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

There's an article in today's Guardian Money Section by Patrick Collinson arguing that compared with other age groups the over 65s are 'receiving a sensational deal'. Research shows that disposable income of people in their 60s is now higher than people in their 20s for the first time ever. Mmmm!

I've been away all week so I'm late in adding my two penn'orth, but Carol has adequately covered everything that I would have said.
Last year, in desperation to discover who I could vote for in future whilst maintaining some integrity, I began to research the Green Party. At the next election they will get my vote.
By the way, I saw Geraldine giving a GN response on the news and thought she did an excellent job.

Just been watching Danny Alexander explain to Andrew Marr the reasoning behind budget changes, i.e. pensioners' tax. After blustering his way through the discussion, he neatly side-stepped any tory blame by claiming the tax allowance changes as lib-dem responsibility.

The raising of the tax threshold (ultimately to £10K) was in the Lib Dem Manifesto. The freezing of the age-related allowance most certainly was not; neither were the changes in conditions for claiming tax credits which have left families far worse off.

PS Danny Alexander is Osborne's whipping boy!

Is anyone else getting fed up with all the references to "baby-boomers" in the papers; the broadsheets are just as guilty as the tabloids. Could we be called the "post-war generation" instead do you think?

Nope! At my age, I don't mind being describe as a "baby" in any context!

I thought Danny Alexander did an excellent job in explaining that the tax allowance changes would affect under half of us, whilst, of course, we all get the pension increase.

I suppose my bottom line is if I have to suffer a bit more financially so that our children and grandchildren don't, I'm happy with that. Because if they weren't changing our tax allowances they'd be cutting more things from our children and grandchildren to make up for it. So, I won't be signing any petition.

Now off to get my tin helmet!!!

Of course, young families, pensioners and people on benefit would not have to vie with each other for sparse resources if the chancellor was not so busy giving away perks to the rich, and fantasising that wealthy tax-dodgers will repent and start paying lower tax - they won't pay any at all, but by the time this is evidenced, the con-dem government will have been ousted.

I'm not prepared to vie with young families and people on benefit. I posted about the article in Guardian Money above. Seems our age group have more disposable income than people in their twenties for the first time ever.
I'd like to have more money instead of the 50p in the pound tax payers but not instead of young families and people on benefit.

I thought that was what I was saying, too petallus? It seems we agree? I don't want to have money instead of young families on benefit, either. I want these groups to be treated fairly and have the 50p or 45p tax payers contribute their just dues.

Whey! I've just been over on Mumsnet reading a thread ...AIBU to think old people have not worked hard all their lives'. Oh dear, none of them seem to think very highly of us. I'm going to risk quoting two posts:

'I am not mad about the boomer generation, the most entitled bunch of whiners who keep the Daily Mail in business'

' many of the elderly I know are rolling it in'

They do seem to have great respect for the hard work the previous generation who left school at 12 (their grandparents) put in though!

Well, they are massively generalising Petallus and don't understand what the baby-boomers did in terms of hours worked, low wages campaigned about, the fight for equality, and the degree of oppression that has been gradually diminished because of this generation's efforts. We have said on other threads that young women don't tend to regard feminism as important because so much is taken for granted now. Likewise, they don't know what the effects of being oppressed through strikes feels like. If they remembered power cuts, no heating, communities gathering together to ensure young families had enough food, and the fight to get equal pay for women, they might not say those things. Also, not all young women on Mumsnet share that view. Similarly, we don't all agree on here.

If this generation hadn't fought for the rights that are now at risk of being taken away, they wouldn't have grown up in a society where pensioners feel a responsibility to fight for families as well as themselves. We know that what gets taken away now will affect that generation, on top of what they are being hit with now - they won't thank us for failing to address it, will they?

We are the ones who have the time and the experience to do something about it. We are the ones who have a massive vote, and it is grandparents who want the best for their grandchildren so will not stand by and see their entitlements eroded.

