Sunday, 25 March 2012


No doubt it came as a shock to many people when they realised the full implications of the Chancellor’s plan to “simplify” the tax situation as it related to old age pensioners. Most of us didn’t believe that we would be the targets so that he could fund the reduction in the amount of tax paid by the wealthiest in society from 50p in the pound to 45p.

When I saw the amount that the top tax payers would be getting as a result of this reduction I really couldn’t believe it. Of course from April all OAP’s will be getting a rise in their pensions as the Prime Minister was quick to remind us but that is no more or less than a rise triggered by inflation; it is not the act of a generous government helping some of the less well of in society. And in any case this move by the Chancellor will, in due course, claw it all back.

If you feel as cross about this as I do why not sign the e-petition here


  1. Yet another act of a government working hard for its own demise.

  2. But surely the retired generation are those who:

    1) had free university access
    2) lots of job opportunities
    3) benefited by seeing property increase by hundreds of thousands of pounds
    4) Had final salary pensions at 65

    Whereas the next generation will

    1) face crippling mortgage costs if they even get on the ladder
    2) pay through the nose for university
    3) struggle to gain employment
    4) Will work till 70 and have hopeless pensions

    Could easily be argued that the 'granny generation' are largely responsible for wrecking society- education, housing, morality et al, and deserve to help out the young a little...

    1. To deal with the "benefits" accruing to the retired generation I should like to say:

      1 the numbers attending university were significantly smaller. and there were fewer universities to attend (eg Essex, Kent, Surrey etc did not exist);

      2 "opportunities" existed, but not necesarily the job that an individual might have wanted;

      3 this is a fallacious argument - the increasing value of one's own residence did not put so much as a brass farthing into one's pocket until the property was sold - and even then the acquisition of another one with removal and legal expenses, and stamp duty, could absorb all that was realised on the one sold; and

      4 in my case the pension arrangement led to suppressed pay during the working life.

      To that I would add:

      5 family allowance (the predecessor to child benefit) was paid only in respect of children in full-time education, was not paid in respect of the first "qualifying" child (so families with only 1 child received nothing) and was but a fraction of what it is now with nowhere near the purchasing power;

      6 other benefits (income support, tax credit, council tax benefit, housing benefit) and the whole range of benefits now used by governments for political gerrymandering did not exist;

      7 families were one man married to one woman (with occaasional breakdowns in the relationship) and cohabitation without marriage, and widespread casual relationships, did not exist to anything like the extent that they do now; and

      8 STD meant subscriber trunk dialling for the telephone system.