Tonight Pensioners will die of the cold
- Thread starter treelover
- Start date
The thing is, no matter how much emphasis is placed on these things by lefties, you're never going to see much in the way of media reports about that kind of stuff unless it gets really big. It's just not sexy, to use your own words.
I'm not saying that there isn't a need for more organisation around workplace issues, around community issues, around claimant issues, etc., but you're massively overstating things.
Silver_Fox
New Member
The point is that while its good to keep raising these issues over and over until something gets done about it, why moan about the far left over and over? How can you put so much emphasis on such a tiny section of the population for what is or isn't happening?
As has already been said a lot of people who do "sexy issues" such as Palestine (and I'm sure people in Gaza would love you describing it that way), they also take up a lot of local issues and workplace issues. Also the demonstrations in London were overwhemingly just members of the general public, the far left is hardly noticeable.
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
Fuck off
We are paid-up members of the para-military wing of Age Concern and we are bloody freezing here at home. We spent serious money on having a CORGI registered fitter install us a new boiler. He has seriously ripped us off. It will not work. Another plumber has capped-off our supply as a dangerous installation. At the moment we have no heating and no hot water. We've had to fight with CORGI to get them to come out and give us a full inspection. They now have promised to "respond" within 10 working days.
But who says the issue of freezing pensioners is not sexy? We've had to learn to cuddle-up again. Last night we drank a bottle of wine tucked up in bed singing the old songs. We'll always believe in the revolution. Keep fighting! Up the rebels!
But who says the issue of freezing pensioners is not sexy? We've had to learn to cuddle-up again. Last night we drank a bottle of wine tucked up in bed singing the old songs. We'll always believe in the revolution. Keep fighting! Up the rebels!
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Far be it for me to have to introduce a dose of reality to your perorations, but pensioners enjoy advantages over other claimants in terms of being able to afford to "heat and eat". They do, for example receive a £300 a year ex gratia payment to assist them purely for heating, and enjoy a minimum income guarantee that other claimants can only dream of.
Yes, some pensioners will die of hypothermia during this cold spell, but so will non-pensioners.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
uhh, pensioners do require a bit more heat tho dont they? its one of the things about being old.
have a pop at treelover for his stupid and counter-productive attacks on people prioritising causes other than his most important one by all means, but your wide of the mark in attacking him for pointing out that pensioners will be the worst to suffer over here (well, worst except for those who are refugee's forced to live on the streets/on friends' floors or other homeless anyway)
elbows
Well-Known Member
Fine, ignore my point about many excess winter deaths being quite normal and unavoidable, carry on copy & pasting.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
fucking hell, just seen your OP. It's a disgrace.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Why? Because elbows is pointing out the truth? That it really isn't as simple as the morning star want to make out?
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Ah, so you're saying that by basing a campaign on mangled statistics, someone pointing out that mangling is undercutting it?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
come on kyser, there are ways of pointing such things out that are supportive of the genral aims, and ways of doing so that aren't. elbows was clearly the latter.
and the campaign isn't based on 'mangled' statistics, it is based on clear and stated staisitcs. It doesnt say anywhere that 'in a socialist society not one of these people would have died', so there is no mangling. It is also clear that nothing like that number need to die, or would die if this government gave pensioners a 'fair deal'. Or even just proper winter fuel payments.
and the campaign isn't based on 'mangled' statistics, it is based on clear and stated staisitcs. It doesnt say anywhere that 'in a socialist society not one of these people would have died', so there is no mangling. It is also clear that nothing like that number need to die, or would die if this government gave pensioners a 'fair deal'. Or even just proper winter fuel payments.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Well it is - it's using a flat stat for all winter deaths of old people, while it should be using 'This is the number of additional deaths that can be directly ascribed to fuel poverty among OAPs'. The apparent claim is that all of these deaths will be caused directly by fuel poverty. Same goes for the muppet in that Morning Star article claiming that energy efficiency and insulation work won't help, whereas in fact it's a far better long term approach to take to this country's quite frankly appalling housing stock insofar as the houses will require less energy to heat, feel warmer and cosier because they won't be drafty (draughty? I can never figure that one out) AND lower CO2 emissions...and of course, it's something that needs to be done one time only, so isn't a reactive, emergency measure.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I'd agree that somewhere the number of additional deaths should get a mention, but that's not a reason to slake the whole campaign. There is no 'apparent claim' that all are caused directly by fuel poverty as far as I can see, i think the vast majority of readers will be quite capable of seeing what the figures actually say.
