Change free prescriptions to state pension age?

My parents taught my brother and me to cook from an early age. I wasn't brought up with money so everything was cooked from scratch plenty of veg and pulses and cheaper cuts of meat and always a pud steamed sponge and custard ,rice pudding and the like. Taught our children to cook and my grandsons taught from very young. Cooking from scratch is cheaper and healthier. Many years ago one if my cousin's left home but my aunt didn't think boys should learn to cook . So he brought himself an basic cook book and taught himself .

Nothing better than homemade meals,soups and baking . At least you know what goes into to. And yes everyone can do it just needs planning . I can't cook fresh everyday haven't got years due to disability so make large pot of stew with either chicken or Quorn mince ,chicken pieces or sausages. I don't eat meat. Plenty of veg and pearl barely or pasta enough for 6 dinners portioned into oven proof dishes. Home made red lentils and veg soup enough for 6 lunches and kept in a large plastic box in the fridge to reheat a portion for lunch. Have same menu all year round plus porridge for breakfast. Have plenty of fruit as well.

I know people would hate my way of eating but it works for me. Plus list 7st since 2017 and still battling to lose the last stone for last 2 nearly 3 years but will get there one day.

Mt61

MissAdventure

You can be malnourished and obese, by the way.

Probably the crappy food they are given to eat, takeaways, parents can’t cook so they don’t eat properly

These are quite unjust aspersions cast on a genration, many of whome, can cook, and do cook.

If the parents can't cook then our generation, their parents are at fault, for not ecouraging them to do so when they were children. I have children and grandchildren who can all cook - and do because they have been mixing and making with food since they were knee high to grasshopper.

I wouldn't imagine many pensioners are fed crap by parents who can't cook.

MissAdventure

You can be malnourished and obese, by the way.

Probably the crappy food they are given to eat, takeaways, parents can’t cook so they don’t eat properly

MaizieD

^The root of the problem is that too much wealth is in the hands of too few people, at the expense of the majority. Call it the status-quo - or just plain old greed.^

Our whole economic system works to channel money upwards towards the already wealthy and it is protected because it is the wealthy who have the most influence over political decisions. They will fight tooth and nail to resist any attempt at redistribution through the tax system, threatening to leave the country and swearing that their money benefits us because they create jobs and because of the nonexistent 'trickle down' effect...

Sadly, our current chancellor seems to have been captured by them...

A very famous political economist wrote this 300+ years ago

The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order ( basically, the wealthy ), ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention.

Nothing changes...

Nothing changes...

Depressing isn't it?

Our whole economic system works to channel money upwards towards the already wealthy and it is protected because it is the wealthy who have the most influence over political decisions. They will fight tooth and nail to resist any attempt at redistribution through the tax system, threatening to leave the country and swearing that their money benefits us because they create jobs and because of the nonexistent 'trickle down' effect...

Yes. Money is sucked out of the economy and we are left to fight among ourselves for what's left. Divide and Rule.

I don't see any end to it. As long as the myth of "there's not enough money to go round" persists, so long will it continue.

"Government-created money is destroyed through the payment of tax. This is important. It explains why tax does not fund government spending. Money creation by the government funds government spending. Taxation takes the money the government creates to fund its spending out of circulation as a mechanism to control inflation. That money is then destroyed. Tax as a result never funds government spending: it cancels money creation." (Richard Murphy, Tax Research)

Hellsbelles

I'm going to disagree with you all , in the nicest way , I'm guessing you all get state pension ( well most of you ) I'm 63 and was my husband's carer as even,though he is also 63 , he has not been able to work for around 5 years due to his health , in that time he has been on 5 different medications a day . When he was under 60 and paying yes he had a certificate which still cost him money.
We had worked full time up to his illness and rarely had
Holidays to pay off our mortgage asap.
Once he was ill we lived off savings and pip and my carers allowance.
This year I have become ill and need 4 different tablets a day , it is an life-long illness and I also get pip , we use our savings to top up . We survive . If we both had to buy the certificates it would be a struggle and more money off our savings .
We dont get state pension until we are 67 , so 4 more years .
We don't get any more help because we have some savings , we've never drank , never smoked , never really had holidays
because we wanted to pay off a mortgage , which we have but at the detriment to other things .
Maybe if we had drank , smoked holidayed , we'd have no savings so qualify for a lot more benefits , but we didn't , so almost have been penalised for being hard working when younger .
So don't deny me free prescriptions as well .

👏👏👏👏👏

Don’t be put off the video by my trigger warning- he just swears a bit in the intro

The root of the problem is that too much wealth is in the hands of too few people, at the expense of the majority. Call it the status-quo - or just plain old greed.

