1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Great Pension Scandal

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Stretch, Apr 6, 2015.

  1. nkata

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 1, 2010

    Posts: 7,039

    Location: Cheshire / Staffordshire

    Oh no! Not this thread again. :( (Said in a high pitched west country accent).

    On topic, it was to be expected. To have to repeal the provisions of the 1995 and 2011 acts could have been a nightmare. I believe that there was adequate notice although it was an unfortunate adjustment for many women.
     
  2. Mercenary Keyboard Warrior

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Aug 4, 2007

    Posts: 9,629

    Location: Wilds of suffolk

    I struggled to have sympathy for them. Nothing is certain.
    I particularly found the "we want equality" but just not to affect us, in future its fine, quite galling.

    My pension age has moved 2 or 3 times since I started work, and it was pretty much illogical that women would retire earlier yet had a longer life expectancy.
     
  3. platypus

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2003

    Posts: 38,971

    Location: Rhône-Alpes+Cambridge

    I'm guessing its Faustus up to his old self-entitled, I'm alright jack tricks again. Disgustingly self-entitled and with the gall to have a go at generations following him for having the rug pulled out from underneath them.

    The baby boomers and final salary pension generation are far more self-entitled than the so called millenials.

    Oh nm didnt realise it was an old post, probably preaching to the choir.
     
  4. platypus

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2003

    Posts: 38,971

    Location: Rhône-Alpes+Cambridge

    I don't really think we should be celebrating an arguably unfair ruling based on the fact that we're broke and couldn't really afford to pay up.

    Pensions in general are an utter mess, should we just not pay them?
     
  5. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 20, 2005

    Posts: 32,185

    Location: Co Durham

    Not celebrating, just pointing out if the Govt had lost then everything they had promised this week at the conference would have gone up in smoke.

    And yes pensions are in a mess and retirement age needs to be much higher than it it is and tax rates increased now otherwise if you think they are a mess now, wait another 10 or 20 years.
     
  6. platypus

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2003

    Posts: 38,971

    Location: Rhône-Alpes+Cambridge

    Everything they've promised at the conference might as well go up in smoke. There's nothing to fund it.
     
  7. GWANGY

    Gangster

    Joined: Apr 25, 2017

    Posts: 185

    Location: london

    Minor point .. This appeal wasnt the waspi women , it was a different group. I do have some sympathy for them , but on the fence,overall . Justice shoud be done , regardless of the cost. Which in reality will be much lower than Govt estimates. Theres not much outrage over Govts paring back of disability benefits, and qualifications for such.
    The govt has plenty of money to fund their promises . Lowest unemployment rate ever, wheres the Bonus from that ? I think they wanted to move to a situation where a large chunk of govt revenue comes from SDLT, but even thats slowing down.
    WInter is coming (recession, some have never seen it)
     
  8. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 20, 2005

    Posts: 32,185

    Location: Co Durham

    The Govt tax revenue was up 30bn this last year but that wont last. Acccounting for inflation its around half extra money. £15bn doesnt got far when you have already promised to spend over £50bn at the conference.

    The money needed to fund their promises assumes a fantastic leave deal from the EU and a booming economy. If we leave with no deal and the world goes into recession as expected then there wont be a case of there not being enough money for their promises, there wont even be enough money for current spending.

    So it will either be borrow more or raise taxes.
     
  9. SPG

    Soldato

    Joined: Jul 28, 2010

    Posts: 5,551

    Every country is broke apart from a very select few, might as well borrow.

    (plenty for the DUP and SNP though it seems.....)
     
  10. Eurofighter

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Mar 20, 2014

    Posts: 1,418

    f other countries can have decent pensions then so can we.
     
  11. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 20, 2005

    Posts: 32,185

    Location: Co Durham

    We can and could off if we accept that we all have to pay more tax or we all should have paid more tax over the previous 40 years. The Govt knew that the average lifespan was increasing year on year and didnt do anything to address it and just kicked the can down the road as they knew they wouldnt be power then.

