[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by parmnion

or get paid in cash like me.

The trouble with that is, if you ever did have to claim benefits or wanted a state pension you'd be fecked.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

The trouble with that is, if you ever did have to claim benefits or wanted a state pension you'd be fecked.

you can do both with an understanding boss.

[kirklancaster]

I deplore this. I do not understand the Government's rationale.

Perhaps it is this:

If someone starts work at say, 18 years of age, works reasonably hard, saves a little, stays 'responsible', buys their first home at around 25 years old, then over the next 45 years or so, by the time they are old and decrepit or ill and in need of care, they should be independantly financially 'secure' - wealthier than they have ever been at any other stage in their life.

That home - by all historical trend data - will have doubled in value every 9 or 10 years, savings will have swollen due to interest and compound interest etc. etc.

But it DOES NOT always work out this way - especially given the increasingly volatile state of our economy, the increasingly punitive tax measures, the increasing scarcity of employment opportunities, and the normal 'Sod's Law' reverses in life.

It is difficult to be in work if there are no opportunities.
It is difficult to be in long-term work if only short-term contracts are offered.
It is difficult to save money when year in, year out, the REAL disposable income we have is increasingly less and less due to poor wage levels, more numerous 'stealth' taxes, and ever increasing 'Costs Of Living'.
It is difficult to even even get onto the property ladder now due to a draconian criterion of mortgage qualification.

For the most part, the generation who are in most need of these 'Sheltered Homes' are the ones who HAVE worked and who HAVE 'paid into the system', and to deny them the help which they need now, or to impair the quality of that help just to 'save money', is not only disgusting, but totally bewildering.

I simply do not understand this Government's rationale here.

They must have read that famous book; "How To Lose Friends And Influence People To Turn Against You".

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I deplore this. I do not understand the Government's rationale.

Perhaps it is this:

If someone starts work at say, 18 years of age, works reasonably hard, saves a little, stays 'responsible', buys their first home at around 25 years old, then over the next 45 years or so, by the time they are old and decrepit or ill and in need of care, they should be independantly financially 'secure' - wealthier than they have ever been at any other stage in their life.

That home - by all historical trend data - will have doubled in value every 9 or 10 years, savings will have swollen due to interest and compound interest etc. etc.

But it DOES NOT always work out this way - especially given the increasingly volatile state of our economy, the increasingly punitive tax measures, the increasing scarcity of employment opportunities, and the normal 'Sod's Law' reverses in life.

It is difficult to be in work if there are no opportunities.
It is difficult to be in long-term work if only short-term contracts are offered.
It is difficult to save money when year in, year out, the REAL disposable income we have is increasingly less and less due to poor wage levels, more numerous 'stealth' taxes, and ever increasing 'Costs Of Living'.
It is difficult to even even get onto the property ladder now due to a draconian criterion of mortgage qualification.

For the most part, the generation who are in most need of these 'Sheltered Homes' are the ones who HAVE worked and who HAVE 'paid into the system', and to deny them the help which they need now, or to impair the quality of that help just to 'save money', is not only disgusting, but totally bewildering.

I simply do not understand this Government's rationale here.

They must have read that famous book; "How To Lose Friends And Influence People To Turn Against You".

I agree with everything you've said here.
Do you think another government would/could turn this around?