Cancel Employer Pension?

jamesd

You're referring to a report released on 30 June 2008, eleven months ago.

It's still three months old but you'll find that its Quarterly Review, March 2009, says instead "Uncertainty about the depth and duration of the economic contraction continued to roil financial markets over the period between end-November 2008 and 20 February 2009. ... policy measures aimed at stabilising markets appeared to gain traction over the period. In money markets, central bank actions and government guarantees helped to calm interbank markets ... Facilities that included outright purchases of agency mortgage- and other asset-backed securities contributed to signs of normalisation in mortgage markets".

jamesd

BernardM wrote: »

If we are intent on clawing back the excessive profits currently being made by big business at workers' expense, it is clear that we need to raise the rate of corporation tax, which is a tax on profits, to at least 50 per cent, which is what it was when it was first introduced.

The revenue raised could be used to invest in public services and in other areas that would help to develop Britain's economy.

jamesd wrote: »

Why are you proposing to cut the worker's pensions? What are you planning to do to prevent that?

With your proposal on corporation tax you proposed cutting worker's pensions and using that money to fund public services, taking from the workers with one hand and giving it back to them with the other.

You may have missed the connection. Final salary pensions funded by employers are a thing of the past for most people in private employment today. Their recent pension contributions are invested in the stock markets and they directly suffer the gains or losses from the companies whose shares they own. If you take money from the companies with corporation tax, that money is reducing the profits that increase the value of the worker's pensions.

For those who are already retired and getting a pension from a company final salary scheme that's fine for them because they won't be affected. Their children and grandchildren will be, as will a lot of baby boomers who haven't retired yet and many who have and still rely on investments and dividend payments for their income.

What you proposed was cake now at the expense of the pension income of the children and grandchildren.

Unless you have some plan to prevent those workers from suffering a reduced pension, and some way to pay for that plan?

movemysuper

" i am 23, and have had an employer pension since i was 16." this is a good news!!!!!!!:beer:

Superannuation funds

bendix

BernardM wrote: »

Moreover it is becoming ever more apparent to millions of people that capitalism is incapable of meeting even the most modest needs of the majority of the world’s population.

And the alternatives have? You might want to ask the tens of millions of people who starved to death in Soviet Russia, Maoist China, North Korea etc whether they would have preferred to give capitalism (with all its inherent problems) a try. And I'm referring only to economic related deaths, not political.

Seriously, it's like you're reading your arguments from a 'Big Bumper Book of Socialist Platitudes' without giving them any thought of your own.

I didnt realise people still believed in such nonsense.

BernardM

In 1994 the Dutch parliament contained not a single radical socialist. In the general election of that year, however, the radical left Socialist Party (SP) entered national politics for the first time, winning two seats.In 2005 the SP, which by then had grown considerably in membership and had nine seats, led the campaign against the European constitution.Almost two-thirds of the Dutch electorate voted No to this neoliberal con trick. Over the next two years, the SP tripled its vote in local, regional and national elections. It is now the country's biggest opposition party both inside parliament, where it has 25 seats, and outside.
With almost 50,000 members, the SP has never succumbed to the tempting comforts of parliamentary politics.
It remains an active presence on the streets of the Netherlands, in its workplaces and social organisations, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with every campaign of resistance to neoliberalism, to the destruction of social provision and of the environment and to the undermining of democracy by political parties which have forgotten what the word means.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index.php/features/seizing_the_moment

BernardM

You talk about forced nationalisation and forget all that has taken place during the last quarter century, the collaborating with increasing enthusiasm in the theft of the people's property, not just in the case of the relatively trivial amounts stolen in fiddles expenses, but in the wholesale corporate trough-snouting that was privatisation and deregulation.

bendix

BernardM wrote: »

You talk about forced nationalisation and forget all that has taken place during the last quarter century, the collaborating with increasing enthusiasm in the theft of the people's property, not just in the case of the relatively trivial amounts stolen in fiddles expenses, but in the wholesale corporate trough-snouting that was privatisation and deregulation.

Huh?

Details please. What 'people's property' has specifically been stolen through 'privatistaion and deregulation.'

If you stopped talking in slogans and dealt in cold hard arguments backed up by facts it might be easier to discuss things with you. Instead, you rant about Dutch politics.

sibot74

BernardM wrote: »

In 1994 the Dutch parliament contained not a single radical socialist... blahblah ... to the destruction of social provision and of the environment and to the undermining of democracy by political parties which have forgotten what the word means.

Either you are a sockpuppet for Steve McGiffen, or you should correctly attribute your quote to his column in the morningstar.

jamesd

BernardM wrote: »

You talk about forced nationalisation and forget all that has taken place during the last quarter century, the collaborating with increasing enthusiasm in the theft of the people's property, not just in the case of the relatively trivial amounts stolen in fiddles expenses, but in the wholesale corporate trough-snouting that was privatisation and deregulation.

What do you make of the way Russia went from forced nationalisation and communism to sell the enterprises back to the people to run as independent businesses? Things like the ships of a fishing fleet sold to the fishermen for a low price so they would own their own fishing vessels.

BernardM

bendix wrote: »

Huh?

Details please. What 'people's property' has specifically been stolen through 'privatistaion and deregulation.'

If you stopped talking in slogans and dealt in cold hard arguments backed up by facts it might be easier to discuss things with you. Instead, you rant about Dutch politics.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index.php/news/content/view/full/76343