I and many others don't just 'whine on' about pensioners entitlements - I also campaign with organisations that want to improve health, education, welfare rights and resources for communities. This generation can take a long view, and envisage what can happen if we let things lie.

The "baby boom" was in babies, not economics. Thousands of demobbed servicemen came home to a loving wife and started a family, then found there was no work and no accommodation.

I'd say "babyboomers" is definitely the wrong name.

Petallus I have also read that Mumsnet thread, and there are many reasonable comments, as well as the one you chose, for example.....

'.....Scapegoating. It's all the fault of the old/young/binge drinkers/men/single mothers/people who support fathers for justice/Tories/Labour/foreigners etc.

Once we get rid of them, we'll be fine....Anyone getting a feeling of deja vu yet? Intelligent solutions anyone? Or would you rather just target a group and decide it's All Their Fault?'

We have lost an hour this morning!

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

Brilliant! We'll go and get it back of 'em in October!!

Hope they don't wear it out before giving it back.

Carol the large majority of the posts I read were challenging the notion that old people had worked hard all their lives and that they were badly off financially now.

I thought it would be interesting to see what our children's generation thought; doesn't mean I agree with them.

How dare anyone challenge the proven fact that our generation worked hard for their pensions!

Somebody on Mumsnet said yes they worked hard but not all their lives, my dad retired when he was 55 on a good pension!! There was also the view that often only one partner worked in our generation and it was enough to buy a house, live on etc.

There was also some research quoted on Friday in Guardian which suggested that our generation have done relatively well out of the system compared with 20 year olds who will have to work until they are 70, struggling to pay off the country's debt.

Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger.

this is a test message only

I don't agree with generalising from the specific (although I do it myself on occasion and berate myself for doing it), but if you are a regular reader and contributor to Mumsnet, you'll understand the different culture of those forums, the hastily written responses, and the willingness of some to jump on bandwagons and not challenge thinking, whereas on here there is thoughtful, considered contribution on serious issues, usually done on a laptop or PC rather than on an iphone. I grant that these views have been posted, but reading the thread demonstrates there is little follow-through of discussion and some posters' comments are just downright gratuitously insulting and rude.

I prefer to read those responsible comments made on Mumsnet, which show the poster has a balanced view, is open to other information, and knows what's going on in the world.

I don't set much store by those provocative comments referred to. If someone's personal experience is that their parents are lazy so-and-so's who have hardly ever worked, contributed little to society, and bring in a tidy income without any effort being put in, then they are going to make such negative observations. It doesn't mean that the whole pension-eligible group is like that. It interests me to know more about those posters, too - if they have had hard-working grandparents who have given more than one could ask by fighting for their countries , bringing up families who turn out to be feckless or lazy, then miraculously the Mumsnet generation of those families turn out more like their grandparents than their lazy baby-boomer parents, that doesn't quite fit, does it? Wouldn't the parents also have that work ethic, usually?

You've made a good point Carol. Many of the posts on Mumsnet are ironic, frivolous, tongue in cheek, brief and deliberately provocative. And sometimes fun!

Nothing like our posts which are thoughtful, insightful and genuine when the topic demands it.

thanks sue

My husband and I are quite happy to pay the so-called Granny Tax. There I've said it!.Churchill made the tax break for pensioners in the 1920's when the supposed average living age was 59. Why should we pay less tax on our income than our hard working children who do not qualify for benefits such as free prescriptions etc.Those pensioners who are either too poor or too rich cannot complain as they were never involved in the first place. The group of pensioners who are affected receive two pensions and in the vast majority of cases will own their own home and be financially secure. I do accept the valid arguemant "Well I paid my taxes and worked hard all my life",I did too. Why is it though we expect to be treated as a more valuable citizen than the people doing the same thing now. I am amazed how the left are now new right and the right are now the new left. There is a lot of political grandstanding on this matter. If George Osborne had gone the other way and increased the rate for pensioners I bet the media and certain political parties would have accused him of unfairness and demanded he brought us in line with the squeezed middle earner and families, accusing him of looking after the rich.