Triple lock: Liz Truss ditches pledge to raise pensions with inflation

[srb7677]

You on the other hand, don't appear to have much ambition other than to make everyone as poor as you. And I have to say Steve, since there is every possibility that you will soon be replaced by an automated checkout

The same beloved straw man lie. I have no desire to make everyone as poor as me.

Like many a right winger you just made that up. It's your favourite straw man

As for automated checkouts, I do far more than work on checkouts which I only spend a small minority of my time doing. And not all manned checkouts are going to be replaced just yet. They still need to persuade more customers to use self service before they can move to them entirely .

[Borchester]

Do you have any beyond enriching yourself?

I have certain qualms about struggling workers paying to further enrich non-workers who are already better off than they are. I say give pensioners the same increases as the workers who are paying for them are getting, and tax them on the same basis, protecting the poorest ones by triple locking the minimum income guarantee.

None that I can think of.

A great man ( I think it was me) once said that no man is more innocently engaged than when he is making money.

You on the other hand, don't appear to have much ambition other than to make everyone as poor as you. And I have to say Steve, since there is every possibility that you will soon be replaced by an automated checkout, that is not something I aspire too

[Sheepy]

Anyway you don't have it yet and as Lizz Truss is likely going fast you still most likely won't get it. It doesn't fit with Austerity or interest rate rises.

[srb7677]

The proof is there. You just suggested that better off pensioners should pay tax. That is taxing people on something they worked their entire life for and already paid in. 

Which is not reducing everyone to the same level, merely making them pay the same taxes proportionally on their incomes. And I am arguing for NI being paid on the earnings they are still making from the work they are still doing when it comes to working pensioners. Not the work they did years ago. That is hardly reducing them all to my level which is the straw man you have invented and clearly love so much that you need to argue against it anyway even though I have never said it. .

As for your usual shite about people on benefits having all mod cons and who shouldn't have, it is barely worth responding to, mostly as it is the kind of nonsense carricature you'll find in the Daily Mail

[Sheepy]

The proof is there. You just suggested that better off pensioners should pay tax. That is taxing people on something they worked their entire life for and already paid in.

If a struggling family have all the trappings of the rich like large TV's, PlayStations, SKY TV and smart phones they are not poor, they are people who make very poor choices. Include smoking, gambling and booze in that list also.

I was laughing Javert sounds more extreme than most.

[Nick]

And you are spouting shite on this topic as ever and the fact that Borchester says similar is proof only of the same lazy canard in your heads.

Let me be clear. I have zero desire to bring everyone down to my level, though raising the lot of the very poorest up to it would be worthwhile.

All I have advocated here is that better off pensioners receive a pension increase in line with that of the workers who are paying for it. And that they pay the same taxes as everyone else.

How you deduce from that that I want to make everyone equally poor is a logical mystery to me. But logic never gets in the way of a good emote when it comes to you poor hard done by right wingers.

I have devastating news for you Nick. I have no desire whatsoever to make you as poor as me, just because I might suggest you contribute a little bit more for the common good. It is your standard kneejerk assumption to hear the latter and assume the former for no logical reason behind the fact that you enjoy ranting against that particular straw man. Which is in fact quite a common trait on the right so few surprises that you are not the only one lazy enough to do it.

The proof is there. You just suggested that better off pensioners should pay tax. That is taxing people on something they worked their entire life for and already paid in. 

If a struggling family have all the trappings of the rich like large TV's, PlayStations, SKY TV and smart phones they are not poor, they are people who make very poor choices. Include smoking, gambling and booze in that list also. 

[srb7677]

Labour has always downgraded everyone in every way possible, they can't stand success or abilities above normal

I am no fan of Starmer's Labour but this is simply not true. The party has always striven to open up opportunities to ever more people and to help the struggling millions prosper. Far from downgrading everyone they tend to want to upgrade people. Trying to get as many people as possible to go to university whilst ignoring vocational training was typical of the middle class triumphalism of the Blairites and a mistake. But genuine levelling up was the aim, and had sufficient emphasis been placed upon vocational training too, it would likely have been far more effective.

But the idea of a good university education for all who want and are capable of it, with other good alternatives for those who don't or aren't, is a good one. Tuition fees, however - which Labour introduced and the Tories trebled - were never a good idea.

[srb7677]

I told you many times your arguments point to you wanting to tax the rich to bring them down to everyone else's level and Borky has independently pointed out the same.

And you are spouting shite on this topic as ever and the fact that Borchester says similar is proof only of the same lazy canard in your heads.

Let me be clear. I have zero desire to bring everyone down to my level, though raising the lot of the very poorest up to it would be worthwhile.

All I have advocated here is that better off pensioners receive a pension increase in line with that of the workers who are paying for it. And that they pay the same taxes as everyone else.

How you deduce from that that I want to make everyone equally poor is a logical mystery to me. But logic never gets in the way of a good emote when it comes to you poor hard done by right wingers.

