Triple-lock on pensions will stay. Pensions will increase when earnings have decreased

Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,979
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...nak-to-keep-triple-lock-on-pensions-d57k5hl8z

So Boris Johnson overruled the chancellor and the triple lock on pensions will stay intact. This means in a year that earnings of people in the country are down, younger people are the most affected, pensioners will see their income go up.

Next year, because of furlough ending and returning to more a normal society, wages will increase but pensions will also increase by somewhere between 8% to 18%, due to the triple lock system.

Guess whose taxes/NI have to go up to pay for these pensions?

And people are surprised when they learn that intergenerational resentment is so high in this country.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
9,244
Maybe if younger people bothered to vote (although I can't blame them when all choices are equally terrible) then parties currently holding the power wouldn't make strategic moves like this in order to gain favour with the larger portion of voters
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,979
Maybe if younger people bothered to vote (although I can't blame them when all choices are equally terrible) then parties currently holding the power wouldn't make strategic moves like this in order to gain favour with the larger portion of voters

It’s a circle. Parties don’t care about young people because they don’t vote reliably, and young people don’t see a party that cares about them so they won’t vote reliably. Personally, I always encourage people to vote.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
9,244
It’s a circle. Parties don’t care about young people because they don’t vote reliably, and young people don’t see a party that cares about them so they won’t vote reliably. Personally, I always encourage people to vote.

They really need to add a none of the above as a choice, if that wins, then all parties must form a coalition to work together to run the country into the ground instead of just 1 party getting to do it
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
81,857
They really need to add a none of the above as a choice, if that wins, then all parties must form a coalition to work together to run the country into the ground instead of just 1 party getting to do it

It'll never happen but yeah IMO a working democracy means nothing without an actual option on the ballot to tell the current parties to do one whether that is a coalition or going back to the drawing board - we increasingly have utterly useless parties in this country that from a different perspective you'd question the intelligence of anyone voting for them :s

Fragmented votes for fringe parties and spoilt ballots generally just helps the status quo.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,979
It'll never happen but yeah IMO a working democracy means nothing without an actual option on the ballot to tell the current parties to do one whether that is a coalition or going back to the drawing board - we increasingly have utterly useless parties in this country that from a different perspective you'd question the intelligence of anyone voting for them :s

Fragmented votes for fringe parties and spoilt ballots generally just helps the status quo.

Proportional representation seems like a nobrainer to me.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jan 2016
Posts
6,624
And people are surprised when they learn that intergenerational resentment is so high in this country.

The government is paying billions of pounds out of public money to keep workers in their private jobs.

Probably not the best time to be calling other generations.
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,675
I don't see why younger generations keep scapegoating older generations for everything, most of the policies that have lead to the situation we find ourselves in today are supported wholeheartedly by those naive younger generations. Older generations voted Brexit to try to curb mass unlimited immigration that drives down wages and drives up house/rent prices and how did youth react? we got the entirety of the younger generations protesting and calling them racists, demanding another referendum and the voting age be lowered so they can get their own way.

When you have the whole political establishment, corporate business world and one percenters fighting in your corner it's a basic rule of thumb that you're on the side that is shafting the little people in favour of the wealthy.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
5 Apr 2009
Posts
22,655
Proportional representation seems like a nobrainer to me.

This would require too much upheaval of our entire system of politics - away from the system of 'get a majority and whip vote through everything you want, whilst the opposition votes against it for show' to 'actually debate and vote legislation on merit instead of party politics'.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,979
The government is paying billions of pounds out of public money to keep workers in their private jobs.

Probably not the best time to be calling other generations.

Comparatively, it's been worse than plans that other developed countries put in place, except the US. And it's coming to an end, unlike other countries. So working people, through no fault of their own, had their earnings significantly reduced or lost their jobs completely, while pensioners will see their income increase.

This would require too much upheaval of our entire system of politics - away from the system of 'get a majority and whip vote through everything you want, whilst the opposition votes against it for show' to 'actually debate and vote legislation on merit instead of party politics'.

Yeah, I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon. But it should happen. Like you say, it will ensure that the party in power is seriously scrutinised, unlike now where it's all theatre.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,979
I don't see why younger generations keep scapegoating older generations for everything, most of the policies that have lead to the situation we find ourselves in today are supported wholeheartedly by those naive younger generations. Older generations voted Brexit to try to curb mass unlimited immigration that drives down wages and drives up house/rent prices and how did youth react? we got the entirety of the younger generations protesting and calling them racists, demanding another referendum and the voting age be lowered so they can get their own way.

When you have the whole political establishment, corporate business world and one percenters fighting in your corner it's a basic rule of thumb that you're on the side that is shafting the little people in favour of the wealthy.

Because of things like this. At a time where younger people (the poorest demographics in the country) are having a jobs crisis, their earnings are significantly reduced through no fault of their own, the government decides to end the furlough scheme (unlike let's say Germany which will keep it up) and let them go unemployed and on benefits, while giving pensioners (the richest demographics in the country) an above-inflation income increase.

But yeah, young people are the one-percenter wealthy and powerful apparently.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,979
Poverty by age:

Screenshot-2020-09-25-at-13-15-02.png

Quite clear that in the last 20 years, poverty among pensioners is massively decreased, while it's increased for everyone else, especially young people. This is for 2014, the situation is significantly worsened since then, and will continue to get worsen.

https://www.jrf.org.uk/mpse-2015/poverty-and-age

4 Million children live in poverty in this country, probably already reached 5 million:
https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/what-we-do/our-work/ending-child-poverty/what-is-child-poverty

I guess that's what happens when you make everyone else poorer, to make the least poor demographics even richer.
 

SPG

SPG

Soldato
Joined
28 Jul 2010
Posts
8,413
i have zero issues for paying for the generations above me. But then i am not a moaning me me me millennial with more opportunity given than any generation before them.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Posts
5,787
Location
Essex
For completing 50 years of work the government give me £540 a month. Not really seeing your argument HACO.

His point is that increasing payments to the relatively least-poverty stricken set of demographics at a higher rate than others isn't a sensible position. You may disagree.

i have zero issues for paying for the generations above me. But then i am not a moaning me me me millennial with more opportunity given than any generation before them.

This also misses the point. If you have finite resources do you give it to those who need it or those who don't? At the moment the OP would be suggesting it is going to those who don't need it.
 
Associate
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
1,682
Next year, because of furlough ending and returning to more a normal society, wages will increase but pensions will also increase by somewhere between 8% to 18%, due to the triple lock system.

It's bonkers, isn't it?

That's the problem with giveaways- you can't take them back.
 
Top