And there is no claim that insulation won't help at all - the muppet says it wont help anyone pay their bills this month - which it wont. Of course the measures you mention are required - BOTH should be implemented. And once the insulation is there the extra payments might not be required, but large numbers of pensioners cant afford that wait.
And there is no claim that insulation won't help at all - the muppet says it wont help anyone pay their bills this month - which it wont. Of course the measures you mention are required - BOTH should be implemented. And once the insulation is there the extra payments might not be required, but large numbers of pensioners cant afford that wait.
Pensioners are dying of cold because the basic pension is too low. It needs to be increased by at least 50%.
Agree with treelover part of the problem is the liberal left. I dont know how many marches were organised by lefties in the 80s calling for more money for a privelleged group like Higher education students but i think it might just have been a bit more than ones calling for an increase in the basic pension.
Agree with treelover part of the problem is the liberal left. I dont know how many marches were organised by lefties in the 80s calling for more money for a privelleged group like Higher education students but i think it might just have been a bit more than ones calling for an increase in the basic pension.
That makes no sense whatsover.
Pensioners have been dying of cold in the UK for years before New Labour got in. Labour could and should have done more to increase the basic state pension.
The spurious left that exists in my mind are confused and angry liberals who seem incapable of understanding that Socialism is not some narrow cult for manic depressives with ego issues.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
No one expects anything else from the official tories, Labour broke its promises to give pensioners a fair deal. Your lot, your 'socialists.' It is you and yours who have chosen the priorities of this government, and those priorities are safeguarding the already well off.
And, how can it be your fictitious lefts fault? Even after they spent all that time organising student demos, they didnt win their demands. So its hardly likely they would have won a better deal for pensiners, is it? Just another excuse for you to trot out your right-wing claptrap as per usual
And, how can it be your fictitious lefts fault? Even after they spent all that time organising student demos, they didnt win their demands. So its hardly likely they would have won a better deal for pensiners, is it? Just another excuse for you to trot out your right-wing claptrap as per usual
It was me that chose the priorities of this government......er.......belboid have a lie down...............
elbows
Well-Known Member
I can quite understand why you may take issue with some of the things I said.
But I am sad if my post reads like I dont support the general aims at all. I do, which is why I went on about crap housing stock and my fears for our energy future, and went on to suggest that maybe older folks should get first dibs on better housing in future.
All the same I will continue to have contempt for misleading statistics, that distort the scale of the problem. Its jut a personal trait of mine, no matter how noble the cause, I hate misleading information.
I think that the right to food and suitable housing should be a basic human right for all. I would like a society where we deny ourselves luxuries unless basic standards of living are attained by all.
The excess winter death statistics bother me far less than the stats about how much poverty reduces life expectancy. I have nothing against old people, though if I was forced to choose, I would pay more attention to poverties effects on children than people who have already had a good innings. But this is silly anyway because there need be no choice between them, both can be tackled.
Another seemingly controversial point I make on u75 is that the bank bailout was not just about saving rich bankers. I think it was a necessary step to prevent rapid total collapse. But it does raise an interesting issue, that when the system is under threat, hundreds of billions can be found, but when it comes to spending to save some people from the ravages of poverty, there are questions about whether we can afford it = sick.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Dont you think that one of the reasons people support subsidised higher education opportunities, is that it is a way to lift some people from the poverty trap?
Students from privileged backgrounds do not need more money, but people without money should certainly be given the privilege of a free education, and then decades later they may have less chance of being cold.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
but I still don't think there are any misleading statistics in the MS article. It simply states 'this many are expected to die from cold this year, equating to this many a day' etc it is all accurate, and I think it's a tad patronising to thnk that no one else is capable of reading those stats for what they are.
As for poverty, it would seem a bit odd for someone from Help the Aged or the National Pensioners Convention to go 'poverty is really bad, but don't bother about us, help the kiddies out instead'
As for poverty, it would seem a bit odd for someone from Help the Aged or the National Pensioners Convention to go 'poverty is really bad, but don't bother about us, help the kiddies out instead'
elbows
Well-Known Member
Fair enough, we dont agree at all on that. I dont think its patronising to point out that the article has a misleading slant.
