53% Of Support For Mortgage Interest Payments Go To Those Over The Age Of 60.

[exiges]

While I don't think the taxpayer should be bailing out anyones mortgage anyway.. if it does, I don't see why it can't benefit from the sale of the property it bought for the "owner"

Edited September 8, 2010 by exiges

[campervanman]

MEW.

SMI is only given for mortgage payments relating to house purchase not for additional borrowing for 'home improvements'. How much is paid in housing benefits to those under 40? I suspect rather more than SMI to those over 60.

[Johnny Storm]

How in gods name do you end up with an outstanding mortgage at 60+?

Talk about sub prime, these guys and gals must be sub-sub-sub prime. I'll bet the lenders double check the life insurance is in order now that house prices are falling...

Hmmm, how about waiting 10 years for a hpc that never happens? I bet a vast number of people on here will end up mortgaged after 60 because of our waiting and hoping.

[19 year mortgage 8itch]

SMI is only given for mortgage payments relating to house purchase not for additional borrowing for 'home improvements'. How much is paid in housing benefits to those under 40? I suspect rather more than SMI to those over 60.

Been mentioned aleady

Those receiving housing benefit are typically not sitting on a large asset and expecting a free lunch like the SMI over-60s.

Just the free lunch.

[200p]

The out of date phrase:

"There's no such thing as a free lunch"

will need to be amended to:

"There's no such thing as a free lunch, unless you get someone else to pay for it"

[campervanman]

Been mentioned aleady

Those receiving housing benefit are typically not sitting on a large asset and expecting a free lunch like the SMI over-60s.

Just the free lunch.

Those on hb are having a free lunch every day, along with those who get family tax credit and the other stuff that 'hard working families' get in 2010. Stuff that the over 60's didn't get a sniff of when they were the under 40's.

[campervanman]

It's pretty sad. Who is stoking this inter generational fire and what is the agenda.

Look at who is poisoning the minds of the young with this vile stuff, look at who's interest it is to deflect the blame from themselves. Add the two together and you will have your answer.

[@contradevian]

Those on hb are having a free lunch every day, along with those who get family tax credit and the other stuff that 'hard working families' get in 2010. Stuff that the over 60's didn't get a sniff of when they were the under 40's.

I agree, and everywhere I go I see subsidised baby factories walking around. I suspect any pensioner benefits is a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of "child credit" paid out. Pales into insignificance compared to the £95k a year being paid out to a "thirty something" family and their 10 kids. I hope the ageist weirdo's, trying to stoke up inter generational warfare on these boards, will be returning their child credit on conscience grounds. I do however think that pensioners should consider down sizing, and thus freeing up houses for families, even though I suspect these would just get allocated to jobless uncontrolled breeders, or those who haven't been in the country more than five minutes.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Sir John Steed

[Dorkins]

I suspect any pensioner benefits is a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of "child credit" paid out.

Wrong, I'm afraid.

Source

[kilroy]

Those on hb are having a free lunch every day, along with those who get family tax credit and the other stuff that 'hard working families' get in 2010. Stuff that the over 60's didn't get a sniff of when they were the under 40's.

HB existed then as well, except in the form of council housing (you know, the ones that were sold off cheaply). I don't believe they came out of university with 30k of debt either. Again

82% of SMI monies goes to the over 40s

18% goes to the under 40s

I choose the cutoff of 40 as this is closest to the average age of a FTB who gets no help from thier parents.

[kilroy]

Wrong, I'm afraid.

Source

Ooh look, over 75s tv license gets allocated more than SMI. Winter fuel allowance is more than JSA?

[hpc-craig]

I agree, and everywhere I go I see subsidised baby factories walking around. I suspect any pensioner benefits is a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of "child credit" paid out. Pales into insignificance compared to the £95k a year being paid out to a "thirty something" family and their 10 kids. I hope the ageist weirdo's, trying to stoke up inter generational warfare on these boards, will be returning their child credit on conscience grounds. I do however think that pensioners should consider down sizing, and thus freeing up houses for families, even though I suspect these would just get allocated to jobless uncontrolled breeders, or those who haven't been in the country more than five minutes.

The breeders seem to be taking over our town. They even take their kids in their pushchairs and hang out by the bus stop smoking. None of them are over 18 and some under 15.

A lot of these kids had kids whilst sill at school and almost all are single parents. Some of them are enjoying 3 bed private rented houses on a nice estate courtesy of the taxpayer.

What really knarks me off is that people are seemingly rewarded for simply reproducing. Having worked 2 jobs simulatneously for 7 years and paid thousands in taxes I'm not entitled to anything.

