Have baby boomers stolen the family silver

"On average, household pensioner income after housing costs is around £20,000, which is considerably higher than the average"

Averages are very deceptive DD and when it comes to earnings almost always substantially higher than the mode, because the relatively small numbers who are very well off raise the average in a way thats deceptive. Some pensioners are on high incomes with very generous pensions. Some are able to work part time in well paid roles.
They are not typical. The majority of pensioners do not have the scope to increase their income by working harder or getting a better job either. The options are more limited.

Exactly, Maizie! It's not a question of 'blame', but some people seem to stick their fingers in their ears and go 'la la la'.

Estimates are not figures plucked from the ether.

Why is everyone so defensive about the costs to the NHS of 'older people'? You're not being attacked. It is a fact that there are a lot of us and we are costing more to maintain as we get older.

It is also a fact, as has been pointed out by others, that we're the generation who voted in the Conservative governments who have broken the consensus on social welfare and have left the NHS very short of money.

PS. It's not true that most pensioners have a low income. On average, they have a high disposable income compared with many other groups. On average, household pensioner income after housing costs is around £20,000, which is considerably higher than the average. Many people (including me) will have a higher income as a pensioner than they currently do. Ask WASPI campaigners!

By the way, Mair, there are other threads about the NHS. The accumulation of wealth by the elderly has other implications, which you seem to be ignoring. The NHS isn't the only problem by any means.

'Blame' and being the cause of something aren't the same thing, so that's a straw man argument.

Yes, graphs only show averages, but it is an ABSOLUTE FACT that baby boomers are wealthier than other generations, are about to become wealthier pensioners than pensioners have ever been and will be in the future.

You are right that averages hide differences, but the government has pandered to this generation, because they are such a big group and buy votes. What the averages show is that there should not be measures directed at pensioners as a group, but at those within the group who need help, in addition to those who need help in ALL age groups.

Maizie.
You do realise that graph is only an estimate dont you? Unreliable.
Stop trying to apportion 'blame' to older people.

There are a number of causes of the problems of the NHS and uncontrolled (and badly controlled) immigration is one of them, and one which could have been avoided. An ageing native population is unavoidable.

Agree Paddy Ann and most pensioners while they have more 'wealth' in the form of a home, have a low income.

PS. Very few people only have the basic state pension, because it's made up to a threshold with Pension Credit and/or housing benefit.

I didn't claim that pensioners are wealthier EVERYWHERE, but it is a FACT that pensioners are on average wealthier.

Where I live pensioners are most definitely wealthier than working families, for the simple reason that they own property and don't have mortgages or rent to pay. That is probably true of most areas.

Do the young people in your area still work in factories? Has the nature of work in the area changed? Do they work at all? Have they moved away? Have you compared how much a pensioner receives with somebody of working age? Don't forget that people are still of working age until they are 66/67.

That's why I wrote that anecdotes don't give the big picture.

A pdf including the statistics for the above can be downloaded here:

www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/the-pinch-how-the-baby-boomers-took-their-childrens-future-and-why-they-should-give-it-back/

dont know where you live Daphne dill but in my area most pensioners live /survive on their state pensions ,its an area where factory work was the norm and no big private pensions and mostly council housing until very recently,so its not a FACT that pensioners are wealthier EVERYWHERE in the UK ,in fact I'd say not in most areas of the UK

*wealthier

Anecdotal stories really don't show the whole picture.

It is a FACT that the 'baby boomer' generation is welathier than any other group ofthe same age in the past - and probably the future. It holds a greater proportion of the country's wealth than other groups and, as mortgages are paid off, has a relatively high disposable income.

It has been the largest group as it has aged and successive governments have pandered to it to buy votes, even though this hasn't been in the long term interests of the country.

Immigrants are in no way to 'blame'. Without them, there will be an even bigger percentage of the population not working.

(You do seem somewhat obsessed with immigration, Mair )

www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/happy-70th-baby-boomer-but-its-the-young-who-need-the-gifts/

Mass uncontrolled immigration at an unmanageable rate causing enormous pressure especially on GPs, A&E and maternity services.

I posted this on the NHS winter crisis thread but perhaps it's appropriate here, too:

Note the extremely low level of 'cost pressure' on the NHS caused by 'immigrants' (even if you add the EU and non EU together they still come to less than the next 'pressure'- ageing population.

It probably was easier to get on housing ladder as there weren't hundreds of immigrants taking up the places and to compete with and there were more council houses being built
no one went abroad for holidays all the time when I was young, no one had dishwashers/washing machines, sky television. And no one had two cars that's for sure!

All good points.
I'd add to that clothing and footwear was expensive (much of it British made) and our wardrobes were quarter the size of peoples now.

Young people dont appreciate that while housing has become relatively more expensive, stuff has become cheaper relative to earnings, because its manufactured in low wage economies, too cheap, encouraging a throw away society. This cannot last.

Mair 11.13.56 Excellent post on the NHS.

Iam64
You might like to consider supplements containing macula protecting
ingredients too?

Thanks for the info Iam64 and annsixty.

I believe they're working on some sort of treatment for both types of AMD but I don't know if it will be in time to help my mum, who is 96, or if it will be thought possible in very old age.

Yes I have wet AMD which can be kept stable with injections. I have been very fortunate in that the area affected in my left eye was able to be treated last May with Photo Dynamic Therapy and since then have only had one injection and on Monday of this week was discharged by the consultant.

eloethan, my mum had dry AMD which led to her becoming registered partially sighted, in fact she could see very little in later life. That's the one which currently has no treatment. I have very early stage AMD, the surgeon who treated other sight stuff recently told me the only treatment currently is to eat a diet rich in green leafy vegetables.

My mum has AMD and now has very poor sight. She has never been given any drugs at all as they have always said there is nothing they can do. What is Avastin and should she have been given this several years ago? Of is it just that the posters speaking about it on here have the type of AMD - I can't remember if it's wet AMD or dry AMD - that can be treated?

That was very self sacrificing of you ann there have been more concerns about Avestin than Lucentis, but no she wasnt given the choice I am pleased to say, as that puts enormous moral pressure on older people.

Mair was your Mother given a choice of drug for her AMD?
When I was diagnosed I received a letter from the local NHS trust explaining the cost of treatment and asking if I would consider Avastin which is a vastly cheaper drug and manufactured by the same people who make Lucentis. It was explained that if everyone in just our area with AMD chose Avastin it would save in just our area £1 million a year. I discussed it with the consultant and was given entirely free choice. I chose Avastin.

But was it the same manufacturer?