Crunch time for council workers’ golden pensions

carolt

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

c) Current private sector provision is woefully inadequate. The new 2012 National Pension Scheme is a scandal as it is effectively a stealth tax. Anyone accumulating a pension pot of under £40,000 is effectively saving for nothing.

Agree absolutely.

Plans clearly not thought through properly - ridiculous.

bendix

carolt wrote: »

No, I avoided your question because I didn't wish to discuss details of my working history with a bunch of complete strangers on an internet forum. I still don't.

You're welcome to believe what you like. If you want to believe I've made it all up for reasons best known to yourself, that's entirely up to you. I find it strange that you have selectively decided to agree with one part of my personal history - namely that I'm a teacher, but not that I'm self-employed - I have no idea why.

Now it's your turn. What do you do, Harry? Please tell us all exactly the nature of your employment and your pension history. Or don't - you know, I don't really think anyone's interested - this thread is not to discuss the pensions of individual posters (I believe there's a Board on MSE specifically to do that, if that's what you enjoy? - maybe it would be more your thing?) but to discuss the larger questions of the future of public sector pensions in the context of government debt and recession. A subject I find much more interesting, personally.

LMAO.

Oh dear carolt. In not answering, you have answered more eloquently than as if you had said proudly, yes I will personally benefit from the teacher's final salary pension.

Just like marklv on a similar discussion, your position is now entirely understandable.

Good on you. Nothing at all wrong in adopting a position out of self-interest, is there?

Old_Slaphead

StevieJ wrote: »

Maybe that will be the reason he will not get elected, it is a large block vote, public sector workers and the unemployed.

I think that you'll acknowledge that the main beneficiaries of Labour's 12 years in office have been burgeoning public sector budgets that have resulted in a 15% increase in employee numbers (+700,000).
This has been funded on the back of global growth much of which now appears to be illusory.

Britain now has to accommodate this mirage - the private sector is feeling the pain through job losses, pay reductions etc - the public sector will have to follow and unwind much of the 'windfall' it has received over the past decade.

Despite what Gordon Brown says about continuing "investment" in public services, we all know that Labour, pretty much the same as the Tories, will be forced to savagely cut back on public sector spending – Brown is merely obfuscating in his pretence that everything will be all right under Labour. No it won’t he’s being disingenuous and deceitful and treats the Great British public as fools…things will be pretty much the same whoever’s in charge….they’ll just put a different spin on it.

I’m what you might call a floating voter. I’ve been around long enough to know that both parties are as bad as each other. Labour’s had 12 year’s in power and has pretty much bu**er all to show for it. Society has hardly come on in leaps and bounds - it's not fairer - divide between rich and poor is just as pronounced. "Things can only get better"….I don’t think so! Tony Blair & Gordon Brown have been conmen ‘par excellence’. Maybe Dave will be just as bad and we’ll probably chuck him out after 5 years but, quite frankly, Labour simply doesn’t deserve another go. The public sector may have different views now but that won’t last once the axe starts to all.

If they can hide the true picture for another 9 months then Labour may have up to 5.8 million public sector votes in the bag. However, there’s still 20 million in the private sector who are sick to the back teeth at what has happened over the last 10 years and the accumulation of non-jobs, quangos, bureacracy, red tape, endless risk assessments, nanny statisms, petty european interference etc. etc. that is now manifest.

Don’t rely on the unemployed either. A significant number want to work and are being prevented from doing so by Labour’s abject governance of the economy. Those that want to sponge of the state won’t be bothered (assuming that they’re educated enough to figure out how the voting form works). Unemployment isn’t the full picture either – many workers have seen their hours and wages cut and they're pretty angry and looking for someone to blame.

Though I’m politically, generally neutral (not at the moment though) – I think the election will be quite interesting. It’ll be a question of who manages to avoid putting their foot in it by telling the truth the least number of times.

movingforward2010

donaldtramp wrote: »

I'll repeat the question....for the public sector employees.

No guilt about living off the backs of other people???

This includes the hard working low paid private sector employees taxes

:rotfl::rotfl: your mental :rotfl::rotfl:

StevieJ

Not to mention all those on invalidity benefit, I still think Brownie has a large bulk vote if he plays his cards right.

bendix

StevieJ wrote: »

Not to mention all those on invalidity benefit, I still think Brownie has a large bulk vote if he plays his cards right.

Not a chance. They'll still be in bed, or on the sofa eating Wotsits.

Old_Slaphead

StevieJ wrote: »

Not to mention all those on invalidity benefit, I still think Brownie has a large bulk vote if he plays his cards right.

What's invalidity benefit ?

Old_Slaphead

wxmlad wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl: your mental :rotfl::rotfl:

?????

All that extra money and still Labour's ejucashun system is not working.

movingforward2010

Originally Posted by donaldtramp
I'll repeat the question....for the public sector employees.

No guilt about living off the backs of other people???

This includes the hard working low paid private sector employees taxes

i mean !!!!!!? , 'living off the backs of other people???' i work!

ok ,we will have no public sector employees, the work will be contracted out to private companies who will employ people in the private sector, but pay them with money from tax payers, as long as it doesn't say 'public sector' on the tin were ok:beer:

movingforward2010

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

What's invalidity benefit ?

incapacity benefit