Keir Starmer aka Captain Flip Flop

I’m very very grumpy!!! Having said that the lady at the proper box company was lovely as was the lady at the bank. Can’t even take it out on the dog….

MayBee

Thanks GG13. Thus far this week my partners ended up in A&E, my dog has been at the vets with a suspicious lump and now I’ve been scammed. Partner got away with bruising, dog thankfully has a cyst and bank sorting out the scam. But it’s left me a bit fragile. I’ll post the scam in the hope that no one else falls for it. I don’t understand how fraudulent companies get away with! I will take it further, though, although I doubt if anything will come of it!

MayBee70 sorry you are having a bad day, I hope you can get help from your bank regarding your purchase 💐

In fact, why did you have to bring that up when I was asking about energy costs? I’m having a s**t enough day as it is having been the victim of buying something from a fraudulent company ( probably a result of being so naive stupid and over emotional….)

No. I won’t. Don’t you get emotional about things that are affecting your children’s and grandchildren’s futures? And, can I point out that your comment is the sort of comment that can make someone very upset? In fact, the total opposite if Maerions post. We’re still living with the aftermath of Brexit ( which was won using lies and misinformation) so why should I when lies and misinformation are still causing terrible problems. You have no right to tell me how I should feel.

MayBee70

petra

MayBee70

Does anyone know if we need to shop around for a new energy deal now? I’m sure that Martin Lewis said a while back that with prices still fluctuating it wasn’t a good idea to get into a fixed rate contract..Maerion, thank you for your informative posts. I’m afraid that, since the referendum I tend to get very wound up and emotional about political stuff.

That was 8 years ago. Don’t you think it’s time to let it go.

No, he said it quite recently.

I wasn’t referring to Martin Lewis. I was referring to your im afraid since the referendum I tend to get very wound up and emotional about political stuff

petra

MayBee70

Does anyone know if we need to shop around for a new energy deal now? I’m sure that Martin Lewis said a while back that with prices still fluctuating it wasn’t a good idea to get into a fixed rate contract..Maerion, thank you for your informative posts. I’m afraid that, since the referendum I tend to get very wound up and emotional about political stuff.

That was 8 years ago. Don’t you think it’s time to let it go.

No, he said it quite recently.

Dickens
wouldnt life be better for so many people if those in work were paid a wage etc
That didn’t necessitate the tax payer subsidising the employers.

MayBee70

Does anyone know if we need to shop around for a new energy deal now? I’m sure that Martin Lewis said a while back that with prices still fluctuating it wasn’t a good idea to get into a fixed rate contract..Maerion, thank you for your informative posts. I’m afraid that, since the referendum I tend to get very wound up and emotional about political stuff.

That was 8 years ago. Don’t you think it’s time to let it go.

keepingquiet

Dickens these are exactly the points I was going to make but you just beat me. Not a competition though!

I'd be very interested to hear your points!

Dickens these are exactly the points I was going to make but you just beat me. Not a competition though!

Wouldn't life be much better - for so many people if those in work were paid a wage that they could actually live on, and pensioners a pension that sustained them above the poverty-line - so no-one had to have top-ups, tax credits, PIP, pension credit, etc, etc?

Why are we saddled with an economy that requires the state - taxpayers - to subsidise employers maintaining their profit margins at the expense of its workforce? Why do pensioners have to exist on the minimum to keep body and soul together? How much does the administration of these convoluted benefits, allowances, top-ups actually cost?

Why don't we have a government that invests in its people?

As long as we accept Thatcher economics of individualism and greed to maintain the status-quo - oh, and Boris Johnson's "greed is good" ideology; as long as we OK free-market libertarian values - and believe that our public services are better run by private enterprises and companies - from health to prison services - then so long will we have cuts, and more cuts - and even more cuts on top of those cuts in public spending; and so long will the wealth-gap widen between the haves and have nots. And so long will those at the bottom of the heap shoulder the burden of this moveable 'black hole' - moveable because it's calculated according to accountancy whim and economic forecasts. It can be increased or decreased according to who is making the calculation, by caprice. It can even be made to disappear

The only way to grow the economy is to put disposable income into people's pockets, and to invest in public services which then generate activity in the private sector.

Other countries appear to be able to run a robust Capitalist economy and invest in its people. Why can't we?

Casdon

I took it to be just the core benefits Wyllow3 - it would be very complicated to compare otherwise, as a lot of people on the living wage will presumably also be entitled to help with housing etc? It’s hard to envisage there ever being a totally ‘fair to everybody’ system, however hard any government tried to achieve that I think.

Agreed. (ditto Doodledog)

So often it's a question of the "how" to be fairer without including overwhelming administration costs and possibly presenting people with an even more complex system to get help.

