RJH pretended :
And rural 'local' is very different to town and city local - getting about is
far more difficult if you don't have a car. Unless as in the example above -
the farmer lays on transport.

I understand farmers do still lay on transport, except now the coaches
are full of none UK workers.

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Younger people are having to retire later, because they are expected
to live longer than I. This in part a result of the much healthier
world I and those like me have helped create for them. They are not
working longer to pay for me.

You have a very rose tinted view of the system. The retirement age has
been raised to save costs at that time. And to get people to pay into the
system for longer.

Just because people live longer does not necessarily mean they are fit to
work to a greater age.

Depends on the type of work.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

whisky-dave explained :
I wouldn't want the UK to go back to that system. You work or you die isn't
very applealing, it's what made the rich richer no wonder the 'country'
prefers it.

There is nothing wrong with earning your own keep, rather than relying
on others to pay for your keep.

On 06/02/2018 16:36, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tim... pretended :
the problem is in work benefits

not unemployment benefit

The problem is caused by both benefits. The in work benefits set the
level for what work is worth it to take up, the unemployment benefits
make not taking up any work an option for many. Include what can be
earned by someone willing to cheat the system and many are much better
off being unemployed. I suspect there are many doing this, hence so many
people never having a job in their lifetime.

Sitting at home doing no worthwhile work, should never be an option for
anyone.

Why not? That's what robots are for.

--
Max Demian

On 06/02/2018 18:09, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Reay wrote :
The 30 year rule is now 35 years and only relates to the State
Pension. Even without a decent record you get a minimum pension under
the new scheme which isn't 'ungenerous' AS UK PENSIONS GO.

I paid into the system for 45 years.


I think you come under the 'old' scheme (ie you are older than me) so
you get 'old' pension.

That is, I believe, the same as (give or take) as the minimum paid under
the new scheme. (I've not looked at the min in detail as it won't apply
to me.) Therefore, someone with, say, 30 years will get the same as you
with 45. Who on earth can justify that?

On 06/02/2018 18:17, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
After serious thinking Fredxx wrote :
Do you not get a state pension?

A state pension I have paid for, yes! That plus other income. Nothing I
get is means tested, because I made damned sure when I was working of that.

There is a non means aspect of Job Seekers Allowance, much like your
pension.

Perhaps people who are on the dole might say the same as you too.

But how can they possibly say that, if they have spent their life on the
dole?

It could be a lifestyle choice. In much the same way there are some who
work and draw a pension.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote on 06/02/2018 :
Just because people live longer does not necessarily mean they are fit to
work to a greater age.

Not necessarily, no - but in general modern generation are much
healthier than previous generations, the effort of work is much easier
than it ever was too. Everyone lives a much longer life now, due to
much better health-care and far better living conditions. Which
basically means that people can retire later too.

Brian Reay laid this down on his screen :
That is, I believe, the same as (give or take) as the minimum paid under the
new scheme. (I've not looked at the min in detail as it won't apply to me.)
Therefore, someone with, say, 30 years will get the same as you with 45. Who
on earth can justify that?

It cannot be justified, but I worked for the most part, because I
enjoyed. I enjoyed my working life.

On 06/02/2018 18:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 06/02/2018 16:36, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tim... pretended :
the problem is in work benefits

not unemployment benefit

The problem is caused by both benefits. The in work benefits set the
level for what work is worth it to take up, the unemployment benefits
make not taking up any work an option for many. Include what can be
earned by someone willing to cheat the system and many are much better
off being unemployed. I suspect there are many doing this, hence so
many people never having a job in their lifetime.

Sitting at home doing no worthwhile work, should never be an option
for anyone.

Why not? That's what robots are for.


Harry isn't going to retire even to make way for a robot.

On 06/02/2018 17:44, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Fredxx was thinking very hard :
Deserved? Paid by others who do work?

I have paid considerably more than my share into the system in the years
I worked.


Everyone can say they "have done more than my bit".

I suppose they could, but would it be true?

And you expect others to retire at a much later age than yourself and
still say you've "done your bit".

I am only getting back some of what I put into the system - other than
my pension entitlement, I get nothing else from the system at all. No
free rent, no housing benefit, no council tax reductions - nothing. I
was one of those who worked hard, earned well and saved for my
retirement. I always paid full tax and full NI, made no use of the NHS.

I am amazed that you did well with no education.

On 06/02/2018 19:57, dennis@home wrote:
On 06/02/2018 18:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 06/02/2018 16:36, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tim... pretended :
the problem is in work benefits

not unemployment benefit

The problem is caused by both benefits. The in work benefits set the
level for what work is worth it to take up, the unemployment benefits
make not taking up any work an option for many. Include what can be
earned by someone willing to cheat the system and many are much
better off being unemployed. I suspect there are many doing this,
hence so many people never having a job in their lifetime.