    Contributions and/or retirement age should have increased steadily year on year for a couple of decades now. I think if you go back 50 years they only expected to pay out pensions for 4 years on average and now it would be 17 years. Its all well and good that current pensions is paid for from current taxation but if you havent factored into needing to pay 4 times the amount you used to then your figures dont add up.

    And now it becomes even more difficult. You can suddenly increase the retirement age which punishes the people who are about to retire but ignores all those people who have already retired and gained the benefit or you can start taxing current workers more tax to cover the extra costs but then that upsets the current generation as they see they have to pay more to fund the current pensioners who retired at 60/65 when they wont be able to retire until they are 69 or something.

    If tax rates had gone up slowly and retirement age had increased every 5 years or so by one year for the last 20 years then people would have got used to it and accepted it.
     
  12. Eurofighter

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Mar 20, 2014

    Posts: 1,418

    Agree.
     
  13. Mercenary Keyboard Warrior

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Aug 4, 2007

    Posts: 9,629

    Location: Wilds of suffolk

    To be honest for me there is a big difference in expecting the state to be providing a good pension for everyone, and the state providing a just about enough pension for everyone
    I think the current state pension pretty much achieves this. With one big assumption, you will not have large mortgage/rent payments to make when you retire.
    If you have housing costs to pay your going to need a really good pension, or your going to have to accept life will be difficult as you will be at the bottom and means tested.

    The politics is tricky. Should we have higher taxation with a much better state pension, or lower taxation with a lower state pension and a requirement to pay into a personal pension.
    I tend to prefer the later, it allows more opportunity to choose to pay in more for an earlier retirement, the first tends to push everyone to working later with far less opportunity to give YOLO now for "you will live much better later"
     
  14. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 20, 2005

    Posts: 32,185

    Location: Co Durham

    The problem is with people living for 17 years on average after pension age, the govt cant afford the current state pension for everybody. And for some its not enough as yous stated about those that rent. Currently there are 1m pensioners living below the poverty line and 2m just above it. That would suggest that the current pension level isnt enough.
     
  15. SPG

    Soldato

    Joined: Jul 28, 2010

    Posts: 5,551

    Make the school leaving age 20 then. A better educated sprog benefits us all, your paying for it either end anyway.
     
  16. Sheff

    Hitman

    Joined: Jun 16, 2008

    Posts: 942

    Location: Newton Abbot

    The issue with this is home ownership is decreasing so people will be more reliant on their pension to cover the cost of housing, and personal pensions push more of the risk on the individual. We probably need to do a bit of both; higher taxation with a more generous state pension which is recuperated partially from wealthier pensions via taxation (some sort of National Insurance contribution or changes to tax thresholds), with the requirement to pay into a private pension (already happening) which is made affordable by increasing the minimum wage.

    People will still be rewarded for saving more for retirement or purchasing a house, but there wouldn't be a stark divide between those that were able to afford these savings and those that weren't (or those whose pension fund was raided or didn't perform as well as expected).
     
  17. Mercenary Keyboard Warrior

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Aug 4, 2007

    Posts: 9,629

    Location: Wilds of suffolk

    Agree, kinda
    The problem with higher taxation is unless careful all your are doing is penalising those in the middle, so they will save less and want more from the state. (Its the basic dilema of higher taxes vs personal responsibility)

    All your are doing in effect is watching the growing wealth divide progress into retirement.
    Those who struggled to be able to afford their own house being in the same trap in retirement. Those who could afford their own house being significantly better off already seeing another relative difference when retired.

    Housing costs remain the most significant difference between the haves and have nots, if we address that as a nation (and i think better fair priced housing being the main solution) we have some hope
     
  18. Sheff

    Hitman

    Joined: Jun 16, 2008

    Posts: 942

    Location: Newton Abbot

    I agree with that, but that would hopefully be done alongside any other changes.
     
  19. platypus

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2003

    Posts: 38,971

    Location: Rhône-Alpes+Cambridge

    I would agree with you if it wasn't for the state of education in this country nowadays. Class sizes are ridiculous, funding is being cut left right and centre, and teacher attrition rates are higher than ever.