BoxRec

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:25

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 04:58

So you would penalise folk for buying a house and saving?
I guess pensioners are the low hanging fruit

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

It's not a benefit, benefits are for folk who have never worked, they have already paid into the system
Most of us have been paying into the system for 20, 30, even 40 years, yet we should want to have that taken away from us??
And then when we are too expensive, then it's assisted suicide!

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:31

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:25

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

It's not a benefit, benefits are for folk who have never worked, they have already paid into the system
Most of us have been paying into the system for 20, 30, even 40 years, yet we should want to have that taken away from us??
And then when we are too expensive, then it's assisted suicide!

They paid into a different system, though.

I'm paying into the system for them now. There's no chance mine, or my kids generation, get anywhere near what they have had... I've got a mortgage until I'm 71. fornicate knows what happens to me, and likely millions like me.
And my kids? They've got no fornicating chance.

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:25

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 04:58

So you would penalise folk for buying a house and saving?
I guess pensioners are the low hanging fruit

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

It's not a benefit, benefits are for folk who have never worked, they have already paid into the system
Most of us have been paying into the system for 20, 30, even 40 years, yet we should want to have that taken away from us??
And then when we are too expensive, then it's assisted suicide!

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:31

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:25

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

It's not a benefit, benefits are for folk who have never worked, they have already paid into the system
Most of us have been paying into the system for 20, 30, even 40 years, yet we should want to have that taken away from us??
And then when we are too expensive, then it's assisted suicide!

They paid into a different system, though.

I'm paying into the system for them now. There's no chance mine, or my kids generation, get anywhere near what they have had... I've got a mortgage until I'm 71. fornicate knows what happens to me, and likely millions like me.
And my kids? They've got no fornicating chance.

giacomino wrote: ↑02 Oct 2026, 09:50

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:31

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:25

It's not a benefit, benefits are for folk who have never worked, they have already paid into the system
Most of us have been paying into the system for 20, 30, even 40 years, yet we should want to have that taken away from us??
And then when we are too expensive, then it's assisted suicide!

They paid into a different system, though.

I'm paying into the system for them now. There's no chance mine, or my kids generation, get anywhere near what they have had... I've got a mortgage until I'm 71. fornicate knows what happens to me, and likely millions like me.
And my kids? They've got no fornicating chance.

I paid into the US system for 50 years. When I was in my 20s I thought there was no way I would get back what I paid in and resented the old bastards getting a pension that I was helping to fund. Two years ago I became eligible for the pension.

Pols generally make sure you get it because old people vote

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑02 Oct 2026, 14:46

giacomino wrote: ↑02 Oct 2026, 09:50

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:31

They paid into a different system, though.

I'm paying into the system for them now. There's no chance mine, or my kids generation, get anywhere near what they have had... I've got a mortgage until I'm 71. fornicate knows what happens to me, and likely millions like me.
And my kids? They've got no fornicating chance.

I paid into the US system for 50 years. When I was in my 20s I thought there was no way I would get back what I paid in and resented the old bastards getting a pension that I was helping to fund. Two years ago I became eligible for the pension.

Pols generally make sure you get it because old people vote

That's why they increased my pension age and raided my pension when I was on my 20's.

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 04:58

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 03:56

Point is, loads of pensioners are extremely well-off, their benefits should be means-tested like anyone else’s. I don’t come from a particularly well off background, but my parents and nearly all of my mate’s parents don’t even need the state pension, they’re mortgage free and saved more than enough in their working lives.

So you would penalise folk for buying a house and saving?
I guess pensioners are the low hanging fruit

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

SticknMove wrote: ↑02 Oct 2026, 18:47

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 04:58

So you would penalise folk for buying a house and saving?
I guess pensioners are the low hanging fruit

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

Just a silly sweeping generalisation. People paid their national insurance contributions to finance the NHS and statutory basic pension at the outset of their working lives many decades ago when our country was very different. People putting into the system after 40 to 50 years of working 40+ hours a week, paying tax and NICs, are getting something back for their service.

I have used the NHS 4 times in my lifetime. I didn’t pay into a system to finance migrants from the Third World who seem to have priority over generational citizens.

So I will be taking that pension, will never need it, and pass it on to my kids along with everything else that the ‘state’ will conspire to steal to finance their excessive waste.

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 03:58

SticknMove wrote: ↑02 Oct 2026, 18:47

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

Just a silly sweeping generalisation. People paid their national insurance contributions to finance the NHS and statutory basic pension at the outset of their working lives many decades ago when our country was very different. People putting into the system after 40 to 50 years of working 40+ hours a week, paying tax and NICs, are getting something back for their service.

I have used the NHS 4 times in my lifetime. I didn’t pay into a system to finance migrants from the Third World who seem to have priority over generational citizens.

So I will be taking that pension, will never need it, and pass it on to my kids along with everything else that the ‘state’ will conspire to steal to finance their excessive waste.

