We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Public-private wage divide gets 50% wider
Comments
-
Former_Spice wrote: »Already happened to around two million people in Local Government Pensions. Used to be for example 25/80 of salary at age 60 (assuming employees paid for it themselves for 25 years) which is for example 25/80 of £20K in a mid paying job making a pension of £6K(a gold plated fat cat 6K, the Daily Mail says so - it must be true)
Unilaterally cut by a quarter down to a (gold plated fat cat) £4.5K for those having the cheek to ask for their own money back at 60.
Nobody outside the people effected cares and most believe tabloid nonsense that under £100 a week is a gold plated fat cat and that it's entirely taxpayer funded. Sets an obvious precedent to repeat it or apply it to other parts of the public sector.
LG employees contribute around 6% (varies with salary band) employers pay on average 18% therefore employer contributes around 75% of funding PLUS any accumulated investment underperformance (and believe me there's plenty around just now given the state of stockmarkets).
You've also omitted to 'declare' the substantial lump sum (around £18000 in your example ?)
Anyone with a private pension will have had to accumulate a fund of well over £100,000 to achieve a comparable £6000pa pension (and that ignores your lump sum benefit).
Over 25 years thats around £3000pa contribition - which compares with your LG figure of around £900pa (ie based on an average salary of £15,000 throughout the 25 years) in your, so called, mid salary job.
nb - your pension is not entirely taxpayer funded - but about 75% of it is !!!0 -
Former_Spice wrote: »Already happened to around two million people in Local Government Pensions. Used to be for example 25/80 of salary at age 60 (assuming employees paid for it themselves for 25 years) which is for example 25/80 of £20K in a mid paying job making a pension of £6K(a gold plated fat cat 6K, the Daily Mail says so - it must be true)
Unilaterally cut by a quarter down to a (gold plated fat cat) £4.5K for those having the cheek to ask for their own money back at 60.
Nope, service before the change date has protected rights to go at 60. It's only service after that date that's reduced0 -
Old_Slaphead wrote: »LG employees contribute around 6% (varies with salary band) employers pay on average 18% therefore employer contributes around 75% of funding PLUS any accumulated investment underperformance (and believe me there's plenty around just now given the state of stockmarkets).
what is more, the scheme is 100% funded by the tax payer, because the employee's salary is paid by the tax payer, hence the employee's contribution to the scheme is funded by the tax payer.0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »what is more, the scheme is 100% funded by the tax payer, because the employee's salary is paid by the tax payer, hence the employee's contribution to the scheme is funded by the tax payer.
Taxes which public sector workers pay too.Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists of choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable. J. K. Galbraith0 -
Sir_Humphrey wrote: »Taxes which public sector workers pay too.
That doesn't mean they have the right for those taxes to be used to underwrite their pension schemes, does it? Remember, without the private sector, the public sector could not exist."You were only supposed to blow the bl**dy doors off!!"0 -
maninthestreet wrote: »That doesn't mean they have the right for those taxes to be used to underwrite their pension schemes, does it? Remember, without the private sector, the public sector could not exist.
And vice versa. No contracts or rule of law without the public sector. We'd still be in the caves.Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists of choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable. J. K. Galbraith0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »what is more, the scheme is 100% funded by the tax payer, because the employee's salary is paid by the tax payer, hence the employee's contribution to the scheme is funded by the tax payer.
Which would be the case regardless of if it was a final salary, defined contribution or private pension only arrangement. In the same way the taxpayer pays for their food, the roof over their head and the clothes on their back.0 -
Sir_Humphrey wrote: »And vice versa. No contracts or rule of law without the public sector. We'd still be in the caves.
Not so - maybe in caves but we'd still be here without the public sector.
As maninthestreet says the public sector could not exist without a private sector.
Please bear that in mind, as the private sector shrinks, then so too must the public equivalent.0 -
Old_Slaphead wrote: »Not so - maybe in caves but we'd still be here without the public sector.
As maninthestreet says the public sector could not exist without a private sector.
Please bear that in mind, as the private sector shrinks, then so too must the public equivalent.
If you want a Depression, reducing public spending now would be a good way to get one. Google 'Counter-cyclical fiscal policy'.
Making any distinction between public and private sector in a caveman economy (such as it would be) is meaningless. And if you are over 40, you would likely NOT be here BTW given the life expectancy of cavemen.
It amazes me how few conservatives (small c) fail to read Hobbes nowadays. Life without government is nasty, brutish and short.Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists of choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable. J. K. Galbraith0 -
Sir_Humphrey wrote: »Taxes which public sector workers pay too.
well, they get a little bit of paper telling them that they have paid taxes, but they haven't really.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards