Triple-lock on pensions will stay. Pensions will increase when earnings have decreased

Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,968
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,361
All trust fund babies?

Home ownership for 24-34 people is 27% for people with middle 20% income. 20 years ago? It was 65%.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/bns/BN224.pdf

You just confirmed you’re in your own bubble of rich kids, with no clue about how the rest of the population lives.

Nope 2 are from a scheme. One has head screwed on straight and worked her way up. The other got lucky as she's incapable but she's now at her limit and much lower down than the other and won't progress but she is doing well and she was living with her mum until she decided to giver up her flash car to save for a house.

So she doesn't have a car anymore but she does have her own flat.

They live in Cumbernauld and I think the other is in Hamilton.

Why don't you go look at house prices in those areas? Then come back before replying.

It's not where trust fund types stay.

You are blinded by tunnel vision and only see what you want to see.

You can buy a flat in Cumbernauld for like £40k.
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Dec 2004
Posts
12,770
Good post. Will read again.

Wrong on both accounts. Won't stop you though.

It's plain to see that you spend most of your time playing the big man on forums, anyone can check your post history. Anyone that pays attention will have noticed your occasional little slip that gives away this pretence of being independently wealthy outside of your family's estate. Then coming on and playing the model of financial prudence in between posting about your thousands of pounds of headphones or whatever BS you're coming out with next. :D

Full of it mate. You don't kid anyone.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2019
Posts
341
Location
U.K.
The problem with that argument is that the places to live need to be close to places of employment that pay enough to pay for the mortgage.

Or travel. Back in the 80s, and actually even up until fairly recently (might still be going on for all I know) there was very good money to be made working in London in construction - guys commuting from the North - i.e. Newcastle, 4 hours on the train, 10 hours on site, 4 hours back, six sometimes seven days a week. Proper graft, couple of years of that and they have bought themselves a decent property.

Actually I know of plenty of millennials have built businesses and property empires from scratch in the last 15 years, just not you. U mad bro?

Last year I was involved in a project in East Anglia and the guys were commuting from Middlesbrough, when they finished the job on the Friday they were home for the weekend and starting in Cardiff on the Monday.
If you want the work that badly, you will travel. I liked my 20-minute commute but it costs me at least 50% reduction of my potential earning or more. My choice, I’m not crying.

No one is talking about robbing pensioners. To rob someone would imply that they have owned it to begin with. The current pensioners have not paid enough to cover their own retirement and therefore need the working generation to support them.

They have paid into a state pension scheme at a point in time where that was pretty much all there was universally available - and they were promised it would provide for them in their retirement. They own and are owed it.
What you are doing is moving the goalposts because those managing the funds have failed to calculate the shortfall. That is not the fault of those that paid into it in good faith for forty years.

FYI, the working generation fund the state pension of the retired generation, that has been the case since the Beveridges proposals of the 1940's. That's how it works.

Consider today, if the investment fund goes bust and takes your private pension pot with it, is it your fault for not "covering for your retirement"? That's happened plenty of times too in the past.
Of course those that were smart took advantage of the property boom and invested for their retirement by acquiring and trading up the property ladder - but apparently by "covering for their retirement" this was also wrong. So which is it?

That is the problem with this system and an unprecedented increase (predicted 18%)

Yeah and on top of all that rental income he still wants a 18% state pension increase!

But nobody is really expecting an 18% increase, apart from Hayco, and he is just trolling for the lulz, if you hadn’t worked that out.
There are plenty of reasonable posts in this thread have showed how they will likely work around the issue of an artificial spike - but I guess sheeple would rather be salty and outraged instead of using independent thought. :)
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,361
It's plain to see that you spend most of your time playing the big man on forums, anyone can check your post history. Anyone that pays attention will have noticed your occasional little slip that gives away this pretence of being independently wealthy outside of your family's estate. Then coming on and playing the model of financial prudence in between posting about your thousands of pounds of headphones or whatever BS you're coming out with next. :D

Full of it mate. You don't kid anyone.

So your saying it's impossible to have a okay job and for your parents to have done okay too? That for me to be doing okay I what took their money? I bought my home, cars, everything without a single cent from my parents.

I had a large deposit thanks to living at home and saving what I could whilst working 2-3 jobs.
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
42,567
Location
Co Durham
Or travel. Back in the 80s, and actually even up until fairly recently (might still be going on for all I know) there was very good money to be made working in London in construction - guys commuting from the North - i.e. Newcastle, 4 hours on the train, 10 hours on site, 4 hours back, six sometimes seven days a week. Proper graft, couple of years of that and they have bought themselves a decent property.

Actually I know of plenty of millennials have built businesses and property empires from scratch in the last 15 years, just not you. U mad bro?

Last year I was involved in a project in East Anglia and the guys were commuting from Middlesbrough, when they finished the job on the Friday they were home for the weekend and starting in Cardiff on the Monday.
If you want the work that badly, you will travel. I liked my 20-minute commute but it costs me at least 50% reduction of my potential earning or more. My choice, I’m not crying.



They have paid into a state pension scheme at a point in time where that was pretty much all there was universally available - and they were promised it would provide for them inboom and invested for their retirement by acquiring and trading up the property ladder - but apparently by "covering for their retirement" this was also wrong. So whi



But nobody is really expecting an 18% increase, apart from Hayco, and he is just trolling for the lulz, if you hadn’t worked that out.
There are plenty of reasonable posts in this thread have showed how they will likely work around the issue of an artificial spike - but I guess sheeple would rather be salty and outraged instead of using independent thought. :)

well they had their chance to temp change it but didn’t so what you are saying is they are just trolling and will actually change it next year then? Please stop the insults as well. Forgive us sheeple for actually think when the government does something they are actually going to do it and not u turn

plus you totally ignored the point. Some posters on here are demanding their 18% and say they are owed it and deserve it. Your post didn’t answer that at all
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Dec 2004
Posts
12,770
So your saying it's impossible to have a okay job and for your parents to have done okay too? That for me to be doing okay I what took their money? I bought my home, cars, everything without a single cent from my parents.

I had a large deposit thanks to living at home and saving what I could whilst working 2-3 jobs.

Well that may or may not one of the truths you scatter conservatively amid your posts, but I still can't respect a guy that was only 3rd tallest in his class.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2019
Posts
341
Location
U.K.
well they had their chance to temp change it but didn’t so what you are saying is they are just trolling and will actually change it next year then?

I don't think you have quite understood how politics, or politicians for that matter work, that's genuinely not meant as an insult BTW.

There is no way Boris will risk upsetting voters by breaking manifesto promises and abandoning the triple lock at a time that is difficult and he needs to be seen to be in control of the chancellor. That was obvious as soon as it was even announced.
They might explore the option by suggesting that they might consider it, gauge the response from the public and then back down and propose an alternative option that is more palatable depending on the pushback - this is pretty standard political procedure.

i.e.

"We are thinking of doing this big thing which will really upset you"
"Oh no actually we changed our mind and now we are going to do this much smaller thing, which will still upset you, but now you are much happier to accept it because we didn't do the big thing"

Call it trolling if you will, but politics is just a game at the end of the day, and the public is always the one getting played.

Please stop the insults as well. Forgive us sheeple for actually think when the government does something they are actually going to do it and not u turn

OK, fair point, but there is a limit to how much BS one can stomach before the inevitable eruption of bile, and this thread is already at bursting point.
If you want advice you can take to the bank, never trust a government to do anything they say. Ever - that's as sure as death and taxes my friend. Always look for the angle, it will be there somewhere.

plus you totally ignored the point. Some posters on here are demanding their 18% and say they are owed it and deserve it. Your post didn’t answer that at all

I haven't seen anybody demanding an 18% increase in pensions.
Plenty of people saying that the current pension is atrocious, which it is.
Plenty of people defending the triple lock, which is acceptable with a predicted 2.5% increase IMO.
Plenty defending the rights of poor pensioners, which is admirable.

So unless I missed it, I don't think I've seen one post so far claiming that pensioners should get an 18% increase - just a lot of people complaining they will do, without any basis on fact.
 
Associate
Joined
21 Jun 2004
Posts
1,356
Actually I know of plenty of millennials have built businesses and property empires from scratch in the last 15 years, just not you. U mad bro?

I own a house and looking to upsize to bigger house next year. As a couple our combined income is in the top 5% nationally, so no I’m not mad.

If you want the work that badly, you will travel. I liked my 20-minute commute but it costs me at least 50% reduction of my potential earning or more. My choice, I’m not crying.
My average commute has been over an hour each way for the last 7 years of my life. So I’m more than happy with my choices. I wasn’t implying you need to be able to walk to work, but talking about Swansea prices only works if there is employment for your role available there.