Is this what Labour meant by 'fair society'?

Edited September 9, 2010 by hpc-craig

[leicestersq]

OK my parents are in this position, my dad worked in the shipyards in the NE of England which closed down so had to move south swapping a house that sold for 30,000 for one that cost 65,000 this is 1988ish.

They then had an endowment policy which was supposed to pay off the mortgage but as you may know many were mis sold them and they lost a fortune, this is where the problems really start, so after remortgaging as they couldnt sell, in 1992ish they moved houses to a smaller place, to move costs 10k or so.

Then after a couple of years here, the company he worked for shut down, so in 1998ish he managed to get another job close to London, in 2000ish after renting for 2 yrs they sold this house and moved again it cost 1000s, for a similar 3 bed terrace it cost a lot more so a bigger mortgage came with it.

Then again after 3yrs here they had to sell up north and move for work again making nothing on their property.

Hence after a lifetimes hard work hes 65 and has just arranged to stay on at his job for another 2 years.

Does he deserve to get his mortgage interest paid unitl they day he die, well thats upto you to decide, id say so though.

PS He realises in hindsight he'd have been better off getting a council house in NE England in 1988 and poncing off the state but he preferred to work so had to move and at the time this area wasnt exactly prosperous for 3 teenage kids.

It isnt even a great tale of woe. I mean, I bet your father has plenty of equity in his property?

Meanwhile, millions of people, young and old, have no equity, but a bigger tax bill, to help pay for your father's illusory woes. On top of that, there is another bill to be paid for adminstering it all.

Dont get me wrong, I dont blame your father for making use of SMI. I save my ire for those that have designed this enormity, and those have chosen to continue with it when they could have closed it down.

Coming here for sympathy is a forlorn hope.

We heard lots of stuff about the mis-selling of endowments. Speaking candidly to one person, I said to him that you 'knew what you were doing' when he bought it. Everyone did, they were buying these products in the hope of making a lot of money. They took the risk, and they lost. Then they bleated like hell, and a lot of them were able to get compensation if the vendor of the product hadnt kept a copy of the original document they signed pointing out the risk. For many it was the right product, extra money if you win, compensation if you lose. So I have little sympathy for those who bought this product, check, I have have NO sympathy for anyone that bought an endowment.

As for that sob story about moving around and buying this house and that house, well woopy do, those things happen. You seem to be suggesting that the taxpayer should pay for every little jaunt your father went on? My opinion it is his responsibility, no one else's, the cost is his.

[campervanman]

I don't believe they came out of university with 30k of debt either. Again

That would be the 10% who went to university back then would it. What about the other 90% who didn't and were working and paying taxes for the other 10%.? Don't tell me, they all have houses that are now worth a fortune so their experiences as under 40's don't count.

[campervanman]

Wrong, I'm afraid.

Source

Rather proves the op's point than disproves it. No wait a minute I forgot, state pensions are now classed as 'benefits' for the boomer generation. It's a special offer, just for them.

[Dorkins]

Rather proves the op's point than disproves it. No wait a minute I forgot, state pensions are now classed as 'benefits' for the boomer generation. It's a special offer, just for them.

How is the state pension not a benefit? It's paid to people who meet the qualifying criteria out of current tax revenue, just like every other benefit. There is no state pension fund. The only reason we don't call it "Old Persons Benefit" is that it would be bad politics to do so.

I hope the state pension is still around when I come to retire, but that doesn't change what it is.

[campervanman]

How is the state pension not a benefit? It's paid to people who meet the qualifying criteria out of current tax revenue, just like every other benefit. There is no state pension fund. The only reason we don't call it "Old Persons Benefit" is that it would be bad politics to do so.

I hope the state pension is still around when I come to retire, but that doesn't change what it is.

The op referred to pensioner benefits. The state pension is not and never has been regarded as a 'benefit' as it is paid to all regardless of income. As for there being no state pension fund, that may be true however the contract between the state and me for the past 40 years implied there was, as it was for every preceding generation for over 100 years. Your generation for some wierd unknown reason seek to change this. It can be referred to in the life position as being 'I'm not ok, your not ok' or to put it more simply, lose-lose is easier to achieve than win-win.

[fluffy666]

How is the state pension not a benefit? It's paid to people who meet the qualifying criteria out of current tax revenue, just like every other benefit. There is no state pension fund. The only reason we don't call it "Old Persons Benefit" is that it would be bad politics to do so.

I hope the state pension is still around when I come to retire, but that doesn't change what it is.