Sitting at home doing no worthwhile work, should never be an option
for anyone.

Why not? That's what robots are for.


Harry isn't going to retire even to make way for a robot.

Are you suggesting he still works.

I thought he was a lazy no gooder like so many others here who think
everyone else should work.

How wrong can I be!!??

On 06/02/2018 17:44, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Fredxx was thinking very hard :
Deserved? Paid by others who do work?

I have paid considerably more than my share into the system in the years
I worked.


Everyone can say they "have done more than my bit".

I suppose they could, but would it be true?

And you expect others to retire at a much later age than yourself and
still say you've "done your bit".

I am only getting back some of what I put into the system - other than
my pension entitlement, I get nothing else from the system at all. No
free rent, no housing benefit, no council tax reductions - nothing. I
was one of those who worked hard, earned well and saved for my
retirement. I always paid full tax and full NI, made no use of the NHS.

Most under PAYE pay "full tax and full NI"? So do those on the dole.

Younger people are having to retire later, because they are expected
to live longer than I.

That's ********, they are not going to live much longer at all.

This in part a result of the much healthier world
I and those like me have helped create for them. They are not working
longer to pay for me.

You haven't paid for their improved lifestyle.

They are working longer, and they are paying your state benefit.

On 06/02/2018 19:34, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Reay laid this down on his screen :
That is, I believe, the same as (give or take) as the minimum paid
under the new scheme. (I've not looked at the min in detail as it
won't apply to me.) Therefore, someone with, say, 30 years will get
the same as you with 45. Who on earth can justify that?

It cannot be justified, but I worked for the most part, because I
enjoyed. I enjoyed my working life.

Me to but many don't. For some it is 'relentless grind' but they still
do it, rather than live off benefits.

On 06/02/2018 20:04, Fredxx wrote:
On 06/02/2018 19:57, dennis@home wrote:
On 06/02/2018 18:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 06/02/2018 16:36, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tim... pretended :
the problem is in work benefits

not unemployment benefit

The problem is caused by both benefits. The in work benefits set the
level for what work is worth it to take up, the unemployment
benefits make not taking up any work an option for many. Include
what can be earned by someone willing to cheat the system and many
are much better off being unemployed. I suspect there are many doing
this, hence so many people never having a job in their lifetime.

Sitting at home doing no worthwhile work, should never be an option
for anyone.

Why not? That's what robots are for.


Harry isn't going to retire even to make way for a robot.

Are you suggesting he still works.

He said you shouldn't get any benefits and should work so he must be
going to work until he drops.


I thought he was a lazy no gooder like so many others here who think
everyone else should work.

How wrong can I be!!??

Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Fredxx brought next idea :
Perhaps state benefits should be withheld from you too.

That might be difficult, because I don't get any at all, not a penny
:-)


Not even winter fuel payments or a bus pass,free prescriptions ,a bit of
state pension to go on top of your one gained as part of your career?
You must be in the minority amongst pensioners who dont get any of those
though it is fair to say that many
dont regard them as benefits being hypocritical sods .
And many people now forget that when they were younger that they received
family allowance or similar payments when they were bringing up a family.
They are/were benefits as well but as middle class people like teachers
claimed them as well they were respectable ones so not in the same class as
a bloke without work because his job had disappeared claiming the dole.

GH

Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Fredxx was thinking very hard :
Deserved? Paid by others who do work?

I have paid considerably more than my share into the system in the
years I worked.


Everyone can say they "have done more than my bit".

I suppose they could, but would it be true?

And you expect others to retire at a much later age than yourself and still
say you've "done your bit".

I am only getting back some of what I put into the system - other than
my pension entitlement, I get nothing else from the system at all. No
free rent, no housing benefit, no council tax reductions - nothing. I
was one of those who worked hard, earned well and saved for my
retirement. I always paid full tax and full NI, made no use of the NHS.

Younger people are having to retire later, because they are expected
to live longer than I. This in part a result of the much healthier
world I and those like me have helped create for them. They are not
working longer to pay for me.

Nice idea, but life expectancy is currently falling again in this
country. We may turn out to be historically a uniquely privileged
generation. (And in thirty years Romania and Turkey may oppose our EU
membership application on the grounds of economic backwardness and lack
of civil rights. Who knows?)
--

Roger Hayter

On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 17:20:17 +0000, RJH wrote:

If they're in reasonable physical condition, they could do it.

Of course they could. The program was just another typical anti-Brexit,
anti-British set up stunt. It takes weeks and months to develop the
muscle groups necessary for that kind of work - weeks and months we
didn't see the eastern europeans putting in, but put it in they already
have.
Grossly unfair as ever, the good old, lying, swindling BBC.




