Ahoo Daryaei Released By Iranian...
News2 mins ago
About Time, Agree Or Not?
93 Answers
http://
Personally I think this is the correct course of action - what are you thoughts on the matter?
Personally I think this is the correct course of action - what are you thoughts on the matter?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by friedgreentomato. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// watch the death rates for the elderly shoot through the roof. //
The second year after the winter fuel allowance was introduced (1999/2000) the winter death rate actually shot up significantly recording the highest rate in 15 years. The death rate now, 25,000, is exactly the same as it was before Gordon Brown's election bribe was introduced.
The second year after the winter fuel allowance was introduced (1999/2000) the winter death rate actually shot up significantly recording the highest rate in 15 years. The death rate now, 25,000, is exactly the same as it was before Gordon Brown's election bribe was introduced.
heating bills have risen a lot in the last few years, so what makes you think if it's scrapped more won't die.
http://
http://
Excess winter death rates
1993/94 24,000
1994/95 25,000
Winter Fuel payments introduced
1998/99 44,000
1999/00 45,000
2004/05 29,000
2005/06 23,000
2006/07 23,000
2007/08 22,000
2008/09 34,000
2011/12. 25,000
The rate of elderly people dying due to the cold weather has not been changed by thewinter fuel payments.
1993/94 24,000
1994/95 25,000
Winter Fuel payments introduced
1998/99 44,000
1999/00 45,000
2004/05 29,000
2005/06 23,000
2006/07 23,000
2007/08 22,000
2008/09 34,000
2011/12. 25,000
The rate of elderly people dying due to the cold weather has not been changed by thewinter fuel payments.
The figures for excess winter deaths are broadly static, thats true. But the bold figures do not tell the whole story.
How many would have died had the WFA not been introduced? How many more pensioners are now actually in fuel poverty due to the exorbitant rise in energy costs since the 90s? How much more would it have cost the NHS to treat elderly with conditions exacerbated by the cold as a consequence of being less able or more afraid to use their heating with the exponential rise in energy costs? Was each year exactly the same length of winter, exactly the same temperatures, exactly the same privations?
You argue as if you know the cost of everything, Gromit, but the value of nothing.
A civilised society looks after the weak and the halt and the lame, and we should certainly be taking care of those who have paid into the system as the vast majority have.
And it is, in national spending terms, a trivial cost to the national coffers - around 0.3% of the national expenditure. Despite your dismissal of its introduction as an electoral "bribe", it was a welcome measure, eminently affordable,something that Labour can be justly proud of, and probably more valuable now than it was when it was introduced.
Have you met many pensioners, Gromit? The idea that pensioners would be bribed into switching their political allegiance with a bung of a couple of hundred pounds a year is laughable.
You can tinker around the edges of it if you want - increasing the age at which the payment is made ( since the overwhelming majority of excess winter deaths occur in those over 75), or make it a taxable benefit, so the best off 15% of pensioners effectively pay it back, but it needs to remain.
If you really really want to save the country money - why not look at programmes far more costly, far less necessary and socially useful?
You seem obsessed with wishing to penalise those elderly that are vulnerable, and for the life of me I cannot see why.....
How many would have died had the WFA not been introduced? How many more pensioners are now actually in fuel poverty due to the exorbitant rise in energy costs since the 90s? How much more would it have cost the NHS to treat elderly with conditions exacerbated by the cold as a consequence of being less able or more afraid to use their heating with the exponential rise in energy costs? Was each year exactly the same length of winter, exactly the same temperatures, exactly the same privations?
You argue as if you know the cost of everything, Gromit, but the value of nothing.
A civilised society looks after the weak and the halt and the lame, and we should certainly be taking care of those who have paid into the system as the vast majority have.
And it is, in national spending terms, a trivial cost to the national coffers - around 0.3% of the national expenditure. Despite your dismissal of its introduction as an electoral "bribe", it was a welcome measure, eminently affordable,something that Labour can be justly proud of, and probably more valuable now than it was when it was introduced.
Have you met many pensioners, Gromit? The idea that pensioners would be bribed into switching their political allegiance with a bung of a couple of hundred pounds a year is laughable.
You can tinker around the edges of it if you want - increasing the age at which the payment is made ( since the overwhelming majority of excess winter deaths occur in those over 75), or make it a taxable benefit, so the best off 15% of pensioners effectively pay it back, but it needs to remain.
If you really really want to save the country money - why not look at programmes far more costly, far less necessary and socially useful?
You seem obsessed with wishing to penalise those elderly that are vulnerable, and for the life of me I cannot see why.....
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Why Can't We Deal With Shop Lifting?
News20 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles52 mins ago
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|