Our whole economic system works to channel money upwards towards the already wealthy and it is protected because it is the wealthy who have the most influence over political decisions. They will fight tooth and nail to resist any attempt at redistribution through the tax system, threatening to leave the country and swearing that their money benefits us because they create jobs and because of the nonexistent 'trickle down' effect...

Sadly, our current chancellor seems to have been captured by them...

A very famous political economist wrote this 300+ years ago

The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order ( basically, the wealthy ), ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention.

Nothing changes...

Doodledog

... just about to watch the 'profane' YT video (busy day yesterday).

I so agree with aspects of your post.

Those that hold the majority of the wealth throw the rest of us some crumbs to share. Many will eat all their crumbs - others won't even have enough of them, then those of us who've saved some will be expected to share what we've saved - God forbid that those who have a creaking-table full - more than they can ever consume - donate more crumbs.

We need a more equitable distribution of wealth. People who are working should be paid a reasonable wage on which they can actually live. A 'flexible' labour force should not mean that workers are on zero-hour contracts. Our public services and infrastructure should be properly funded. More workers with disposable income means more spending into the economy, buying goods and services and hospitality.

Taking away the WFA from those above the PC limit is like trying to plug the family 'black hole' by taking back some of your child's pocket money - it's penny-pinching.

The root of the problem is that too much wealth is in the hands of too few people, at the expense of the majority. Call it the status-quo - or just plain old greed.

Dickens

What is so depressing about this is that there will be numbers of elderly pensioners who are living the last few years of their lives.

Those who are just above the PC limit can look forward to their remaining years with little joy or pleasure knowing that when the economy is finally 'stabilised' (I think that's the word the government us using) - they will be gone - because all they have to look forward to, is more of the same... as we've been told things are going to get worse before they get better.

A failing NHS which may not be able to support them when they need it; community care which is in a similar state, rising energy bills and other costs. So they will be penny-pinching for what is left of their lives. That's it, that's their lot. Of course, if they are lucky, they will be surrounded by a loving family - but that's very often not the case.

Most of us can tolerate a period of personal austerity if there's a brighter future - but if you are facing impoverishment until the day you die, with little or no emotional or financial support, it's just bloody bleak.

That's how I see it, Dickens. At 65, I am not quite there yet, but my health isn't great, I still don't have a state pension, and who knows what the future holds? I am a classic 'squeezed middler'. We have inherited nothing, have worked since our teens and have lived fairly frugally, but less so than many, I realise. We own a fairly average house, have occupational pensions, some savings and no dependent children, but who knows what we will need to spend before turning up our toes?

I don't want to spend money from savings in case we need it later, but at the same time am aware that anything we hang onto can be taken away if we need care, and I can't help resenting that when I know that some of what we could be charged will be used to pay for the care of those who have spent far more than we have before it was deemed to be 'deprivation of assets'. That really does rankle, as does the fact that so many women of my generation chose not to work but get given what people like me will have to pay for. It's less of a big deal to me than it may seem on here, when it only comes up in discussions like these - I don't spend any time thinking about it nine days out of ten

My mother's generation, who in many ways had things a lot easier (one salary being enough to support a family, LA housing with low rents and lifetime tenancies for those who needed it, widows inheriting their husbands' pensions, women retiring at 60, high levels of MIRAS, free higher education for their children etc) is now at the age where the cuts are really biting. My aunt is very frail now, and is spending a fortune on in-house carers that my grandmother's generation got free, along with free social care. There is no free dentistry, chiropody, ear wax treatment etc, all of which they are used to having, and they complain like mad, as it's human nature to resent having things taken away - far more than never having had them in the first place.

My generation will never know any of that, and could well have to do without free travel passes and other concessionary things that we've already had postponed by six years or more.

It's not cheery, but at least we're prepared, I suppose .

For those with a sense of humour in adversity, here's John Cooper Clarke's take on the matter - Trigger Warning For Profanity

www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LRFYJ1-aIA

What is so depressing about this is that there will be numbers of elderly pensioners who are living the last few years of their lives.

Those who are just above the PC limit can look forward to their remaining years with little joy or pleasure knowing that when the economy is finally 'stabilised' (I think that's the word the government us using) - they will be gone - because all they have to look forward to, is more of the same... as we've been told things are going to get worse before they get better.

A failing NHS which may not be able to support them when they need it; community care which is in a similar state, rising energy bills and other costs. So they will be penny-pinching for what is left of their lives. That's it, that's their lot. Of course, if they are lucky, they will be surrounded by a loving family - but that's very often not the case.

Most of us can tolerate a period of personal austerity if there's a brighter future - but if you are facing impoverishment until the day you die, with little or no emotional or financial support, it's just bloody bleak.

I have never trusted Labour.

