search box, not the forum one as that gets confusing.
49 results. Not many in the great scheme of things.
One of the difficulties is that when you start discussing these problems seriously the thread often gets sidetracked by people who would be much happier on a different forum.
Not sure about bereavement benefits cuts specifically, but I know I have signed a couple of government petitions about it. Again another iniquitous example of hitting the suffering, when 75% of bereaved families will be up to £12,000 worse off.

Sorry, Rigby. Some of us do try to stick to the subject.

theconversation.com/britains-massive-unclaimed-benefits-failure-and-how-to-fix-it-75816

From that thread, just in case you know anyone who does not claim all their benefits.
Perhaps you should put bereavement benefit links on the DWP thread.

gg I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that if there's a thread called 'triple lock' on a forum of generally older people, that there might be some informed debate on the subject.

I am certainly glad I didn't make any suggestions about what I want to change as, as you had already made clear you would, you just rejected Jen's suggestion as being 'utopian'.
I find basic income very interesting as, it appears, do many countries that are trying it out. I don't know if it is the way we should go but I am happy to follow what those in the know are saying about it. No point really in trying to discuss it with someone who dismisses all but their own interest out of hand.

Sorry - should have put 'Rigby' in there somewhere.

I am sorry Rigby, that you do not find the thread has any informed posts.

back to the OP and triple lock...I think using percentage rates to explain rises on wages and pensions is very right wing. Let's see some real figures which politicians never wanted to show as it reveals tight fistedness and inequality. eg two and a half percent on state pension is about £3 a week. So the triple lock means a rise between £1 (average income rise/and inflation rate) & £3 (the 2andhalf per cent) whichever is the greatest...currently the latter.
And that is causing generational hate? Let alone anger on GN.?? Pensioners don't get triple lock on anything else - it is political....it both makes pensioners feel more valued than £3 a week and makes non pensioners furious that they are not getting it. Misinformation all round. It masquerades at generosity on one hand and mocks equality on the other. 1% rises across the board benefits the richest and penalises the poorest.
The overall gentler treatment by Society to pensioners is they are too old to work, not wanted in the workplace, marginalised and often suffering from chronic ill health. They are not young. Social Care is cruelly cut How many young would opt to be old? I find the generational war very disturbing and quite heartless. To receive a Pension as a Right and not begged for by means testing is a further advance in civilisation. Before the State Pension there was the workhouse or charity for the old. The pension gave back some dignity to the poor. And as I have stated many times already the triple lock is still very little and our old age pension is one of the lowest in Europe. So stop making pensioners feel guilty and wanting to give it away??? its a form of bullying.

I should have referenced Rigby in the above as most posts are very just and reasonable.

especially GGMk2 who I feel possibly got some of the spleen aimed at me.

to clarify about not making pensioners feel they want to give away or forego their triple lock (£3) I didn't mean that those who are amply rewarded by other pensions shouldn't. to give freely at this stage of life is a blessing.

..I think using percentage rates to explain rises on wages and pensions is very right wing.

I think you have a very good point there.

I was listening to what our uni students are getting in loans next year. I know they have to pay them back (if they earn enough) but the amount they are deemed to need is often more than a pensioner gets. These young people are very capable to topping up with part-time work (ours do) whereas older people are often unable to do so. For the students this is a short period which should bring them higher earnings; for pensioners it is forever.

I hasten to add I don't think they should get less and pensioners more but that we all need enough to live on.