For propaganda purposes, pensions are lumped into benefits when people want the biggest figure possible for the benefits bill, but quietly ignored when it comes to discussing what benefits to cut - which is where the stories of 10-child families come in. This is because Pensioners tend to vote Tory... (In fact, pensioners vote full stop..)

[Dorkins]

The op referred to pensioner benefits. The state pension is not and never has been regarded as a 'benefit' as it is paid to all regardless of income. As for there being no state pension fund, that may be true however the contract between the state and me for the past 40 years implied there was, as it was for every preceding generation for over 100 years. Your generation for some wierd unknown reason seek to change this. It can be referred to in the life position as being 'I'm not ok, your not ok' or to put it more simply, lose-lose is easier to achieve than win-win.

Does it really matter whether we call the state pension a benefit or a banana, except when it comes to not hurting people's feelings? As I say, the state pension operates exactly like every other benefit. If you want to call it something else, that's up to you. The money still flows the same way: from current taxpayers to the elderly. When it comes to the impact on Britain's fiscal position, £1 of state pension spending is the same as £1 of any other benefit.

I don't think anybody wants to see an end to the state pension, there's just a question of how much is affordable. The recent promises of a triple-guaranteed pension (i.e. pensions to rise by the greatest of CPI, earnings, or 2.5%) seems particularly unjust at a time of stagnant or falling wages for the taxpayers who are actually paying for those pensions. Spending on the state pension and other benefits for older people makes up a big chunk of government spending. We have a £170bn deficit, and the idea that this can be closed while actually increasing spending on state pensions and the NHS (which primarily benefits the elderly) is a bit delusional. If there is to be an intergenerational conflict over spending cuts it will be from elderly people refusing to take a share of the cuts while taxpayers refuse to pay more taxes at a time when they are taking home less and less.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Dorkins

[campervanman]

Does it really matter whether we call the state pension a benefit or a banana, except when it comes to not hurting people's feelings? As I say, the state pension operates exactly like every other benefit. If you want to call it something else, that's up to you. The money still flows the same way: from current taxpayers to the elderly. When it comes to the impact on Britain's fiscal position, £1 of state pension spending is the same as £1 of any other benefit.

I don't think anybody wants to see an end to the state pension, there's just a question of how much is affordable. The recent promises of a triple-guaranteed pension (i.e. pensions to rise by the greatest of CPI, earnings, or 2.5%) seems particularly unjust at a time of stagnant or falling wages for the taxpayers who are actually paying for those pensions. Spending on the state pension and other benefits for older people makes up a big chunk of government spending. We have a £170bn deficit, and the idea that this can be closed while actually increasing spending on state pensions and the NHS (which primarily benefits the elderly) is a bit delusional. If there is to be an intergenerational conflict over spending cuts it will be from elderly people refusing to take a share of the cuts while taxpayers refuse to pay more taxes at a time when they are taking home less and less.

I think you will find that to pensioners it does matter that the state pension is an entitlement and not a benefit. As i said earlier, pensioners were sold the oap on the basis that you paid in an amount and you got something back. That is why there is a minimum number of years contributions required to receive it. The mismanagement of state pension funding cannot be an excuse to change it's status from entitlement to benefit, so yes it is important that it is not classified as a benefit.

Your stance re the defecit is very reasonable, so reasonable that the government want everyone to be as reasonable as you. Of course 'We are all in this together' espesially if you are not one of the 5% who own most of the wealth. I don't see too many bankers saying we can't afford to pay my bonus because it needs to go towards reducing the debts built up by the government to bail us out. The money is there to allow people to have a decent retirement now and in the future, they just wan't you to believe it isn't so that you finish up paying for the irresponsibility and bad management of others.

Edited September 9, 2010 by campervanman

[or in excess of]

Below is a comment from the following article ...

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100007530/how-house-prices-and-debts-are-building-ugly-tensions-between-parents-and-their-children/

I checked the PDF (Page 7) and it's true, how on earth are so many old people relying on the tax payer, you have to ask that considering everything has gone there way recently, how have they not paid off their mortgages? I'm fuming! :angry: :angry:

As you'd imagine the amounts paid to the handful of under 40's is higher, but how can 5x more old people be reliant on government hand outs, i feel sick! :angry:

The more you delve into this smi scam, the more it makes your blood boil. There is something called " mortgage interest run on".What it means is,if you lose any benefits because you or other half are returning to work/ working more hours/ earning more money, you will be paid an extra 4 weeks

money. What on earth for?