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 10:53:12 +0000, tim... wrote:

why is that strange?

Any kind of work at all is strange to Dennis.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On 06/02/2018 21:57, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 10:53:12 +0000, tim... wrote:

why is that strange?

Any kind of work at all is strange to Dennis.




I don't need to work I have a pension that isn't funded by taxes.

I bet CD hasn't done anything worthwhile for decades.

On Sunday, 4 February 2018 22:11:13 UTC, dennis@home wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-engl...bs-in-cornwall

Does it say anywhere in the article (can't be arsed to read it), that
many UK people don't pick veg not because they don't want to, but they
can't *AFFORD* to. UKians have to pay UKian housing prices, Poles can
afford to come over hear and live in a caravan for three months and
earn enough to pay more than a years' rent back home. Why do you think
the traditional UK veg pickers were *children*? Ie, people who lived in
accommodation paid for by other people.

On 06/02/2018 22:20, dennis@home wrote:
On 06/02/2018 21:57, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 10:53:12 +0000, tim... wrote:

why is that strange?

Any kind of work at all is strange to Dennis.




I don't need to work I have a pension that isn't funded by taxes.

I bet CD hasn't done anything worthwhile for decades.

And you have?

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) used his keyboard to write :
Yes. But wanting benefits stopped only applies to others. Those on here
who get them will say they are entitled to them.

If they have paid in, then why not?

Does that mean someone who has paid more in taxes than another is entitled
to better NHS treatment?

--
*Does fuzzy logic tickle? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Younger people are having to retire later, because they are expected
to live longer than I. This in part a result of the much healthier
world I and those like me have helped create for them. They are not
working longer to pay for me.

You have a very rose tinted view of the system. The retirement age has
been raised to save costs at that time. And to get people to pay into the
system for longer.

Just because people live longer does not necessarily mean they are fit to
work to a greater age.

Depends on the type of work.

Exactly the same thing applies to the unemployed. Not everyone can do the
same sort of job.

--
*Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 07/02/2018 00:40, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) used his keyboard to write :
Yes. But wanting benefits stopped only applies to others. Those on here
who get them will say they are entitled to them.

If they have paid in, then why not?

Does that mean someone who has paid more in taxes than another is entitled
to better NHS treatment?


You raised that idea, no one else suggested it.

In your leftie utopias, do you think the leaders get the same treatment
as a farmer labourer?

The NHS doesn't take any notice of your 'status'.

True, some pay for private treatment but that isn't the NHS.
--

Suspect someone is claiming a benefit under false pretences? Incapacity
Benefit or Personal Independence Payment when they don't need it? They
are depriving those in real need!

https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

In article ,
wrote:
On Sunday, 4 February 2018 22:11:13 UTC, dennis@home wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-engl...bs-in-cornwall

Does it say anywhere in the article (can't be arsed to read it), that
many UK people don't pick veg not because they don't want to, but they
can't *AFFORD* to. UKians have to pay UKian housing prices, Poles can
afford to come over hear and live in a caravan for three months and
earn enough to pay more than a years' rent back home.

Why do you think the traditional UK veg pickers were *children*? Ie,
people who lived in accommodation paid for by other people.

no - because they were available - others were working

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 06/02/2018 22:46, Fredxx wrote:
On 06/02/2018 22:20, dennis@home wrote:
On 06/02/2018 21:57, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 10:53:12 +0000, tim... wrote:

why is that strange?

Any kind of work at all is strange to Dennis.




I don't need to work I have a pension that isn't funded by taxes.

I bet CD hasn't done anything worthwhile for decades.

And you have?



Most of the UK network is still running on stuff that I was part of the
design team. What do you have that is used by millions of people?

In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 07/02/2018 00:40, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) used his keyboard to write :
Yes. But wanting benefits stopped only applies to others. Those on here
who get them will say they are entitled to them.

If they have paid in, then why not?

Does that mean someone who has paid more in taxes than another is entitled
to better NHS treatment?


You raised that idea, no one else suggested it.

You are incapable of understanding what was meant? That many think others
getting benefits of any sort are a drain on the system - but not any they
get. Which they always say they are entitled to.

In your leftie utopias, do you think the leaders get the same treatment
as a farmer labourer?

Interesting you consider a farm labourer as the lowest of the low.

The NHS doesn't take any notice of your 'status'.

True, some pay for private treatment but that isn't the NHS.

--
*Being healthy is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
On Sunday, 4 February 2018 22:11:13 UTC, dennis@home wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-engl...bs-in-cornwall

Does it say anywhere in the article (can't be arsed to read it), that
many UK people don't pick veg not because they don't want to, but they
can't *AFFORD* to. UKians have to pay UKian housing prices, Poles can
afford to come over hear and live in a caravan for three months and
earn enough to pay more than a years' rent back home.