They have paid into a state pension scheme at a point in time where that was pretty much all there was universally available - and they were promised it would provide for them in their retirement. They own and are owed it.
What you are doing is moving the goalposts because those managing the funds have failed to calculate the shortfall. That is not the fault of those that paid into it in good faith for forty years.

The issue is that people are living for far longer with significant care and pension costs associated. They made no provision for their own pension or care, but expect the working generation to pay for it. I don’t think anyone thinks the pension should be stopped. But a 20% universal increase makes no sense when it will cripple the working generation, particularly when my parents will get an increase despite having their own final salary pensions and saving money each month already. Changes need to be means tested. The worst part is knowing you will pay hundreds of thousands in NI with the expectation that you will never be able to claim a government pensions as it will be means tested by the time I’m 75/77.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2019
Posts
341
Location
U.K.
The issue is that people are living for far longer with significant care and pension costs associated. They made no provision for their own pension or care, but expect the working generation to pay for it.

Life expectancy has been going up for some time, it is not just younger generations that have had to consider the burden of care for the elderly.
They have made provision for their pension - it is called a state pension, that is what you paid into. It was that, your mortgage and the man from the pru.

Private pensions as the de facto standard is a relatively modern concept, and generally it was those with good jobs that had a company pension scheme, and even for most boomers final salary was approaching extinction.
It is unreasonable to expect anybody to have been able to have predicted the current situation 40+ years ago, not least the average person starting work.

I don’t think anyone thinks the pension should be stopped. But a 20% universal increase makes no sense when it will cripple the working generation, particularly when my parents will get an increase despite having their own final salary pensions and saving money each month already. Changes need to be means tested.

Again, these rash statements are creeping in. Nobody has said the pension should be stopped, and nobody has said they should get a 20% increase (notice how it’s up from 18% already, 25% next week :p).

What was being talked about was removing a 2.5% minimum guarantee on the triple lock to save 4bn per year for five years - which has now been rescinded.
That is it. Everything else is noise and so much BS

The worst part is knowing you will pay hundreds of thousands in NI with the expectation that you will never be able to claim a government pensions as it will be means tested by the time I’m 75/77.
But isn’t that is exactly what you are proposing? and it seems reasonable to me – the wealthy pay in and those that need it the most benefit from it. Cake, have, eat - choose one.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
28,680
Location
Cornwall
*ding ding* We have another that doesn't understand the facts :rolleyes: Congratulations…

https://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/.../lloyds-bank-affordable-cities-2019-final.pdf
mtd3Exx.png


Woops, looks like Oxford, Chichester, Winchester and Truro are all more unaffordable than Greater London. And Bath and Cambridge are tied… Oh and I'm sure ( :rolleyes: ) that the step down to 9.7, 9.6, 9.3 and 9.1 for the remaining cities shown really make it that much easier for people.

EDIT: Oh sorry I see you found a £45k flat in Swansea. I stand corrected. Absolute lols from this end of the stadium, Graham :rolleyes:
Woot, I'm in the top #4! Winning! :p
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
42,567
Location
Co Durham
I don't think you have quite understood how politics, or politicians for that matter work, that's genuinely not meant as an insult BTW.

There is no way Boris will risk upsetting voters by breaking manifesto promises and abandoning the triple lock at a time that is difficult and he needs to be seen to be in control of the chancellor. That was obvious as soon as it was even announced.
They might explore the option by suggesting that they might consider it, gauge the response from the public and then back down and propose an alternative option that is more palatable depending on the pushback - this is pretty standard political procedure.

i.e.

"We are thinking of doing this big thing which will really upset you"
"Oh no actually we changed our mind and now we are going to do this much smaller thing, which will still upset you, but now you are much happier to accept it because we didn't do the big thing"

Call it trolling if you will, but politics is just a game at the end of the day, and the public is always the one getting played.



OK, fair point, but there is a limit to how much BS one can stomach before the inevitable eruption of bile, and this thread is already at bursting point.
If you want advice you can take to the bank, never trust a government to do anything they say. Ever - that's as sure as death and taxes my friend. Always look for the angle, it will be there somewhere.



I haven't seen anybody demanding an 18% increase in pensions.
Plenty of people saying that the current pension is atrocious, which it is.
Plenty of people defending the triple lock, which is acceptable with a predicted 2.5% increase IMO.
Plenty defending the rights of poor pensioners, which is admirable.

