Public sector monster needs to be tamed

Old_Slaphead

StevieJ wrote: »

Do people on here object to paying for the pension of BP workers when they fill up at the petrol station :rotfl:

Yes I do. But then again I have the choice. Car or shank's pony.

There's probably more going into PS pension than BP pensions with each litre.

I use as little fuel as possible in order to obviate my support of both sets of pension scheme

ChristopheB

donaldtramp wrote: »

No "admittedly" about it, I am.

Why shouldn't I defend the wealth of the hard working? If you read the papers I am by no means in the minority. Why is it ok for people to come on here (MSE) and moan about what they are not getting/trying to get their "entitlements" for this that and the other and me for a lower tax culture? Where's the difference? I'm trying to do the best for me and mine. Why is it OK to come on trying to squeeze the most out of the system? If you post up querying the size of the state/system you get called "greedy" "bitter" etc etc. I'm sorry I'm not bitter or greedy, I just don't want to pay for wasters lifes! I think you'll find a bigger percentage of the population agree with me and I believe this will be shown at the next election.



I really don't mind paying taxes if they are well spent. But they are not. As for your comment about the NHS and the sick that is simple nonsense. Nobody wants to see ill people not getting better, you could have phrased the sentence even better by inserting "sick kids" or the like. How dare you try to associate me with wishing bad on ill people.
The inneficiences of the NHS is the problem. Large amounts of money are handed over with few increases in improvements. That's what happens when socialism takes the reins.



The choke point will be when public sector pensions are cut/rebalanced fairly. The time will come (soon) when policies are changed. THAT is the choke point. Absolutely no "mind reading" required.


What exactly is FAIR about redistributing the wealth so that things are "more even"?
"More even" for who? The people who didn't try at school, didn't go to university, don't try to better themselves, don't get up out of their pits to go to job interviiews, quite content living on the social etc etc etc.
Why exactly is that "fair"? Please define how that is "fair".


Yes, yes same old nonsense. I welcome foreigners to our country. They work hard and are more than entitled to the money. I'd very happily swap the lazier part of our "british" society for the hard working Poles who come here. Out working the farm jobs/bar jobs that are below(below, how can that be possible?) many or our dole cheque recipients. I'd very happily swap this section of society. (I have a funny feeling though that Poland wouldn't have them) That is social mobility in action and unfortunately we're stuck with the lazy benefits mob. (who won't get off the couch and away from their Sky TV)

So you equate council workings (nurses, teacher, policemen etc) as lazy. Nobody in the public sector works hard? That’s quite a broad statement to make. The public sector provides a service to us all. Personally I think public sector workers are entitled to a pension in the same way as my employer contributes to my pension. Nobody mentioned anything about "squeezing the most out of the system". Your post was about public sector pension funds. I am sure that there are many public sector workers out there that would be quite offended at your description of them as "wasters lifes".

The cogs of government are inefficient. I don't think anyone will dispute that so what’s your alternative? Cut taxes and reduce services? Privatise the NHS? Remove the roots of the evil socialists? What is your idea of socialists? A provision for public health and pensions?
I am not sure the alternative is any better though. They do that in The States, the rich have expensive medical insurance whilst the poor get whatever provision they can. Hoping to god they don’t lose their job and get ill at the same time.

You seem to have a skewed view of life. On the one size are the "hard workers" (including yourself) whilst the rest are wasters. How about the hard workers that get very little pay. How about people that go to a failing inner city school and are far less likely to have the opportunity to go to higher education? How about the rich bankers who retire at 50 with large pensions or footballers who get paid £40,000 a week? You seem to equate people with low paid jobs as lazy which really isn't the case.

I am not sure how your diatribe about people on benefits is relevant to a discussion about public sector pensions so I won’t follow up that point.

Anyone else you want to bash except for public sector workers, the low paid and the unemployed because we are running out of people?

bigheadxx

Personally I think public sector workers are entitled to a pension in the same way as my employer contributes to my pension.

You are right Christopheb, the problem is that this is not what is happening. Public sector pensions are being subsidised by the taxpayer.

davilown

bigheadxx wrote: »

Personally I think public sector workers are entitled to a pension in the same way as my employer contributes to my pension.

You are right Christopheb, the problem is that this is not what is happening. Public sector pensions are being subsidised by the taxpayer.

But it is happening, its just that your pension funds are put into high risk portfolios and have lost lots of money.

bigheadxx

davilown wrote: »

But it is happening, its just that your pension funds are put into high risk portfolios and have lost lots of money.

Even at the peak of the stock market this was an issue. The amount of money that a public sector employee contributes to his/her pension would not buy the same return in the private sector it is as simple as that.

perplexed.com

I actually agree that the NHS is full of inefficiencies as I see it first hand, unfortunately, and it is incredibly frustrating to see money spent on some projects when we struggle with long waiting lists and not enough staff. I also agree that everyone, in whatever sector they work, should have a fair and reasonable pension. Bigheadxx I think you're right, too. I would have no objection to paying more of my salary for a pension. I think this whole argument is about fairness and justice and it is the systems that need adjusting to reflect this. Feeling hard done by when seeing people getting away with doing little to contribute to anything is always frustrating and it happens in all sectors, private and public.

A_fiend_for_life

From what I gather the American system is even more inefficient in terms of percentage treated and cost per capita. Almost certainly funded through tax breaks to companies who provide medical cover and it still needs medaid to pick up people who fall by the wayside.

perplexed.com

A_fiend_for_life wrote: »

From what I gather the American system is even more inefficient in terms of percentage treated and cost per capita. Almost certainly funded through tax breaks to companies who provide medical cover and it still needs medaid to pick up people who fall by the wayside.

Indeed, the American system is not a useful model I'm afraid

Andy_L

bigheadxx wrote: »

Even at the peak of the stock market this was an issue. The amount of money that a public sector employee contributes to his/her pension would not buy the same return in the private sector it is as simple as that.

But that is the case for any occupational scheme where there is an employers contribution, be it a DB or DC scheme.

Old_Slaphead

davilown wrote: »

But it is happening, its just that your pension funds are put into high risk portfolios and have lost lots of money.

Most private pension funds are invested in managed (60/70% equity) and/or cautious manage funds (30/50% equity)....you can see that by the total values invested in such funds. Most of us are sensible enough not to go for 'high risk' however all asset classes (even fixed interest) seems to have suffered badly. There's been no escape in this recession.

LA pensions (well for the accounts I've investigated) are much more heavily invested in equities (up to 60%) but the overall risk profile is probably not too dissimilar to PPPs. Consequently LAPs like PPPs are experiencing HUGE deficits. So even though council & national taxpayer paying in around 18-20% to such schemes they are seriously underfunded.

Based on last accounts my local LA had assets of £800mn and liabilities of £1.4bn and that was in 2008 before full effect of stockmarket 'crash'. The 3 year review comes round soon - they'll probably recommend increasing funding significantly (to 25%??????).

Even though LAPs are getting a very generous employer (taxpayer) contribution in the current climate it seems that it is still not nearly enough.

Sorry to focus on LA pensions but, as they're the only ones funded and producing accounts, they're the only ones that are transparent.

NHS. Police, CS etc - gawd knows what their liabilities are....current estimates are £1trillion.

If I were a lot younger than what I am, I'd be up in arms over this MASSIVE liability that's being accrued that will need to be paid for over the next 40 years.