Why do you think the traditional UK veg pickers were *children*? Ie,
people who lived in accommodation paid for by other people.

no - because they were available - others were working

Quite. Always a problem with seasonal work. There are fruit pickers that
move from country to country following the work.

--
*I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
AISB, doing that sort of job involves using, and using very hard,
muscles that normally don't get much of a work out at all. No wonder
locals have a problem. For the Poles though, it's no issue because they
are using those muscles all the time.

All Poles are used to the physical fitness required for fruit picking etc?
Or only those who come here to do it?

Do they get special physical education at school to prepare them for such
work?

Or do they merely develop the muscles needed by doing the job? Ie, exactly
the same as happens with any physical job anywhere.

--
*Why is the word abbreviation so long?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

on 06/02/2018, dennis@home supposed :
I am amazed that you did well with no education.

I went to school, I went at least twice to college and university too,
how did you assume no education?

After serious thinking Fredxx wrote :
Most under PAYE pay "full tax and full NI"? So do those on the dole.

Out of who's pocket?

After serious thinking Jim.GM4DHJ ... wrote :
....hope things are now going well for you Harry ........

Yes, fine..

Marland explained on 06/02/2018 :
Not even winter fuel payments or a bus pass,free prescriptions ,a bit of
state pension to go on top of your one gained as part of your career?

Those are part of my entitlement, which I take - I would be a fool not
to, but I made arrangements and planned my life and earnings, so as not
to be a burden on the system.

On 07/02/2018 11:51, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
on 06/02/2018, dennis@home supposed :
I am amazed that you did well with no education.

I went to school, I went at least twice to college and university too,
how did you assume no education?

You have never had any state benefits.

On Tuesday, 6 February 2018 18:47:28 UTC, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
whisky-dave explained :
I wouldn't want the UK to go back to that system. You work or you die isn't
very applealing, it's what made the rich richer no wonder the 'country'
prefers it.

There is nothing wrong with earning your own keep, rather than relying
on others to pay for your keep.

I never said there was but most of us working or those that have worked have also been paying for those that don't work for whatever reason(s)

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Marland explained on 06/02/2018 :
Not even winter fuel payments or a bus pass,free prescriptions ,a bit
of state pension to go on top of your one gained as part of your
career?

Those are part of my entitlement, which I take - I would be a fool not
to, but I made arrangements and planned my life and earnings, so as not
to be a burden on the system.

You think you can plan not being ill? Not being run over by a bus, etc?

--
*Vegetarians taste great*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
news
After serious thinking Jim.GM4DHJ ... wrote :
....hope things are now going well for you Harry ........

Yes, fine..

good good

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
On 07/02/2018 11:51, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
on 06/02/2018, dennis@home supposed :
I am amazed that you did well with no education.

I went to school, I went at least twice to college and university too,
how did you assume no education?

You have never had any state benefits.

But these are things Harry knows he's entitled to. He only wants to stop
payments to others. On a whim.

--
*If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 07/02/2018 12:01, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Marland explained on 06/02/2018 :
Not even winter fuel payments or a bus pass,free prescriptions ,a bit of
state pension to go on top of your one gained as part of your career?

Those are part of my entitlement, which I take - I would be a fool not
to, but I made arrangements and planned my life and earnings, so as not
to be a burden on the system.

How is taking money not a burden on the system.
Its not as though you are drawing on a fund you paid into that is
earning "interest".

I intend to claim for anything I can get but I won't deny it being a
benefit. Not that I will be able to get any means tested benefits anyway
as I already have an income above minimum wage before I can get a state
pension (in six years). I will be paying income tax to pay out benefits
to others well into the future unless something happens.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I intend to claim for anything I can get but I won't deny it being a
benefit. Not that I will be able to get any means tested benefits anyway
as I already have an income above minimum wage before I can get a state
pension (in six years). I will be paying income tax to pay out benefits
to others well into the future unless something happens.

I've actually only claimed the sort of benefits that annoy so many on here
once. After being made redundant.

You wouldn't believe how unpleasant an experience it was made to be. And
because I found some daily work after finally getting a payment, had to
pay it back.

But then I have skills which were in demand then. In an area where they
were also much in demand. Things have changed today with many more chasing
the same work.

And I'm sure would have been a different matter with different skills or
non at all in a different area.

I didn't really need that unemployment benefit, having been paid some
redundancy. More to keep my NI up to date, before making arrangements to
pay the self employed one.

But no different from someone with a private pension taking the OAP.

--
*The e-mail of the species is more deadly than the mail *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.