Doodledog

How has Labour (AKA the government) dug itself into a black hole? It really hasn't had time to do that, although to be fair, Liz Truss managed to crash the economy faster. This government has inherited a 'black hole' from the previous one, and whilst its strategy for getting us all out of it may not be popular with everyone, there is no reason for panic, as the budget, whatever it may hold, is not until 30 October.

It is clearly wrong to suggest that 'no pensioner will trust them', as many on here are perfectly able to differentiate between rumour, speculation and reality.

Many, but not all apparently.

I agree, rafichagran. I never understand how people can think they know what others can afford. Restricting help (of any kind) to those on benefits on the grounds that everyone else can afford to pay removes any incentive to be self-sufficient. That is not to say that help shouldn’t go to the poor, but neither should means-testing drag those with a bit more into poverty.

I hope the prescription and bus passes are just rumours, the prescriptions help me and my partner uses the freedom pass on trains and buses. It does help us financially.
The people who will feel the financial strain the most are not the PC or the wealthy pensioners, but the ones on the new state pension who are just over or people like me on the new state pension plus a occ pen. I am not a poor pensioner but not wealthy either and wfa, plus the two things spoken above really help.
I really resent anyone who says we csn manage. I don't just want to manage I want to enjoy the time I am a pensioner, I have earned it.
I used the wfa for what it was meant for and it helped.

How has Labour (AKA the government) dug itself into a black hole? It really hasn't had time to do that, although to be fair, Liz Truss managed to crash the economy faster. This government has inherited a 'black hole' from the previous one, and whilst its strategy for getting us all out of it may not be popular with everyone, there is no reason for panic, as the budget, whatever it may hold, is not until 30 October.

It is clearly wrong to suggest that 'no pensioner will trust them', as many on here are perfectly able to differentiate between rumour, speculation and reality.

Freya5

growstuff

To be honest, it seems to be the Telegraph spreading the speculation. Given the demographic of its readership, I'm not surprised that it should pick on this issue.

Why is speculation wrong. Every paper speculated re Tory budgets, why should Labour be exempt. Its not only papers either, MSM have a go too. Labour have dug itself into a black hole, no pensioner is going to trust them, when they say they won't, but then they do.

Who said it's wrong? People can believe what they want and get in a pickle about whatever they read.

growstuff

To be honest, it seems to be the Telegraph spreading the speculation. Given the demographic of its readership, I'm not surprised that it should pick on this issue.

Why is speculation wrong. Every paper speculated re Tory budgets, why should Labour be exempt. Its not only papers either, MSM have a go too. Labour have dug itself into a black hole, no pensioner is going to trust them, when they say they won't, but then they do.

And take away my bus pass and my income would be reduced by another few pounds a week.

To be honest, it seems to be the Telegraph spreading the speculation. Given the demographic of its readership, I'm not surprised that it should pick on this issue.

M0nica

growstuff I keep saying that PC should rise to provide for these extra costs and you would probably then be entitled to this.

The alternaative is to keep paying the WFA, but make it refundable through the tax system. No one would repay any of it until their income exceeded £12, 570. They would then repay it at £20 for every £100, by the withdrawal of each £100 of taxable income. You would need to have an income in excess of £14, 070 before you repaid all of it. PC is currently £11,343.

Your income would be within the personal allowance, so you would not get the full WFA.

Do you mean that the threshold should rise or the amount which is paid because you haven't been clear?

In any case, it would still mean that there would be a cliff edge.

Additionally, my income does exceed £14,070 but I pay £850 a month rent. With your calculations, I would receive nothing. I already pay income tax (no complaints about that), but if I didn't receive partial housing benefit, my disposable income after housing costs would be less than £100 a week.

Deduct WFA (£6 a week), add £3 for prescriptions and my income would be reduced by almost 10%.

PS. OK! I confess! I haven't paid for prescriptions for over 30 years anyway because I'm diabetic, but I expect somebody would like to criticise that.

If adjustment must happen taxation feels less of a punitive approach.

growstuff I keep saying that PC should rise to provide for these extra costs and you would probably then be entitled to this.

The alternaative is to keep paying the WFA, but make it refundable through the tax system. No one would repay any of it until their income exceeded £12, 570. They would then repay it at £20 for every £100, by the withdrawal of each £100 of taxable income. You would need to have an income in excess of £14, 070 before you repaid all of it. PC is currently £11,343.

Your income would be within the personal allowance, so you would not get the full WFA.

Tiley

Yes when I look at it logically I agree with what you say. It's just when you are ill and old everything seems to get you down and worried

I understand. That is why the speculation is so cruel.

M0nica

growstuf if you got a free season ticket for the first year and an increase on PC sufficient for you to save for it after year 1, you would be no worse off and would have saved the money you needed.

But I'm not eligible for Pension Credit! My total income is £13 a week above the threshold.