UK election - its all about what the opposition will look like

It was interesting to watch the French two stage voting approach unfold. The first round is often as much about protest against stuff as it is voting for something. So a lot were voting against Macron’s candidates. However many were voicing protests about things that concern them and voting for Le Pen’s candidates in the first round to highlight these concerns.
Then the second round comes with time for reflection, awareness of how the first round turned out and a chance to vote in the best of the two remaining candidates in each location.
Also an imperfect system but a lot fairer and more informed than FPTP.

True/ False/Scaremongering who knows!

Suggesting Labour are talking about means-testing state pensions sounds like scaremongering to me.

This link gives an answer to this question from Steve Webb, from This is Money, explaining why such a move from any government would be shooting themselves in the foot - making themselves unpopular for no gain in the current Parliament is not a good plan.
I can’t see it happening, to be honest

1 Like

I do not trust Labour,Conservative. All this and still voted into power. There will be no opposition to swindlers - taking candy from a baby.

This article could have been (better) shared on the thread I created a while ago about the dismal performance of UK pension funds in their low investment in UK businesses. However the article raises a serious question about how pension funds are encouraged or discouraged from such investments. The article is not raising an issue with the taxing of the pensions people actually receive. It is about the taxing of the funds themselves on the dividends they receive from their investments. So quite misleading when its posted under a thread showing fake claims about pensioner taxation.

Sounds very like scaremongering. The state pension has increasingly being set out in the manner of a private pension - the less you put in, the less you get. You are even encouraged to fork out lump sums to bring your “pot” up to the maximum level if you’ve under-contributed. So to then impose some calculation of wealth at which point your state pension gets docked if you exceed that level runs contrary to the “you get what you’ve put in” set up. This will never be imposed. Changing the triple lock might but not means testing. Utter Tory scaremongering to their favourite target audience.


I was not aware of your post Linclonshire, sure Azz will move mine for you. Agree with your comments, the point is the deception. Gordon Brown ruined retirement for a generation.

1 Like

Thanks, but I’m not that bothered about where things appear, simply noting there was a thread on poor UK investment by pension funds.
While we are discussing Labour, tax and pensions - I’m not sure I agree with the Express headline. Removing a tax kick back from companies managing your pension is not the same as taxing pensions or impairing pension pay outs. My experience of pension funds is that they are not very capable, provide a pretty average return on investment and skim a lot for their own profits. The UK pension industry is worth something like £5 trillion - so “robbing” the industry of 0.1% of their value is hardly going to cripple them.

I think it’s a brilliant idea…Means tested before you can receive a full state pension… :+1:
They should also look at ex pats living abroad and claiming pensions… :+1:
The clue is in the name…EX-PATRIOTS!


Geographic specific payment is a great idea. Nothing for anyone coming from or living in Yorkshire as its been proven that this region is a net drain on the state - financially and emotionally.
Meanwhile people drawing pensions but living outside the UK are not a drain on the resources of the UK. So they deserve a bit more to balance things up.
Any other bright ideas?

1 Like

I think you are confusing two different words.

An Expat is not a shortened version of the word Ex-Patriot

The full name for an Expat is “EXPATRIATE”
which just means a person who lives outside their native country.


We might be a drain on the state but it was caused by successive governments in cahoots with the EU, stealing the mining industry, steel industry, fishing industry, engineering industry, of which I was a part, and all the supporting businesses, shops, transport and power generation. Yorkshire was the industrial powerhouse of England, and we were sold out to Brussels while our Yorkshire communities were devastated. So yes we are a drain on the state, you ex-pats should be ashamed for leaving a sinking ship and turning your backs on your fellow Brits and still taking from the nation purse.

I stand by my definition of EX PATRIOTS Boot…People who have taken the best from Britain (training, skills, knowledge and the best healthcare) and still expect us to support them.

They paid for that support.

I paid for nearly 10 years into graduated pensions but have received nothing back. You’re welcome.

I could have paid a couple of thousand bucks to receive a pension but decided it was far too much of a hassle, every dollar of UK pension reduces my Australian pension by 50c, and once it starts it fixed at that value for ever. Total rip off.

1 Like

I think all people who match that condition should be called “immigrants”.


I thought it was ex-patriated - with the emphasis being on an action of someone being ex-patriated by others (government, military, company, etc.). Which why the vast majority of people who live in other countries (and have done so through personal choice) are simply migrants. This is, presumably, also the reason we do not refer to, say, a Polish person living in the UK as an expat.


Unique and individual definitions of words are not really helpful, are they? Go write your own dictionary, then hide it in a cupboard because its no use to anyone.
Now, I am very confident that I have contributed more in tax than I ever have or ever will take out of the UK system. I am certain that my contributions through income tax, national insurance and all other taxations have benefitted many.
Are you suggesting that if I leave the UK then I can take all my contributions with me?


That is a desperate article that you shared from spiked. We could be talking about major challenges the country faces but spiked think no, its vital that we pick holes in individual past statements about gender identify, and even then only in the context of prison sentencing. Somehow the article does not, for example, explore beliefs of Reform candidates, or speeches by part Tory PMs (remember the one about cheese?).
Please find something of substance to share and otherwise enjoy such spiked rubbish in the privacy of your own home.