So unless I missed it, I don't think I've seen one post so far claiming that pensioners should get an 18% increase - just a lot of people complaining they will do, without any basis on fact.
At least two people have posted that the triple lock is the triple lock and if that means its 18% next year then tough. They have said they would feel robbed it it was pulled back to a sensible 2.5% as a one off.

the fact is currently by law the triple lock will give an 18% increase unless somebody does something and changes the law or finds another clever way to cheat the calcs
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,361
At least two people have posted that the triple lock is the triple lock and if that means its 18% next year then tough. They have said they would feel robbed it it was pulled back to a sensible 2.5% as a one off.

Out of interest why would it be 18%?

What's gone up 18% in the past year?
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
42,567
Location
Co Durham
Out of interest why would it be 18%?

What's gone up 18% in the past year?

the averages wages of the triple lock is based on July to July. In July we had 9 million people on furlough and the average wage had dropped by 18% from last year.

assuming the economy doesn’t collapse it is reasonable to assume that wages will return to normal levels next July and the av wage increase will be 18% and hence according to the triple lock pensions will increase by 18%

Rishi wants to take a temporary break from the triple lock next year and with a double lock pensioners would probably get 2.5% again and then go back to triple lock next year. Boris overruled him and said triple lock was a manifesto promise.

So now somebody has to figure out how to cheat/fudge the figures so the triple lock doesn’t come up with 18%.

I thought most people in the times of covid and special circumstances would understand 18% was a stupid and unjustified increase but several posters in here are defending it and saying that pensioners deserve the 18% increase. That’s the bit im arguing against.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Sep 2010
Posts
24,552
the averages wages of the triple lock is based on July to July. In July we had 9 million people on furlough and the average wage had dropped by 18% from last year.

assuming the economy doesn’t collapse it is reasonable to assume that wages will return to normal levels next July and the av wage increase will be 18% and hence according to the triple lock pensions will increase by 18%

Rishi wants to take a temporary break from the triple lock next year and with a double lock pensioners would probably get 2.5% again and then go back to triple lock next year. Boris overruled him and said triple lock was a manifesto promise.

So now somebody has to figure out how to cheat/fudge the figures so the triple lock doesn’t come up with 18%.

I thought most people in the times of covid and special circumstances would understand 18% was a stupid and unjustified increase but several posters in here are defending it and saying that pensioners deserve the 18% increase. That’s the bit im arguing against.

The Secretary of State can estimate the general level of earnings in any manner they think fit. It could be argued as reasonable to exclude increases due going from furlough pay back to full pay as that isn't a true reflection due to exceptional circumstances.
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,361
the averages wages of the triple lock is based on July to July. In July we had 9 million people on furlough and the average wage had dropped by 18% from last year.

assuming the economy doesn’t collapse it is reasonable to assume that wages will return to normal levels next July and the av wage increase will be 18% and hence according to the triple lock pensions will increase by 18%

Rishi wants to take a temporary break from the triple lock next year and with a double lock pensioners would probably get 2.5% again and then go back to triple lock next year. Boris overruled him and said triple lock was a manifesto promise.

So now somebody has to figure out how to cheat/fudge the figures so the triple lock doesn’t come up with 18%.

I thought most people in the times of covid and special circumstances would understand 18% was a stupid and unjustified increase but several posters in here are defending it and saying that pensioners deserve the 18% increase. That’s the bit im arguing against.

I very much doubt that wages are going to go back to normal within a single year.

Many industries have been ruined.

Cinemas, airline industry, hotels, indoor entertainment like comedy clubs, theatres, etc. Nightclubs are ruined.

A lot of independent cafes that relied on offices and footfall.

It would be mental for them to bounce back within a year. It will take many years to go back to the way things were and only if there is a vaccine that works long term.

The high street was already dying this has pretty put another nail in that coffin.

I'd bet good money it's never going to be 18%
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Dec 2009
Posts
9,913
I very much doubt that wages are going to go back to normal within a single year.

Many industries have been ruined.

Cinemas, airline industry, hotels, indoor entertainment like comedy clubs, theatres, etc. Nightclubs are ruined.

A lot of independent cafes that relied on offices and footfall.

It would be mental for them to bounce back within a year. It will take many years to go back to the way things were and only if there is a vaccine that works long term.

The high street was already dying this has pretty put another nail in that coffin.

I'd bet good money it's never going to be 18%

A substantial increase in unemployment presumably takes those newly jobless people out of next year's average salary calculation.
 
Top