How big should my pension pot be ?

novice-saver

marklv wrote: »

Much the same could be said for the other posters on this thread - or are they all retired? Smartass.

Well, I can only speak for myself, but my replies are sporadic because I only post on my days off.

I have more than enough to do when I'm at work.

skinto_1

marklv wrote: »

And I smell a rat..........

Mark,

I am new on here and by no means an expert on pensions, as im sure neither are you, i was just raeding through this thread and it seems your views are very biased in favour of the public sector and take no consideration to the other side of the coin.

I work for a private company as a head of my department and my mate who does the exact same job (we went to uni together) is head of his depertment within the public sector.

He works 36 hours a week flexi-time, gets paid for any overtime, gets 12 unchallanged sick days apparently (these viewed as just holidays by him) and i think 5 days more holiday than me.

I work on average 40-45 hours a week, if required to work late at nights or come in at weekends do not get paid, have had 1 day off sick in last 5 years and less holiidays.

My mate gets paid 2k more than me and as we know his pension laughs in the face of mines.

Thefore in my scenerio, someone doing my job in the public sector gets paid more, works less, has less responsibilty and gets a much better pension.

I do not begrudge my mate or anyone else in the world earning good money whatever sector they are in, what i do not like is people generalising that all private sector workers earn huge salaries and get big bonuses, reality proves this to be wrong.

Mark, you talk about how you could earn more in the private sector but like the public sector ethos so the money wont tempt you too switch.

You then go on to say that if your huge pensions were to be cut, their would be a mass exodus of public sector workers, surely if you were all just working their due to the public sector values etc the taking away of your golden pension would not force you to abbandon your principles?

Or maybe, just maybe are you like everyone else and just working for the money???

Harry_Powell

Paul_Herring wrote: »

Of course *I* can't prove it. It would also need one of the moderators on here to see if (e.g.) they have any IP addresses in common. (But, of course, it still wouldn't prove anything for sure.)

However, I find it highly strange for someone in their first message here to post something, as if they'd been here all along, to support a contentious point of view, then for the other person who also supports that point of view to reply saying "well done that man!"

I also find the choice of user-name a bit 'on-topic.' ('Fit for purpose' is possibly another way I'd phrase it.)

All speculative I agree, but along with the logical fallacies being used, and the casual use of insults, when nothing constructive can be felt to be added, I personally believe* the behaviour to have a high correlation with sock-puppetry.

* You are, of course, free to believe otherwise

I actually agree with you, and on the balance of evidence I'd say that I was also very suspicious. However, I still feel that regardless of how many AE's someone creates to support their argument, if their argument is bogus, then you simply pull it apart as you would if mark (or whoever) had posted it.

Let's face it, the difficulty lay in staying awake while reading such a lengthy post, not in refuting its contents.

Perfect_Choice

I find it so amusing statements like mass exodus of workers from the public sector. Where to? The dole queue then as the only place to go would be the private sector or overseas!

As against higher rate tax relief on pension contributions. then if that happens it should also apply to higher rate tax on income, let’s have a single tax rate for all workers, in cash terms you still pay more the more you earn.

I am not actually against eliminating higher rate tax relief on pension contributions as long as it is balanced elsewhere and for start, eliminate those final salary schemes in the public sector as well. Financing the future will require sacrifices from all sectors, there is no single answer here.

Skinto_1 – good post, honest and clear of real life, something certain posters here simply do not appreciate.

bendix

marklv wrote: »

Smarmy git.

Seriously, is that the best you can do?

marklv

skinto_1 wrote: »

Mark,

I am new on here and by no means an expert on pensions, as im sure neither are you, i was just raeding through this thread and it seems your views are very biased in favour of the public sector and take no consideration to the other side of the coin.

I work for a private company as a head of my department and my mate who does the exact same job (we went to uni together) is head of his depertment within the public sector.

He works 36 hours a week flexi-time, gets paid for any overtime, gets 12 unchallanged sick days apparently (these viewed as just holidays by him) and i think 5 days more holiday than me.

I work on average 40-45 hours a week, if required to work late at nights or come in at weekends do not get paid, have had 1 day off sick in last 5 years and less holiidays.

My mate gets paid 2k more than me and as we know his pension laughs in the face of mines.