You say it’s a “sweeping generalisation” and then immediately confirm you’re in the exact same position as the people I talk about in my post

But thanks for confirming you want state handouts for no reason

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 05:50

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 03:58

SticknMove wrote: ↑02 Oct 2026, 18:47

Just a silly sweeping generalisation. People paid their national insurance contributions to finance the NHS and statutory basic pension at the outset of their working lives many decades ago when our country was very different. People putting into the system after 40 to 50 years of working 40+ hours a week, paying tax and NICs, are getting something back for their service.

I have used the NHS 4 times in my lifetime. I didn’t pay into a system to finance migrants from the Third World who seem to have priority over generational citizens.

So I will be taking that pension, will never need it, and pass it on to my kids along with everything else that the ‘state’ will conspire to steal to finance their excessive waste.

You say it’s a “sweeping generalisation” and then immediately confirm you’re in the exact same position as the people I talk about in my post

But thanks for confirming you want state handouts for no reason

So, I seldom agree with Stick, but are you saying if someone was promised a pension while working and paid into the pension system, it's a "state handout" to receive the pension you were promised if you've saved and can survive without it? Or am I misreading your argument? Don't disagree if it's somebody with millions in the bank. But most retirees who saved don't have millions. Maybe Stick does, I dunno

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:04

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 05:50

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 03:58

You say it’s a “sweeping generalisation” and then immediately confirm you’re in the exact same position as the people I talk about in my post

But thanks for confirming you want state handouts for no reason

So, I seldom agree with Stick, but are you saying if someone was promised a pension while working and paid into the pension system, it's a "state handout" to receive the pension you were promised if you've saved and can survive without it? Or am I misreading your argument? Don't disagree if it's somebody with millions in the bank. But most retirees who saved don't have millions. Maybe Stick does, I dunno

Yeah that’s what mean-testing is - giving benefits to those who actually need them. The UK state pension was created at a very different time, it was never intended to be paid out for 20+ years.

In the example of my best mate’s parents - they own 3 properties (2 in the UK, 1 abroad) which are all mortgage-free and they rent out for a very handsome income. They also both have extremely generous final-salary based pension plans, neither of which would be offered to modern workers as they were financially unsustainable. They’re bringing in more money in retirement than they did whilst working! And this isn’t rare scenario by any means, lots of middle class ‘pensioners’ are in a similar boat. So why on earth should they then be given state pension on top of all that? It should go to those who genuinely need it (and here’s a novel idea, we could actually then increase the amount for those receiving it!).

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:42

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:04

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 05:50
So, I seldom agree with Stick, but are you saying if someone was promised a pension while working and paid into the pension system, it's a "state handout" to receive the pension you were promised if you've saved and can survive without it? Or am I misreading your argument? Don't disagree if it's somebody with millions in the bank. But most retirees who saved don't have millions. Maybe Stick does, I dunno

Yeah that’s what mean-testing is - giving benefits to those who actually need them. The UK state pension was created at a very different time, it was never intended to be paid out for 20+ years.

In the example of my best mate’s parents - they own 3 properties (2 in the UK, 1 abroad) which are all mortgage-free and they rent out for a very handsome income. They also both have extremely generous final-salary based pension plans, neither of which would be offered to modern workers as they were financially unsustainable. They’re bringing in more money in retirement than they did whilst working! And this isn’t rare scenario by any means, lots of middle class ‘pensioners’ are in a similar boat. So why on earth should they then be given state pension on top of all that? It should go to those who genuinely need it (and here’s a novel idea, we could actually then increase the amount for those receiving it!).

While I agree it should be means tested if money is going to millionaires, there are millions of middle income folks like myself who worked decades and paid into the system and saved at the same time but didn’t inherit and don’t own more than one property or collect anywhere near what they earned while working. It seems unfair to tell those people, “sorry, thanks for contributing to the system, but you don’t get anything we promised you because other people didn’t or couldn’t save or earned less money.” If you state that up front … that middle-income earners are going to pay into a pension system they won’t get … that’s fine. If it’s a welfare system it’s a welfare system. But if they were promised a pension, they paid into it and now you decide, eff you, you boomers and Gen X who paid for decades get nothing, that’s BS, IMO. If you want to change the system now, do it so people know up front it won’t be for them if they save or get on the property ladder. I knew up front when I was in my 20s in the US that Congress was screwing me on the pension, but I had 40 years to figure it out

I inherited only the cost of my parents funeral, so I am not talking about people who inherit wealth

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:59

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:42

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:04

Yeah that’s what mean-testing is - giving benefits to those who actually need them. The UK state pension was created at a very different time, it was never intended to be paid out for 20+ years.

In the example of my best mate’s parents - they own 3 properties (2 in the UK, 1 abroad) which are all mortgage-free and they rent out for a very handsome income. They also both have extremely generous final-salary based pension plans, neither of which would be offered to modern workers as they were financially unsustainable. They’re bringing in more money in retirement than they did whilst working! And this isn’t rare scenario by any means, lots of middle class ‘pensioners’ are in a similar boat. So why on earth should they then be given state pension on top of all that? It should go to those who genuinely need it (and here’s a novel idea, we could actually then increase the amount for those receiving it!).

