30/11 Strikes.

[MagicBoy]

You want your pension to be subsidised with other people's money. That by definition is pure socialism.

No I do not. The LGPS is not directly funded out of tax revenues.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

the deal being offered by the government is extremely generous considering the current economic state.

And what is this deal you speak of?

 

[dirtydog]

No I do not. The LGPS is not directly funded out of tax revenues.

If the money isn't yours, it's someone else's. Someone else's money which you are greedily eyeing up. All money is either yours or someone else's.

 

[FuriousGeorge]

You want your pension to be subsidised with other people's money. That by definition is pure socialism.

You do realise that private sector pensions are effectively subsidised with other peoples money in the form of Pension Relief?

 

[dirtydog]

You do realise that private sector pensions are effectively subsidised with other peoples money in the form of Pension Relief?

Yes. And it is debtable whether that should continue either.

 

[MagicBoy]

I think all I and others are saying is this: you can have as generous a pension as you like, so long as YOU pay for it.

Why is that not fair?

Stop spouting propagandist rubbish.

I am paying for it.

Six and a bit percent of my wages go into the pension fund with a matching contribution from the employer. The local fund is in surplus and can meet all existing and future liabilities. There is no need for a contribution increase as the Government keep insisting.

If you believe that arrangement is overly generous, then take it up with the many private sector companies that run similar schemes.

 

[Hagar]

You're talking out of your **** - there is no pay equality between London and the rest of the country - nearly all public sector salaries have a weighting for inner and outer London - take a look at the teachers pay scales for example.

I am not talking about weighting, I an talking basic pay agreed nationally. Weighting is unfair on other cities also.

My premise is that it should be agreed locally so that all these factors including affordability are agreed based on where the job is located and the associated costs.

 

[MagicBoy]

If the money isn't yours, it's someone else's. Someone else's money which you are greedily eyeing up. All money is either yours or someone else's.

What are you smoking, and can I have some please?

 

[dirtydog]

Stop spouting propagandist rubbish.

I am paying for it.

Six and a bit percent of my wages go into the pension fund with a matching contribution from the employer. The local fund is in surplus and can meet all existing and future liabilities. There is no need for a contribution increase as the Government keep insisting.

If you believe that arrangement is overly generous, then take it up with the many private sector companies that run similar schemes.

No you are paying TOWARDS it. The rest is subsidised by other people's money.

You can argue in favour of that by all means, but please don't pretend that what you are currently paying is sufficient on its own to fund the pension you want.

 

[bam0]

If the money isn't yours, it's someone else's. Someone else's money which you are greedily eyeing up. All money is either yours or someone else's.

So because they're paid from taxation and the employer contributions come from taxation they shouldn't get any of it? Or do you think there is some direct conduit from tax revenues to these pension schemes?

 

[MagicBoy]

No you are paying TOWARDS it. The rest is subsidised by other people's money.

Such as?

 

[dirtydog]

So because they're paid from taxation and the employer contributions come from taxation they shouldn't get any of it? Or do you think there is some direct conduit from tax revenues to these pension schemes?

No I'm not saying that.

The money they earn is theirs. It WAS someone else's, but by doing their job, they earn their pay and it becomes theirs.

Their pension should come from that money alone. What could possibly be fairer. People paying for their own pension provision. Not forcing others to pay for it.

 

[dirtydog]

Under the government proposals the pensions would still be heavily subsidised, yet incredibly, the unions and union members are demanding more Truly unbelievable.

 

[RDM]

Yeah all teachers are out living the life of Riley right now. None could possibly be sat at home marking work, planning lessons etc.

That isn't really striking is it?

 

[Deleted User 234324]

I work in the public sector, can't afford to pay anything into a pension as all my money is taken up with just living, not been on holiday in years. No pay rise in god knows how long yet the cost of living has increased substantially over the past few years alone.

Now you may just think well get another job then, trust me i've been looking but there is nothing and im reluctant to move away from family/friends again.

 

[bam0]

No I'm not saying that.

The money they earn is theirs. It WAS someone else's, but by doing their job, they earn their pay and it becomes theirs.

Their pension should come from that money alone. What could possibly be fairer. People paying for their own pension provision. Not forcing others to pay for it.

They make a contribution, and the employer makes a contribution, the same as most pension funds. As far as I'm aware these schemes aren't being additionally funded from another source, are they?

 

[elmarko]

That's bordering on a insult. Carry on and I'll be clicking the RTM button.

Wanna see my "I love Maggie" hat from the 87 General Election?

I would have thought it was a compliment .

But I agree, this isn't a left/right wing issue at all.

 

[ubersonic]

They make a contribution, and the employer makes a contribution, the same as most pension funds. As far as I'm aware these schemes aren't being additionally funded from another source, are they?

The employer in this case is the taxpayer.

 

[topshot]

I work in the public sector, can't afford to pay anything into a pension as all my money is taken up with just living, not been on holiday in years. No pay rise in god knows how long yet the cost of living has increased substantially over the past few years alone.

This isnt the case for teachers though, and yet they still have the cheek to moan. They should look at the cuts other countries are making to public sector workers and be thankful they have a secure job with a comfortable pension. It's all want want want with teachers and their unions, i can only dream of someone matching my pension contributions

 

[Dolph]

So because they're paid from taxation and the employer contributions come from taxation they shouldn't get any of it? Or do you think there is some direct conduit from tax revenues to these pension schemes?

Employer contributions should remain, in line with the rest of the economy or maybe a bit above.

The issue is that the current contributions do not come close to covering the cost of the pension.