Thefore in my scenerio, someone doing my job in the public sector gets paid more, works less, has less responsibilty and gets a much better pension.

I do not begrudge my mate or anyone else in the world earning good money whatever sector they are in, what i do not like is people generalising that all private sector workers earn huge salaries and get big bonuses, reality proves this to be wrong.

Mark, you talk about how you could earn more in the private sector but like the public sector ethos so the money wont tempt you too switch.

You then go on to say that if your huge pensions were to be cut, their would be a mass exodus of public sector workers, surely if you were all just working their due to the public sector values etc the taking away of your golden pension would not force you to abbandon your principles?

Or maybe, just maybe are you like everyone else and just working for the money???

OK, but there are many variables at play here. It's quite possible that you could get a higher salary by moving to another private sector company, and it's also possible that if your friend moved to another part of the public sector he would be earning less.

This is why my suggestion of new public sector workers being offered as pension benefits an average of benefits from the basket of FTSE 100 companies would be the fairest way forward. What I do not agree with is taking away the current pension benefits of existing public sector workers, as this would be grossly unfair to those who have made plans on the basis of their pension rights.

bendix

marklv wrote: »

OK, but there are many variables at play here. It's quite possible that you could get a higher salary by moving to another private sector company, and it's also possible that if your friend moved to another part of the public sector he would be earning less.

This is why my suggestion of new public sector workers being offered as pension benefits an average of benefits from the basket of FTSE 100 companies would be the fairest way forward. What I do not agree with is taking away the current pension benefits of existing public sector workers, as this would be grossly unfair to those who have made plans on the basis of their pension rights.

In other words, so long as it doesnt affect marklv (who has only been in the public sector a short time), he doesnt mind.

Meanwhile, back to the TUC variance on their advocacy of final salary pensions for the public sector, while the member unions cut them for their own staff . . . . STILL no response.

skinto_1

Thanks PC, comments much appreciated!

Totally agree with your comment on a single tax rate for all, why should prople who work hard and do well for themselves be punished for doing so.

skinto_1

marklv wrote: »

OK, but there are many variables at play here. It's quite possible that you could get a higher salary by moving to another private sector company, and it's also possible that if your friend moved to another part of the public sector he would be earning less.

This is why my suggestion of new public sector workers being offered as pension benefits an average of benefits from the basket of FTSE 100 companies would be the fairest way forward. What I do not agree with is taking away the current pension benefits of existing public sector workers, as this would be grossly unfair to those who have made plans on the basis of their pension rights.

I reaslise their are many variables, that was the point i was trying to make, some of your previous posts were generalising all private sector works as big earners who automatically earned more in the private sector than they would in the public sector doing the same job.

Your situation is that you could earn more in the private sector and my situation is i could earn more in the public sector, therefore it is unfair to make any sweeping statements that you are either better off working in the private sector or the public sector.

With regards you not agreeing with taking away current pension benifits to existing public sector workers, that may be, but many private sector workers did not agree with their current pension benifits being taken away and it still happened.

If there is not enough money in the pot, whether it be private or public sector then something has to be done!!

marklv

skinto_1 wrote: »

I reaslise their are many variables, that was the point i was trying to make, some of your previous posts were generalising all private sector works as big earners who automatically earned more in the private sector than they would in the public sector doing the same job.
I never intended to give that impression. My generalisation is based on the accepted fact that for most (though of course not all) occupations, the private sector pays more.

Your situation is that you could earn more in the private sector and my situation is i could earn more in the public sector, therefore it is unfair to make any sweeping statements that you are either better off working in the private sector or the public sector.

I never intended to give that impression. My generalisation is based on the accepted fact that for most (though of course not all) occupations, the private sector pays more.

skinto_1 wrote: »

With regards you not agreeing with taking away current pension benifits to existing public sector workers, that may be, but many private sector workers did not agree with their current pension benifits being taken away and it still happened.

If there is not enough money in the pot, whether it be private or public sector then something has to be done!!

I know very well that in a number of cases private sector workers had their final salary benefits frozen and were forced on to less generous money purchase schemes. Yes, this was wrong, and there should have been legislation in place to prevent this happening, but two wrongs don't make a right, do they? And yes, something has to be done to ensure that there is money 'in the pot'. The change that I outlined earlier would ensure that there is, without a need for drastic measures.