For example:
Yes, thats because they government are incapable of stopping a lot of them. I would love to know how many are preventable, not by paying people to come up with more statistics, but by throwing resources at the problem until nobody is avoidably cold.
I'll say something else that may make me unpopular - I dont believe the idea that spending 10% of your income on fuel bills = fuel poverty. Fuel is one of the important basics of life, several generations have been very lucky that we've exploited energy supplies that took a very long time to be formed. This has given us a silly attitude towards the cost of energy. Why should the cost of fuel not make up a considerable proportion of my expenditure?
For example:
Yes, thats because they government are incapable of stopping a lot of them. I would love to know how many are preventable, not by paying people to come up with more statistics, but by throwing resources at the problem until nobody is avoidably cold.
I'll say something else that may make me unpopular - I dont believe the idea that spending 10% of your income on fuel bills = fuel poverty. Fuel is one of the important basics of life, several generations have been very lucky that we've exploited energy supplies that took a very long time to be formed. This has given us a silly attitude towards the cost of energy. Why should the cost of fuel not make up a considerable proportion of my expenditure?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
It's perfectly possible to stop a hell of a lot of them.
As for your second point, it's a total nonsense. Food, clothes, housing* also cost a significant proportion of income, if more than 10% is going on fuel, it simply doesn't leave enough for those things, let alone anything as decadent as the odd evening in the pub, or at a match or whatever.
* all of which you could equally well make case for being 'too cheap'
As for your second point, it's a total nonsense. Food, clothes, housing* also cost a significant proportion of income, if more than 10% is going on fuel, it simply doesn't leave enough for those things, let alone anything as decadent as the odd evening in the pub, or at a match or whatever.
* all of which you could equally well make case for being 'too cheap'
elbows
Well-Known Member
I never suggested they should. I was talking about my priorities, not theirs.
But I will complain about the following, now you mention it:
Does it have to be a competition to see who can claim to be treated the worst? Kids have no control over their circumstance, at least the old have had a lifetime to try to get themselves into a better position.
And I will repeat my point about people sometimes being their own worst enemies. He mentions pensioners worying about whether they can afford to put the heating on. Some of those worries are not caused by actual poverty, but by mindset, unreasonable fear about how poor they are, failure to keep up with the effects of inflation. Some people are freezing themselves needlessly, and there are other ways of making them realise they can afford not to scrimp on the heating, than just throwing more money at them.
On that note, I wish there were a whole raft of services which could help some of these other issues of old age. I would like there to be more opportunities for people to remain in their own homes, but have things that they cannot grasp properly, taken care of for them. If bills and the fear of poverty are ruining some lives, take that fear away from them by having organisations that look after the bills for them, and reasure them.
This controversial point is sponsored by my personal experience of both sets of grandparents. Both had managed to accrue some wealth over their long years of hard work, but lost the ability to judge its value properly. They were saving it for a rainy day that never came, and they had a much worse standard of living than they could of actually afforded. I wanted them to spend the money rather than have their kids inherit it, but as they are humans with as much right to make their own choices, its tricky. My grandad used to joke about not wanting to be the richest man in the cemetery, well he didnt have that much money but he sure didnt spend what he had in the last few years, when they needed it most. Tragic.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Thats a problem - neither you or I have any idea how many of those are preventable, because the stats we were given in that article werent terribly revealing about such realities. I will go and research as much as I can to see if I can give a rough indicator of how much death the fuel poverty issue is causing.
elbows
Well-Known Member
There is probably a good deal of nonsense in my posts, but I stand by my basic point that humans have been living off energy resources that are extremely expensive in terms of what actually went into the fossil fuels forming in the first place, how long that took, compared to how quickly we have used it up.
In exchange for doing meaningful work, the minimum I would expect in return is to be able to eat enough, keep warm and dry in conditions that arent too cramped, be treated for illness, and to enjoy a dignified and comfortable retirement. I have a bleak view of how we will support ourselves in future, which does not involve spending a large proportion of our income on relative luxuries.
Similar threads
- Poll
