Osborne's Budget - looks like pensioners will lose out the most

I have four children, all in their 30s, all have been through uni - the eldest got a grant and the other three had loans. One son is back at uni doing a further degree because he couldn't get decent work with the one he had (media, film and photography). They all had jobs whilst studying. Two own their own homes, mortgaged to the hilt and two rent (one son had a house and handed it over to ex-DIL). They will all eventually own their own houses, despite government and recession hurdles. They all want better incomes and lifestyles and are working hard to achieve what they want for themselves and their families.

They have more disposable income than I had through my twenties and thirties, the standard of living is much higher than 30 years ago, and they have found it easier to get a mortgage than my generation did. We didn't have exotic holidays back then - now they have been holidaying in Mexico, Cuba, Thailand, Australia, Florida, Spain, Kenya and Malaysia in just the last 3 years. The struggles are relative, aren't they? The money spent on such holidays could also be paid into pension plans - the culture is changing - our children will work out how they want to prioritise their income.

If this generation come complaining to me that they can't get on the housing ladder, I have only to look at their cars and how they spend their leisure time to see that they aren't as badly off as we baby-boomers were.

Yes Carol I agree with what you say. I was generalising when I said I thought in many ways we were a lucky generation. One thing which was much worse then than now was the financial fate of women who got divorced. A number of my friends who did this have ended up struggling to make ends meet whilst their ex husbands are quite well off.

And yes in my family everyone started off living with the parents in the front room but they did go on to get council houses or managed eventually to buy. I didn't earn very much money but still managed to buy a first property (with my then husband) when I was 23. Can't see that option being available to many average earners now.

Your last sentence review is to the point. It's hard to hear good news now.

bit.ly/oMbfWa

I agree with you Petallus - our children are finding it more difficult. When I came into the world, following the war, families were also in that situation and for the first two years my mum, dad and I lived in the attic room at my grandmother's house because there wasn't enough social housing - many houses were still being built after the war. My parents were in their late forties by the ime they could afford a deposit for a house, by which time I was 21, earning a very low income despite every effort, and saving with my fiancee for our own house.

I don't think we should be thanking anyone for not being involved in two world wars, nor should we be blamed because of this. Our children won't be talking about skimpy state pensions because they will be integrated into a different system where everyone is required to make pension arrangements from the start. If I had had any inkling of the way my pension was to be eroded, I would have been able to plan for it. As it was, in the last few years of my employment, I paid 15% of my salary and bought AVCs, instead of 9% in order to try and catch up with the deficit I faced because of bringing up my children and not having a job till they were at school (I wasn't doing nothing - I was a volunteer for 15 hours a week, studied for another 15 hours, and looked after 4 children whilst renovating a house to try and add some value to it - husband got the benefit of that in divorce, not me).

It's easy to forget that many women have been kept in poverty and on much lower incomes, so need every penny of their pension.

I agree with Gillian 77 and, sorry Carol I do think that in many ways we baby boomers were the fortunate generation (although obviously it varies from person to person) But we avoided having to fight in the two World Wars, lived in a period of growing national prosperity and had plenty of work. There was also a good supply of social housing for those who could not afford to buy. Now we are in this financial crisis with no job to worry about losing and a pension of sorts, mortgages already paid off for us older ones anyway. I feel sorry for my children and grandchildren who seem unlikely to ever get a foot on the property ladder and who will probably have to work until they are 70 only to retire on an even skimpier state pension.

Labour shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Rachel Reeves said: “George Osborne has tried to bury his £3 billion ‘Granny Tax’ raid on pensioners over the next four years.

“The freeze in the personal allowance for pensioners will see 4.4 million pensioners who pay income tax losing an average of £83 per year next April. And people turning 65 next year will lose up to £322".

The move will generate an extra £3.3billion in income tax over the next four years.

Wow! we are getting another £5 odd aweek in our pensions. They are among the lowest in Europe. We have to pay tax on that £5 and we only get it because of the price index last September. If the index had been lower we would not have got it. 'Call me Dave' goes on as if he personally arrange for us to get the £5. Sylvia

You aren't comparing like with like Gillian. Statistics are bandied about to illustrate that we baby-boomers have had it all, and it simply is not the case. Yes, we have always been able to get work, but we never had the statutory basic rate of pay, so many earned a pittance. Women working part-time have only recently gained the same rights. Benefits were almost non-existent when I was a young person who was not allowed to go to college, let alone university - I funded my way through an OU Honours degree with no help from anyone. I didn't have a free university education.

When I got married, we need a third of the deposit for the house and we had to prove to the Building Society that we (and by we, I mean my ex-husband, whose name was on the mortgage, despite my contribution) were able to pay by showing a pattern of saving. We had MIRAS tax relief on the mortgage, but the mortgage was 17% interest at one point! We lived through power cuts, 4 day weeks, redundancies, closing mines, shipyards and steelworks. We really did have a low standard of living.

The majority of pensioners know what it is like to struggle despite having work, paying taxes and saving for retirement. A single person on benefits of £67.50 with savings below £10,000? Who the heck has up to £10,000 savings when they have been living on that level of benefits? Very few people. People on very low incomes spend all their savings, or they have none to save.

Annobel - I'm watching Vince Cable on QT and I think he really has sold out now - I thought he had some integrity left. David Dimbleby flippantly asked him why he hasn't resigned in protest, and I would have expected a man who has purported to have some principles would have stepped forward, but even he has become as corrupt as the rest.

'Why have we been getting an extra tax allowance all these years?'. Presumably because Labour were trying to buy our votes.