Wyllow3

Doodledog I'm getting different answers about getting WFA on top of PIP? PIP is not means tested like PC.

All the same, someone who is disabled will need the heating on more than someone who isn't.

You won't get an argument in favour of means-testing from me, in any case .

On reflection, I think the CWP should be increased, and paid to everyone on benefits, but acknowledge that this will mean that those in low incomes will miss out. Also, if this happened it would be interesting to see whether the SP counted as a benefit or not. It seems that sometimes it is and sometimes not, and rarely to the benefit of pensioners.

I took it to be just the core benefits Wyllow3 - it would be very complicated to compare otherwise, as a lot of people on the living wage will presumably also be entitled to help with housing etc? It’s hard to envisage there ever being a totally ‘fair to everybody’ system, however hard any government tried to achieve that I think.

Doodledog I'm getting different answers about getting WFA on top of PIP? PIP is not means tested like PC.

Casdon

Good question maddyone. It looks too that the gap is widening year on year.
financial-advice.co.uk/2024/01/the-widening-gap-national-minimum-wage-vs-new-state-pension/

I had to look it up but it doesn't appear those figures include pension credit. (might be wrong, do cross check) It doesn't increase the pension by a great deal but includes gateway benefits.

The NMW is topped up with means-tested benefits, paying the profits of exploitative employers from taxpayers' money. Nobody (or very few people) will actually live on it. Maybe someone in a couple whose partner brings the household income (another unfair measure) to higher than the level that has been decided people 'need', but generally speaking it is notional. It is blatantly unfair that two people in the same job on the same money end up with different amounts because one has a well-paid partner and the other doesn't. 'The labourer is worthy of his (or her) hire', and all that. Means-tests drag everyone down.

The thinking is that many pensioners have bought houses, so have no housing costs in later life and don't 'need' as much to live on. Home buyers pay interest for decades (out of taxed income) only to have the value of their assets means-tested away if they need care in later life, and can't afford to pay without selling them, so as ever, those in 'the middle' lose out. Mooted 'caps' on spending disadvantage those whose houses have not benefited from the investment in some areas that keep house price differentials across the country so skewed, and again, it's an unfair system from top to bottom. I really hope (but don't expect) that it will be comprehensively overhauled to be fair to everyone.

Sorry if this is a silly question, but to return to the question of the WFP, the Cold Weather Payment is still available to those on benefits (presumably including PC). I'm thinking of the money paid when the temperature drops below a certain level for a set number of consecutive days, or similar. If so, maybe that could be increased so that everyone on benefits gets more help with heating bills? If I'm right, it is paid to people of all ages who claim certain benefits (eg PIP). If it's not, perhaps that could be brought in so there is no perceived intergenerational unfairness?

It still leaves the injustice of the means-test, though, and as ever there will be those just above the limit who won't qualify, and those who have struggled to be self-sufficient who will have their struggles count against them.

Good question maddyone. It looks too that the gap is widening year on year.
financial-advice.co.uk/2024/01/the-widening-gap-national-minimum-wage-vs-new-state-pension/

I know nobody around here who earns anything like twenty thousand a year, though.

I cannot, to use a weird expression, get my head around the idea that the poorest pensioner on pension credit can live for a year on £11,500 approximately, with of course the huge addition of the £200 WFA, whilst the minimum wage brings in approximately £20,000 a year. If a person needs £20,000 a year to live on, why are pensioners expected to manage on only a little more than half that?

MissAdventure

I wonder if phasing it out would have been better, slowly reducing it across the board, with larger payments for the genuinely hard up

Possibly - but I think it was the easiest option, less admin, etc.

There are other ways to plug this alleged "black hole" - apart from the accountancy rules used to decide what it actually is. However, public spending is always the first option, as we know.

I wonder if phasing it out would have been better, slowly reducing it across the board, with larger payments for the genuinely hard up

Quokka

Dickens

Quokka

Removing a payment from those who really don’t need it to fund something else? What’s wrong with that?

Because those who are just above the PC cut-off point more than likely do need the WFA. These are the pensioners we are talking about.

Perhaps the answer is to firstly encourage those who are entitled to PC to apply for it? It appears there are many who have no idea they are eligible.

Sadly, no matter where you draw the line some will always fall outside it.

Sadly, no matter where you draw the line some will always fall outside it.

Obviously.

But perhaps the line should be drawn higher up?

Pension credit theoretically prevents pensioners from living below the 'poverty-line' - so being just above it still equals impoverishment.

If the WFA is scrapped this autumn, then those pensioners who've budgeted with the allowance in their budget, then they will have not been given a grace period to save any money towards it.