While I agree it should be means tested if money is going to millionaires, there are millions of middle income folks like myself who worked decades and paid into the system and saved at the same time but didn’t inherit and don’t own more than one property or collect anywhere near what they earned while working. It seems unfair to tell those people, “sorry, thanks for contributing to the system, but you don’t get anything we promised you because other people didn’t or couldn’t save or earned less money.” If you state that up front … that middle-income earners are going to pay into a pension system they won’t get … that’s fine. If it’s a welfare system it’s a welfare system. But if they were promised a pension, they paid into it and now you decide, eff you, you boomers and Gen X who paid for decades get nothing, that’s BS, IMO. If you want to change the system now, do it so people know up front it won’t be for them if they save or get on the property ladder. I knew up front when I was in my 20s in the US that Congress was screwing me on the pension, but I had 40 years to figure it out

I inherited only the cost of my parents funeral, so I am not talking about people who inherit wealth

So you’d qualify for the means-testing, don’t worry

Whereas my best mate’s parents wouldn’t (and apparently neither would Stick, since he’s simply going to ‘stick’ his in savings and pass it on ).

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 07:10

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:59

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:42

While I agree it should be means tested if money is going to millionaires, there are millions of middle income folks like myself who worked decades and paid into the system and saved at the same time but didn’t inherit and don’t own more than one property or collect anywhere near what they earned while working. It seems unfair to tell those people, “sorry, thanks for contributing to the system, but you don’t get anything we promised you because other people didn’t or couldn’t save or earned less money.” If you state that up front … that middle-income earners are going to pay into a pension system they won’t get … that’s fine. If it’s a welfare system it’s a welfare system. But if they were promised a pension, they paid into it and now you decide, eff you, you boomers and Gen X who paid for decades get nothing, that’s BS, IMO. If you want to change the system now, do it so people know up front it won’t be for them if they save or get on the property ladder. I knew up front when I was in my 20s in the US that Congress was screwing me on the pension, but I had 40 years to figure it out

I inherited only the cost of my parents funeral, so I am not talking about people who inherit wealth

So you’d qualify for the means-testing, don’t worry

Whereas my best mate’s parents wouldn’t (and apparently neither would Stick, since he’s simply going to ‘stick’ his in savings and pass it on ).

Eff that, whatever I have I am going to try to spend before I shuffle off this mortal coil:)

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 11:44

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 07:10

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 06:59

So you’d qualify for the means-testing, don’t worry

Whereas my best mate’s parents wouldn’t (and apparently neither would Stick, since he’s simply going to ‘stick’ his in savings and pass it on ).

Eff that, whatever I have I am going to try to spend before I shuffle off this mortal coil:)

Damn straight. My private pension is coming along nicely, so if the state pension is still a thing when I hit retirement, that will be getting blown in the casino every month!

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 12:13

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 11:44

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 07:10
Eff that, whatever I have I am going to try to spend before I shuffle off this mortal coil:)

Damn straight. My private pension is coming along nicely, so if the state pension is still a thing when I hit retirement, that will be getting blown in the casino every month!

My addictions are wine and running, neither of which cost much in Spain, so my US state pension covers it. My Mrs loves travel and the latest technology, so I am glad we both saved while we worked

bmw hector wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 13:50

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 12:13

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 11:44

Damn straight. My private pension is coming along nicely, so if the state pension is still a thing when I hit retirement, that will be getting blown in the casino every month!

My addictions are wine and running, neither of which cost much in Spain, so my US state pension covers it. My Mrs loves travel and the latest technology, so I am glad we both saved while we worked

Have you ever done both them at the same time?

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 16:04

bmw hector wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 13:50

giacomino wrote: ↑03 Oct 2026, 12:13
My addictions are wine and running, neither of which cost much in Spain, so my US state pension covers it. My Mrs loves travel and the latest technology, so I am glad we both saved while we worked

Have you ever done both them at the same time?

No, but I once ran a half-marathon in New Orleans where they offered cups of local beer at the half-way mark. I felt it would have been rude not to accept

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:31

Coco wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 14:25

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑01 Oct 2026, 05:08

I wouldn’t say it’s penalising them at all, they still have a far far better life than someone relying on the state pension, and often spend a lot of time abroad in one of their holiday homes and are getting additional income from their UK rental property (also both mortgage free).

Why are we giving benefits to people who clearly don’t need them? Should we start giving job seekers allowance to people on £60k salary per year?

It's not a benefit, benefits are for folk who have never worked, they have already paid into the system
Most of us have been paying into the system for 20, 30, even 40 years, yet we should want to have that taken away from us??
And then when we are too expensive, then it's assisted suicide!

They paid into a different system, though.

I'm paying into the system for them now. There's no chance mine, or my kids generation, get anywhere near what they have had... I've got a mortgage until I'm 71. fornicate knows what happens to me, and likely millions like me.
And my kids? They've got no fornicating chance.

bmw hector wrote: ↑05 Oct 2026, 08:35 Looks like Restore are cutting into the Reform votes and Labour are benefitting from it.
6 Council by-elections with 0 wins for Reform.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/polit ... ns-410180/