I have devastating news for you Nick. I have no desire whatsoever to make you as poor as me, just because I might suggest you contribute a little bit more for the common good. It is your standard kneejerk assumption to hear the latter and assume the former for no logical reason behind the fact that you enjoy ranting against that particular straw man. Which is in fact quite a common trait on the right so few surprises that you are not the only one lazy enough to do it.

[T00ts]

I told you many times your arguments point to you wanting to tax the rich to bring them down to everyone else's level and Borky has independently pointed out the same.

Labour has always downgraded everyone in every way possible, they can't stand success or abilities above normal, they wrecked education leaving the bright to fend for themselves. They wrecked University education with the mantra that everyone regardless of ability should go. As a result the places are full of mickey mouse courses that don't provide jobs and worse they have downgraded courses to provide for the fact that so many have little education or prospects to start with. They hate anyone to make money unless they can squeeze them til the pips squeak. I remember when tax was 95% and then they wondered why people left the country. They only appreciate mediocrity except of course for the Politicians families. Look how many of them decry private education but forget when it's their own child. In fact how many Labour politicians are privately educated themselves?

[Nick]

Do you have any beyond enriching yourself?

I have certain qualms about struggling workers paying to further enrich non-workers who are already better off than they are. I say give pensioners the same increases as the workers who are paying for them are getting, and tax them on the same basis, protecting the poorest ones by triple locking the minimum income guarantee.

I told you many times your arguments point to you wanting to tax the rich to bring them down to everyone else's level and Borky has independently pointed out the same. 

[Sheepy]

At last — someone who appears to realise that today's state pensioners are paid for by today's taxpayers.

And I can see no reason why people over pension age in paid employment shouldn't pay NI the same as other employees...

We have said that for years, but it still doesn't explain where did the previous money go. They were told they were paying in for their future.

[srb7677]

Tell us Steve, do you have any politics beyond raising taxes and making everyone as poor as you?

Do you have any beyond enriching yourself?

I have certain qualms about struggling workers paying to further enrich non-workers who are already better off than they are. I say give pensioners the same increases as the workers who are paying for them are getting, and tax them on the same basis, protecting the poorest ones by triple locking the minimum income guarantee.

[patman post]

There is an inherent problem if pensioners - already on average better off and with fewer outgoings than workers, notwithstanding the existence of many genuinely poor ones - get such large pension increases paid for by the taxes of the working population who themselves are getting far lower pay increases for the most part.

The days are long gone when the average pensioner is in one of the neediest groups. Rather than triple lock the state pension - which gifts increases far larger than the working taxpayers who are paying for it get, often to pensioners who are reasonably well off - link increases to average pay increases instead whilst triple locking the minimum income guarantee.

And have working pensioners subject to the same taxes as other workers, ie abolish their exemption from NI, thereby ensuring that the better off ones make a greater contribution on the same basis as everyone else. We are all in this together, are we not? Those with broader shoulders - whether of working age or retirement age - should contribute reasonably a little more to help us all get through this.

At last — someone who appears to realise that today's state pensioners are paid for by today's taxpayers.

And I can see no reason why people over pension age in paid employment shouldn't pay NI the same as other employees...

[Borchester]

There is an inherent problem if pensioners - already on average better off and with fewer outgoings than workers, notwithstanding the existence of many genuinely poor ones - get such large pension increases paid for by the taxes of the working population who themselves are getting far lower pay increases for the most part.

The days are long gone when the average pensioner is in one of the neediest groups. Rather than triple lock the state pension - which gifts increases far larger than the working taxpayers who are paying for it get, often to pensioners who are reasonably well off - link increases to average pay increases instead whilst triple locking the minimum income guarantee.

And have working pensioners subject to the same taxes as other workers, ie abolish their exemption from NI, thereby ensuring that the better off ones make a greater contribution on the same basis as everyone else. We are all in this together, are we not? Those with broader shoulders - whether of working age or retirement age - should contribute reasonably a little more to help us all get through this.

Tell us Steve, do you have any politics beyond raising taxes and making everyone as poor as you?

[srb7677]

I look forward to a pension increase of over 10% in the next round. I won't hold my breath, though.

There is an inherent problem if pensioners - already on average better off and with fewer outgoings than workers, notwithstanding the existence of many genuinely poor ones - get such large pension increases paid for by the taxes of the working population who themselves are getting far lower pay increases for the most part.

The days are long gone when the average pensioner is in one of the neediest groups. Rather than triple lock the state pension - which gifts increases far larger than the working taxpayers who are paying for it get, often to pensioners who are reasonably well off - link increases to average pay increases instead whilst triple locking the minimum income guarantee.

And have working pensioners subject to the same taxes as other workers, ie abolish their exemption from NI, thereby ensuring that the better off ones make a greater contribution on the same basis as everyone else. We are all in this together, are we not? Those with broader shoulders - whether of working age or retirement age - should contribute reasonably a little more to help us all get through this.