Triple lock

From the FT about Philip May. I wonder what he thinks about the triple lock.

“He is very much a back-channel to City sentiment,” said one senior executive. “He does understand business in a way that [Theresa May] has not experienced herself. You could say he comes across as a translator for the PM.”

Since 2006, Mr May has stepped back from directly managing money himself, instead working for the limelight-shy asset management behemoth Capital Group to develop the firm’s retirement products.

In a statement published last summer when the Mays moved into Downing Street, his employer said: “His job is to ensure the clients are happy with the service and that we understand their goals.”

GG What figure have you heard students need? I can't remember exactly how much my DS has had to borrow, but his halls fees alone are £120pw and there's no housing benefit.He certainly doesn't have more than a pensioner.

She didn't say anything about pensioners, I noticed.
However, lots of pensioners volunteer.

Interesting Jen. I think most suggested systems gradually do away with the personal allowance as the amount paid in BI is increased Jen but I haven't seen the idea of community exchange. I hope the community gets to say what is worth-while.

I read an article by Jeanette Winterson at the weekend.
It was to do with the original May Day Manifesto.
She is an advocate of the basic income.
She would scrap the personal allowance and give everyone a graduated income, starting with £6000 at 18, offsetting higher education bills, rising to £10,000 a year at 21.
High earners still get it, but it attracts tax relief if gift aided in full.
Fund through an income tax levy and higher corporation tax.
Anyone not in paid work will have to do community exchange for a few hours a week contributing to the community. The point would be to make everyone feel a part of society and break the rule of the haves over the have nots.

I don't think anyone has suggested that basic income would be brought in as a perfect ready made solution to replace everything else Rigby. Indeed it is often suggested that the first step would be to pay everyone of working age the equivalent of JSA. It is the reliability of the unconditional payment that makes the difference.

I agree about % and that it all depend on the base figure. If JSA went up by 2.5% the increase would be about £1.70 a week. if you are an habitual non worker, you wouldn't qualify for contribution based JSA. The reason I called the basic income utopian was not an attack on the idea, far from it, but that I was trying to discuss not the perfect solution if we were designing a benefits system from scratch but what ideas might work within the current benefits paradigm of the current and next government. So it's about tweaking not redesigning because does anyone really think that is going to happen? I still think the fair thing is to increase all benefits by the same % and improve the level at which means tested benefit levels are set. It is surely so wrong that other benefits are frozen? None should be.

Very good point about percentages grannygranby

Percentages always sound good and fair but in fact they discriminate against the lower paid and the better paid have a bigger rise. Over time the'real' gap gets wider.
It is disgraceful the low amount that people who have lost their jobs are given. I know they talk about the long term unemployed, and some are a cause for concern, but many of them are not intentionally so but for a variety of reasons are unable to get a job. It must be possible for people's work record to be looked at and habitual non workers are a different kettle of fish to those who come to it from redundancy or when in later life. I am not talking her at all about people with some form of disability.
When the pension goes up maybe the JSA should be increased by the same amount.

Hear Hear GGMk2

I hasten to add I don't think they should get less and pensioners more but that we all need enough to live on.

I was listening to what our uni students are getting in loans next year. I know they have to pay them back (if they earn enough) but the amount they are deemed to need is often more than a pensioner gets. These young people are very capable to topping up with part-time work (ours do) whereas older people are often unable to do so. For the students this is a short period which should bring them higher earnings; for pensioners it is forever.

..I think using percentage rates to explain rises on wages and pensions is very right wing.

I think you have a very good point there.

to clarify about not making pensioners feel they want to give away or forego their triple lock (£3) I didn't mean that those who are amply rewarded by other pensions shouldn't. to give freely at this stage of life is a blessing.

especially GGMk2 who I feel possibly got some of the spleen aimed at me.

I should have referenced Rigby in the above as most posts are very just and reasonable.

back to the OP and triple lock...I think using percentage rates to explain rises on wages and pensions is very right wing. Let's see some real figures which politicians never wanted to show as it reveals tight fistedness and inequality. eg two and a half percent on state pension is about £3 a week. So the triple lock means a rise between £1 (average income rise/and inflation rate) & £3 (the 2andhalf per cent) whichever is the greatest...currently the latter.
And that is causing generational hate? Let alone anger on GN.?? Pensioners don't get triple lock on anything else - it is political....it both makes pensioners feel more valued than £3 a week and makes non pensioners furious that they are not getting it. Misinformation all round. It masquerades at generosity on one hand and mocks equality on the other. 1% rises across the board benefits the richest and penalises the poorest.
The overall gentler treatment by Society to pensioners is they are too old to work, not wanted in the workplace, marginalised and often suffering from chronic ill health. They are not young. Social Care is cruelly cut How many young would opt to be old? I find the generational war very disturbing and quite heartless. To receive a Pension as a Right and not begged for by means testing is a further advance in civilisation. Before the State Pension there was the workhouse or charity for the old. The pension gave back some dignity to the poor. And as I have stated many times already the triple lock is still very little and our old age pension is one of the lowest in Europe. So stop making pensioners feel guilty and wanting to give it away??? its a form of bullying.

I am sorry Rigby, that you do not find the thread has any informed posts.

Sorry - should have put 'Rigby' in there somewhere.

I am certainly glad I didn't make any suggestions about what I want to change as, as you had already made clear you would, you just rejected Jen's suggestion as being 'utopian'.
I find basic income very interesting as, it appears, do many countries that are trying it out. I don't know if it is the way we should go but I am happy to follow what those in the know are saying about it. No point really in trying to discuss it with someone who dismisses all but their own interest out of hand.

gg I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that if there's a thread called 'triple lock' on a forum of generally older people, that there might be some informed debate on the subject.

theconversation.com/britains-massive-unclaimed-benefits-failure-and-how-to-fix-it-75816

From that thread, just in case you know anyone who does not claim all their benefits.
Perhaps you should put bereavement benefit links on the DWP thread.

Sorry, Rigby. Some of us do try to stick to the subject.

Put a search for benefits in the top search box, not the forum one as that gets confusing.
49 results. Not many in the great scheme of things.
One of the difficulties is that when you start discussing these problems seriously the thread often gets sidetracked by people who would be much happier on a different forum.
Not sure about bereavement benefits cuts specifically, but I know I have signed a couple of government petitions about it. Again another iniquitous example of hitting the suffering, when 75% of bereaved families will be up to £12,000 worse off.

Went on the DWP thread and started reading backwards - some recent interesting posts and then suddenly it's all about Corbyn - at this point I lost the will to live, again. Seriously though, don't you think a thread just called DWP is very wide and that good debate and discussion can just get buried?