Discussion
As you likely know I rely on the FT for my news (alongside the Guardian) but this statement reveals the class context of FT journalism.
'Britain last year shied away from reforms to its generous benefits system'....
'generous benefits system'????
That, sadly, is the political class' prejudice being repeated as fact; what is really generous in the UK is top executives' pay for under-performance.
Still, I'll stick with he FT, but just with the usual caution!
@ChrisMayLA6 isn’t the benefit system
55% state pensions? The “triple lock” protection in the UK has resulted in the highest level versus full-time earnings in 30 years so arguably the triple lock has been very generous to pensioners versus wage earners (albeit from a pretty low starting position).
That depends on your baseline. The UK state pension is less than the average of the EU27 by around 15%.
The triple lock is there to slowly bring the state pension in line with that of other wealthy countries, rather than the massive cost of bring it to a comparable level with, say, Ireland (which would be an increase of over 50% over today's rate) in a single jump (which would have been unaffordable).
The pension is generous only in comparison to the state pension before the triple lock was introduced.
@david_chisnall @MatthewPCooke
yes, exactly (and boosted)
@david_chisnall @ChrisMayLA6 yes, my point is just that any time a paper talks about benefits going up or the merits of bringing them back down, it shouldn’t be assumed that they are talking about disability benefits - that is not the main benefit that’s been going up yet that tends to be what everyone assumes
@ChrisMayLA6 I have always been of the opinion that before anyone could stand as a candidate for parliament that they should have to live on benefits in a poor part of the UK for a certain period of time.
That period of time to be randomly chosen without them being informed from a range of six months to three years and the person wishing to be an MP would get assigned a fake disability.
So say blind or a wheelchair user or partially deaf. Just something that made their lives extra difficult.
I'd be happy with preventing them from having income other than the MP salary and making their pay a weighted value between the benefits rate and the median income of an in-work person, weighted by employment rates. Can't live on the median salary? Maybe you should do something about the cost of living and wage stagnation...
@david_chisnall @ChrisMayLA6 That would also be a good idea.
Seeing as there is no shortage of people who want to be an MP (minimum of five* in every constituency) why do we need to pay MPs a good wage to attract candidates for each of the positions?
*Labour, Conservatives, Reform, LibDems, Green.
Install bonfire.cafe
Get the full app experience