[kilroy]

That would be the 10% who went to university back then would it. What about the other 90% who didn't and were working and paying taxes for the other 10%.? Don't tell me, they all have houses that are now worth a fortune so their experiences as under 40's don't count.

Must have been nice to have jobs. Did young unemployment ever touch 25% back then, as it is now?

[Dorkins]

Your stance re the defecit is very reasonable, so reasonable that the government want everyone to be as reasonable as you. e are of course 'all in this together' espesially if you are not one of the 5% who own most of the wealth. I don't see too many bankers saying We can't afford to pay my bonus because it needs to go towards reducing the debts built up by the government to bail us out. The money is there to allow people to have a decent retirement now and in the future, they just wan't you to believe it isn't so that you finish up paying for the irresponsibility and bad management of others.

Of course, I'm not too impressed by the government handing hundreds of billions to the banks either. I'm not impressed by trillion pound guarantees to bank bond- and shareholders. I'm not impressed by councils giving private landlords grants to do up their pads, and I'm not impressed by housing benefit being paid at a rate which I struggle to compete with using my wages. I'm not impressed by free bus passes to people who don't need them, or SMI to people who have 6 figures of equity in their house. I'm not impressed by GPs on 6 figure salaries, council chief executives on a quarter of a million, and university vice chancellors on £450k. I'm not impressed by CEOs on hundreds of times the wage of their employees. I'm not impressed by the huge public sector pension liability being quietly added to my generation's bill. I'm not impressed by the massively expensive and no doubt corrupt mess that is PFI and other corporate welfare programmes like the railways. I'm not impressed that the cost of all of this waste is being added to the national debt, which my generation will be handed with a wry smile. I'm not impressed by zero interest rates keeping house prices out of my generation's reach while slowly destroying my modest savings through inflation. I'm not impressed by the constant efforts to inflate the cost of living which make it impossible for my generation to compete with cheap foreign labour. I'm not impressed that if I lose my job and am struggling to get by, I am entitled to almost no help from the state because I bother to use a condom and don't own a house. I'm not impressed by the negative way my generation is portrayed by a smug and self-satisfied media. I am tired of being part of the priced out, screwed over, pick up the tab, kick me generation. It is the existing system in all its glory that has put people my age in this situation, and this is why I have so little respect for it. This is not just a British problem, it's the same for young people across the developed world. The cracks have already appeared, and the sooner this monster collapses the sooner we can start rebuilding a sane and humble society again.

[leicestersq]

Of course, I'm not too impressed by the government handing hundreds of billions to the banks either. I'm not impressed by trillion pound guarantees to bank bond- and shareholders. I'm not impressed by councils giving private landlords grants to do up their pads, and I'm not impressed by housing benefit being paid at a rate which I struggle to compete with using my wages. I'm not impressed by free bus passes to people who don't need them, or SMI to people who have 6 figures of equity in their house. I'm not impressed by GPs on 6 figure salaries, council chief executives on a quarter of a million, and university vice chancellors on £450k. I'm not impressed by CEOs on hundreds of times the wage of their employees. I'm not impressed by the huge public sector pension liability being quietly added to my generation's bill. I'm not impressed by the massively expensive and no doubt corrupt mess that is PFI and other corporate welfare programmes like the railways. I'm not impressed that the cost of all of this waste is being added to the national debt, which my generation will be handed with a wry smile. I'm not impressed by zero interest rates keeping house prices out of my generation's reach while slowly destroying my modest savings through inflation. I'm not impressed by the constant efforts to inflate the cost of living which make it impossible for my generation to compete with cheap foreign labour. I'm not impressed that if I lose my job and am struggling to get by, I am entitled to almost no help from the state because I bother to use a condom and don't own a house. I'm not impressed by the negative way my generation is portrayed by a smug and self-satisfied media. I am tired of being part of the priced out, screwed over, pick up the tab, kick me generation. It is the existing system in all its glory that has put people my age in this situation, and this is why I have so little respect for it. This is not just a British problem, it's the same for young people across the developed world. The cracks have already appeared, and the sooner this monster collapses the sooner we can start rebuilding a sane and humble society again.

I duly award you the Award for Rant of the Day.

I particularly enjoyed how you showed your determination to bang out your message with such feeling, that you managed the Rant without the aid of Paragraphs.

It really contains the essence of what HPC is all about, anger at the system that takes from those who produce, to give to those who do not, so that they can enjoy better lives and housing than those who produce.

Keep it up, we need to change things.

[Dorkins]

I particularly enjoyed how you showed your determination to bang out your message with such feeling, that you managed the Rant without the aid of Paragraphs.

Some things are too important for paragraphs!