For Newsnight: should we end universal benefits for better off pensioners?

And as for the thongs!? Ouch!,

Thankyou darlings! I do find the swimsuits a little 'constricting' though!

Neither! We have two single beds and a sofa that converts into a double bed if required. (they call it a suite but it's actually a larger cabin) if youre interested ,
Go to Cunard QE, click on accomadation. It's a princess grill P3 grade but disabled accessable, which means it is a little larger and has a wet room rather than a shower over a bath!

Impeccable taste in evening wear...

jeni, for a chap, you do look good in drag. The pearls give a subtle touch of authenticity.

pogs

jeni.
A suite, how posh, which one of you get's the sofa.

Absolutely! I bet a lot of you thought I was a woman!
Don't tell maniac we're sharing a suite!

Yes, we do get men on here as well! It could have been seen as sexist to just assume deserving was a woman.

deserving.

I think I found your reply amusing and agree with a lot of your comments. What upset you though with regard to he/she which I admit to writing. I only meant it as a way of not supposing your gender which could upset in another way. P.C. correct crap and all that.

I get very easily confused.

I'm lurking ....could you just run all that by me again please ... ..

Yes I know all about the manderins etc. but what I am suggesting is something really radical and to take it out of the politicians grubby little hands and hand the decision re welfare state etc. back to us. How we go about it is the real problem I think, but there must be a way.

To DES: by the way , for avoidence of doubt

Wellll Heloooo , wondered what had become of u .

So...just a remarkable coincidence! That's all right then...

And now for something you consider interesting.Another contribution to this thread.First I must attribute all the smaller words to Miss Smith of St Modwins primary, some of the larger words to Mr Jackson of , "the big school" other things are probably what I have read,and remembered, seen, heard about, from numerous places. I wqs rather hoping I could regurgitate them, but apparently there seems to be a time limit on repeating something you have learned.
Is 1066 far enough back to remark upon without being accused of plagiarism? (you will have somebodies eye out with that) There seems to be a distinct feel of what I think is now called"textual bullying" about some of the remarks (I haven't the time to spend pouring over Wikiwhatsit to see if that is on there, I am reliably informed that everything is on there so it makes it difficult for anyone to say anything, to the satisfaction of grammar nazis)
With regards to the he/she, introduced by one and taken up by the others, what's that all about? What could you say if you knew I was ginger?
My posts have been likened to shrapnel, in an attempt for brevity they can appear so, yet they seem to some still to be long. Iv' e had longer shopping lists, whats two or three paragraphs, it's not War and Peace.

The problem with introducing universal benefits, for the purpose of votes, is that it becomes very difficult for those that follow on to repeal them. They want to remain in power and all they can do is tinker with them.Regarding the costs, robbing Peter to pay Paul (don't know who to attribute that to) is something they do not do regarding benefits.
We have sufficient to give to places like India, but we are borrowing. We have enough for illegal wars but not for the NHS. You all know the situation and can no doubt quote numerous more examples.We are not going to solve it but we must be careful not to dilute the benefits in a magnanimous moment of patriotism,by agreeing to forgo some, to the detriment of those that need them. The means test is costly and to a great extent ineffective, I have never known a "tick box" type situation to be fair or fully representative.

elegran you've hit the nail (or politician) on the head.
Unfortunately the country is mainly run by the mandarins in reality! To join the civil service and rise to the higher echelons, a mandatory imaginectomy is performed!
It seems as well, once elected MPs can ignore our wishes and do as their party tells them to! G&S

Elegran You're right about the need for imagination, but somehow I don't think there is any available to politicians..

And there should be some level of appropriateness in what different taxes are spent to - road tax spent on building and maintaining roads, for instance, so that if the roads got more use by more traffic, there would be more road tax coming in, which could be used to mend potholes and make improvements. Alcohol tax spent on dedicated drying-out units and counselling to take the pressure off the main NHS. A bit of imagination is needed.

The same happened with the money gained from selling off council houses. It went into the general pot, and income from rents went down, so building on new council houses slowed down, so those who needed them..... and so on. i hoped at the time that they would invest some of the dosh in good rental schemes for those with no hope of getting onto the property ladder.

Yes exactly - so what I am saying is that it is time for a re-think.

Personally I firmly believe in the welfare state and would be devastated to see it end. But what is so needed is a total overhaul so that governments of any persuasion can't fiddle around with it without our consent. We should all agree what we want and at what level and at what cost and then each year or so look at the accounts and make decisions about the next few years. Does that sound a bit utopian?

I think that's the problem, though, whitewave, NI payments just go into the general 'pot' and there is no 'insurance policy' as such. So governments spend the money each year, and of course there is a bigger and bigger shortfall as the population ages and the welfare bill increases.

This point has probably been made, but when the welfare state was set up the object was along the lines of a national insurance scheme, pay in during good times, and take out in times of need. Most of us hope that we will never need it, and indeed I suppose that most of us don't otherwise it wouldn't work. I suspect that if we as a nation decide that we do indeed want to continue to recieve these universal benefits we have to decide at what level we are prepared to pay for it. I just wish someone - a none party political bod - would cost it so that we could get an idea of what we get for what we are prepared to pay. And that the state was forced to publish a yearly account so that we could see where indeed the money we pay for our insurance is going and not being syphoned off somewhere else.

It will be interesting to see if deserving has any more to contribute to this thread.

Point-scoring - misusing information and personal power to undermine others. All it does it is lose respect for the individual who uses this tactic.