"Peter Smyth" wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ...

In message , at 12:07:41 on
Sun, 23 Jun 2013, Recliner remarked:
I'm still confused by your definition of "genuine retirees". You
seemed to suggest that it could be defined as people not receiving
taxable income -- would you have an age limit as well? Or would you
only include people not receiving "income from employment"? So you'd
not allow a 70-year old part-time worker to get a twirly pass?

The normal reason for proposing such restrictions is to avoid a person
with a twirly card using it was a subsidised means to "commute to work".

But if they only have a part-time job (which one can perhaps define by
the amount of income they get from it) then it might strike a better
balance than a 60yr-old merchant banker still working full time and
earning £200k having the run of London for free.

But then you could argue, why does a 60 year old banker who has taken
early retirement with a large pension get free travel, when a 60 year old
who is still working 40hrs a week on minimum wage gets nothing?

Exactly. Roland is using his value judgments to restrict universal
benefits, without appreciating that not everyone shares his values.