Why have we been getting an extra tax allowance all these years? Yes, we've worked hard all our lives but at least we had the opportunity. I fear that many of the youngsters will not get the same chance, the jobs aren't there. There's no point comparing working people with the likes of Osbourne and Cameron. I agree the wealthy shouldn't have got a tax cut but I feel that, bearing in mind the state of the country, we get reasonable benefits compared to many others. A single person on benefits one day before retirement age gets £67.50 per week, the next day they're guaranteed £137.00, if they have savings below £10,000. I think compared to some we're treated okay.

Question Time on TV. I used to like Vince Cable, but I'm off to bed. I am sure we've said it all in this thread and anyway, it's always so predictable.

Annobel

You said it all, Carol and em - except for one thing. Who are the volunteers serving in charity shops, advising in CABs and Age UK, running lunch clubs for their contemporaries, and, in many cases, acting as unpaid childminders? In other words, where do you find Cameron's 'big society' in action? In the ranks of maligned pensioners, that's where and what kind of recognition do we get? No, don't bother trying to answer that - it's a rhetorical question.

em agreed. I don't want any handouts, I'm happy to pay tax and I want to live in a fair society that treats its older citizens properly - not with pampering and pandering to whims, but by ensuring that we don't end up struggling to survive as health and fitness gradually lessens and we become a little bit more dependent on support to maintain independence. I'd like to see George Osbourne trying to live on a limited income for a month, and then let's see whether that £5.30 'rise' helps him maintain the lifestyle he would want to live when he retires!

Hi Carol ~ yes not looking for special treatment just fairness for all.
slashing benefits for sick and disabled and yes Gillian tuition fees etc. but then making tax cuts for those at the top.
I think it was the way the tax change (which was actually brought in by Churchill) was sneaked in that seemed to make many angry.
I was hurt by many comments made as if pensioners were some sort of scroungers who had no right to receive a state pension.
I helped in the fight for equal pay and many other things that now seem to be being wiped out. I think that the young and old and disabled et al should be standing together.

Agree Carol about 'playing the pensioner card'. My mum always said that we should be happy that we were in a position to pay tax. Pensioners who don't pay tax don't have the income to pay it. All that is self-evident. Mum struggled to convince an elderly aunt that her opinion was not reasonable. Aunt C firmly believed that no pensioner should ever pay tax. When Mum tried to explain about tax allowances and reasonable private pensions she simply said it was nonsense! However I say again that I find it mean-spirited to take from those who have paid their dues, not to mention the high mortgage interest rates back then, only to hand it over to the wealthiest in society. I am also a bit resentful of the fact that our pension pots were 'raided' a few years back and knocked sideways some of our plans!

Hear hear Carol I for one am sick of being the "sensible" one. May as well just spend everything and go on benefits.

Never could do that though, and I don't owe a penny either. If I can't afford something then I do without.

A few of us have talked about the need for a car for various reasons. The 2012 £5.30 a week rise in pension has disappeared months ago, as the cost of petrol rose. Since I retired 2 years ago, when I was putting £45 a week of petrol in my car, the cost of that same weekly fill-up is now £55 to £60. I use my car for hospital visits, child-minding and babysitting duties and to bring shopping home. I would struggle to do the 40 mile round trips by public transport. As a percentage of my income, it's a huge rise - not so for the rich.

Excellent post Carol

Students, those with disabilities, pensioners, young families losing tax credits - none of them are the high rollers who are putting their money in off shore banks, and avoiding tax. It isn't a competition to be the worse off in society - these groups of people are the ones who are getting the brunt of the economic fiasco that was none of their doing. The rich bankers and suchlike who could actually do some good by paying their taxes and being philanthropicby giving some of their money away are busy squirelling it out of sight, and who do you think gives most in percentage terms of income to charity? Yes, us lot!

I don't accept that we are a moaning lot who don't know when we are well off - I and many others use the low income I have wisely and frugally, and I still look around to see if I can help others who have less.

I am angry that pensioners are being lumped together and called moaning, or 'playing the pensioners' card' when I know that there are many things I don't claim that I could, I pay all my tax dues, I give to charity, I recycle clothes and other belongings that others can use, and I don't live a materialistic life.

The pension rise is due to inflation - it isn't a gift from George Osborne - it has already been eroded because of energy and shopping bills, the cost of petrol, and rising essential monthy bills like water, phone, insurance etc.

Let's not have people dividing pensioners and making them feel guilty because they are feeling the pinch. We are the ones who share tips about saving money, cooking cheaply, recycling material and yarns to make more clothes and much more. We're probably better equipped to deal with austerity than some, but we have a voice and we are entitled to use it!

So do I!

We just have to get on with it. There will always be perceived anomalies in every budget, by any party. The country's in a mess and we have a massive deficit. In years to come things may get worse, so yes, I agree with Gillian 77.

And many people of pension age like to play the pensioners' card too FlicketyB as if it's an excuse for special treatment, which doesn't help how we are perceived either. I also find all this media hysteria slightly disturbing Anagram.

Gillian77

And the richest in our society, those earning over £150000 are getting a whopping tax cut.

Students are having to pay up to £9,000 per year in tuition fees; sick and disabled under retirement age are having benefits slashed; families are losing thousands of pounds through the cutting of child benefit and child tax credits; and, guess what, pensioners are moaning about a change of tax allowance which for the average pensioner will see a reduction of income of one quarter of one per cent! That is, of course, if it affects you, as it doesn't affect 60% of us. Oh, and, of course, I almost forgot, we're getting a 5% rise in our state pension in two weeks time. Come on girls, get a grip!!