Homes go for £800 - could it happen here?

sabretoothtigger

That mostly applies to telephone, accounting and technology development I think since the distance is less of a factor in the cost of the final product.
Not all Indians are peasants, they are very capable hence the threat

carolt

GDB2222 wrote: »

The trouble is that people who can only earn minimum wage are barely better off working than not. I know they only lose part of their benefits when they earn, but it does cut the effective wage that they earn to way less than the minimum. It's hard to motivate people in that position.

True, but I don't think it's impossible or even very difficult to come up with a system where that doesn't apply - the road-sweeping thing for the unemployed I seem to remember the govt mooting a little while back, for instance.

Getting a real job seems like a fag when the alternative is sitting on your !!!! watching daytime tv. It sems a darn sight more appealing when you're out in all weathers picking up leaves, say.

Likewise, the disabled. Obviously, some can't work. But many can, just not in the jobs they used to do, necessarily. So finding what the could do, ie what they were able to do, rather than viewing them as not so much disabled as unable to do anything, would help all of us, them most of all.

And single mothers can work, too. As a mother, I had to work when my children were small or we would have starved - literally. I can't see why single mothers should be exempted from the work that mothers in couples are obliged to do, just by virtue of their single status.

Anyway, my point is that a full welfare state for those who really cannot work, or are too old to work, is perfectly affordable. The trouble is persuading all those living off benefits that this is in their interests too. :rolleyes:

IT_nerd

amcluesent wrote: »

IIRC on the TV this week they features some Asian lads who had 20 properties out for rent bought with money from 'friends'.

I saw that show. And I think it was good on them.
They're probably giving 8% returns to their friends that invested, and they don't have to worry about paying a mortgage.
Bloody good business if you ask me.
When the !!!! BTLers cave because they got 100% mortgages these guys will be there to buy them out.

Generali

Sapphire wrote: »

The former group have also paid tax and national insurance all their lives, and have led productive lives.

It's disgusting and shameful that a supposedly advanced country like Great Britain has one of the lowest pension provisions in the whole of Europe.

They have and unfortunately they have been lied to by successive Governments (both Labour and Tory) that they can have a pension without paying for it and that they can pay less tax by promising Government workers that they can have pensions that haven't been paid for. Of course anyone that looked at that proposition would realise that it's rubbish but it's a very seductive promise and pretty much the whole country was suckered in.

Of course many other European countries with 'more generous' pension schemes have merely promised something even less likely to be realised. In France for example, many people in jobs in the public sector (and in many heavily regulated private sector areas) expect to have retired by the age of 55 at the very latest.

Sapphire wrote: »

Also that the 'government', as a way of avoiding the issue, has fooled people by making them think they can rely on property for their pensions. This has caused problems for (and resentment in) other people who don't have properties and would like to buy one (as well as those who rightly did not believe the rulers and did not 'invest' in property).

Almost Gordon Brown's first act on becoming Chancellor of the Exchequor was to increase the taxes on private pension schemes. That is the single most destructive act against private savings that I can think of to have happened in the UK.

It is interesting to see that the Government has acted to prop up the bank system having refused to do the same for the private pension system when Equitable Life went under.

Sapphire wrote: »

I cannot stand this 'government'. :mad:

Nor I.

paulherts

Why does everyone slag the police pension after thirty years (thirty five now). I pay for my pension I do a job that brings me into daily contact with situations that the general public never have to suffer.

I work in Central London and when you deal with people almost constantly that live off welfare, who are fit and healthy, that would seem to be an area that needs addressing not picking on public servants.

It is not the police officers fault that government after government have failed to invest the 11% that every officer contributes from their wages for their pensions.

Sapphire

paulherts wrote: »

Why does everyone slag the police pension after thirty years (thirty five now). I pay for my pension I do a job that brings me into daily contact with situations that the general public never have to suffer.

I work in Central London and when you deal with people almost constantly that live off welfare, who are fit and healthy, that would seem to be an area that needs addressing not picking on public servants.

It is not the police officers fault that government after government have failed to invest the 11% that every officer contributes from their wages for their pensions.

I would agree with you. What I cannot stomach, however, is MPs voting in high pensions for themselves while ordinary working people get the bare minimum in order to survive; also that those who have tried to safeguard their future in a minimal way are now being pounded because of the excesses of the financial sector. Meanwhile that sector is stealing money from taxpayers and awarding itself bonuses, high salaries and high pensions. And the 'government' does nothing.

As I said above, it shouldn't happen in a country that prides itself on being 'advanced'. We should be leaders in adequate and fair pension provision in Europe, not trailing far behind countries like Greece, Turkey, France and many others.

Sapphire

Generali wrote: »

Of course many other European countries with 'more generous' pension schemes have merely promised something even less likely to be realised. In France for example, many people in jobs in the public sector (and in many heavily regulated private sector areas) expect to have retired by the age of 55 at the very latest.

Almost Gordon Brown's first act on becoming Chancellor of the Exchequor was to increase the taxes on private pension schemes. That is the single most destructive act against private savings that I can think of to have happened in the UK.

It is interesting to see that the Government has acted to prop up the bank system having refused to do the same for the private pension system when Equitable Life went under.

From non-English friends and family living abroad, I am hearing that people generally are getting decent state pensions (whether they have savings or not) and retiring at 55. (Personally, I wouldn't know what to do with myself if I retired at 55 – I like being productive, though one can always slow down a bit if it is affordable.)

Your points about the 'government's' actions are very true. :mad:

Generali

paulherts wrote: »

Why does everyone slag the police pension after thirty years (thirty five now). I pay for my pension I do a job that brings me into daily contact with situations that the general public never have to suffer.

I work in Central London and when you deal with people almost constantly that live off welfare, who are fit and healthy, that would seem to be an area that needs addressing not picking on public servants.

It is not the police officers fault that government after government have failed to invest the 11% that every officer contributes from their wages for their pensions.

You are right IMO to say that it is not the fault of the policeman that the Government has promised in the tax payers' names that they will receive a certain pension according to their contract.

It is the fault of the politicians that they made that promise knowing that they had no way of providing for it and it is the fault of the electorate that they took these promises at face value without scrutiny.

Sapphire wrote: »

From non-English friends and family living abroad, I am hearing that people generally are getting decent state pensions (whether they have savings or not) and retiring at 55. (Personally, I wouldn't know what to do with myself if I retired at 55 – I like being productive, though one can always slow down a bit if it is affordable.)

People are at present getting state pensions at 55 in many countries. My argument is that the taxpayers can't afford those pensions and so this won't last.

Sapphire wrote: »

Your points about the 'government's' actions are very true. :mad:

I agree but then I would!

hethmar

It always depresses me how many "man hours" of work are being wasted every day in this country. Just think of all the improvements that could be made if everyone who claimed dole had to make a contribution to society.