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.
📨 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!
Pension fund £16000 to pay just £480 per yr
Comments
-
Yes, but my point is: how many people have enough money to retire before 55? Not many, to be sure. Infact, a lot of people haven't got enough to retire at 65, let alone 55.0
-
Why should anyone retire at all if they cant afford it? Why does everyone moan about benefit layabouts until the moment they turn 65 (or whatever) and then suddenly it's OK to live off the back of other people's labour?0
-
Why should anyone retire at all if they cant afford it? Why does everyone moan about benefit layabouts until the moment they turn 65 (or whatever) and then suddenly it's OK to live off the back of other people's labour?
Do you want people to work until they drop, as in Victorian times? You must be barmy! In any civilised society the state needs to provide for the needs of its elderly population. And when you retire you don't live 'off the back of other people's labour', you live on the 40+ years of NI contributions you've made.0 -
Do you want people to work until they drop, as in Victorian times? You must be barmy! In any civilised society the state needs to provide for the needs of its elderly population. And when you retire you don't live 'off the back of other people's labour', you live on the 40+ years of NI contributions you've made.
I never said anything about not helping those (of any age) who are unable to work due to infirment, illness or disability. I simply said, why is it OK to live off other people's labour when you're more than capable of working yourself.
Do you think that the day you turn 65, you're suddenly crippled and incapable of working, yet you weren't at 64, 63, 62, ...?
p.s. The part of your NI contributions that goes towards pensions is NOT for your own pension but to pay for current pensioners. No part of it is put away in order to pay for your retirement.0 -
I never said anything about not helping those (of any age) who are unable to work due to infirment, illness or disability. I simply said, why is it OK to live off other people's labour when you're more than capable of working yourself.
Do you think that the day you turn 65, you're suddenly crippled and incapable of working, yet you weren't at 64, 63, 62, ...?
p.s. The part of your NI contributions that goes towards pensions is NOT for your own pension but to pay for current pensioners. No part of it is put away in order to pay for your retirement.
Rubbish. You are still suggesting that people should work until they fall seriously ill or disabled - meaning you are either a total fool or utterly barking mad. Probably both.
Do you honestly think that what you suggest would be acceptable in any modern society? And do you also honestly believe that bosses would like to have a workforce of ailing 70 somethings or even 80 somethings? I would always refuse to accept geriatrics in my team - come hell or high water. When people reach a certain age - and in my opinion that age should be 60 - they should stop working, put their slippers on and watch daytime TV. The modern workplace is very aggressive and mentally and physically demanding - no place for the elderly. What you are suggesting is totally unworkable, brutally inhumane and plainly idiotic.
You statement on NI contributions is also untrue. How the government uses this money is one thing, but NI contributions have always been earmarked for your retirement and that is how they should be treated.0 -
Rubbish. You are still suggesting that people should work until they fall seriously ill or disabled - meaning you are either a total fool or utterly barking mad. Probably both.
If you find it impossible to have a debate with someone without getting angry and resorting to name calling, then I suggest you stop using internet forums, it doesn't paint you in a good light and TBH it undermines your argument.Do you honestly think that what you suggest would be acceptable in any modern society? And do you also honestly believe that bosses would like to have a workforce of ailing 70 somethings or even 80 somethings? I would always refuse to accept geriatrics in my team - come hell or high water. When people reach a certain age - and in my opinion that age should be 60 - they should stop working, put their slippers on and watch daytime TV. The modern workplace is very aggressive and mentally and physically demanding - no place for the elderly. What you are suggesting is totally unworkable, brutally inhumane and plainly idiotic.
I think a lot of 60 year olds (and above) would resent that you think they should be thrown on the scrap heap because they're 'geriatrics'. You clearly have a very poor opinion of older people and the value they bring to the workplace.You statement on NI contributions is also untrue. How the government uses this money is one thing, but NI contributions have always been earmarked for your retirement and that is how they should be treated.
My statement about NI is, sadly, very true. They're not 'earmarked' or invested into a 'pot' but are in fact spent on paying the current crop of pensions. When you retire, our children and Grand Children will be paying our pensions via their NI payments. A fact that will become all too clear to our kids as they struggle under the weight of paying for an ever increasing ageing population.0 -
"I think a lot of 60 year olds (and above) would resent that you think they should be thrown on the scrap heap because they're 'geriatrics'. You clearly have a very poor opinion of older people and the value they bring to the workplace. "
I never said this. I said that many (not all) workplaces these days cannot cater for older workers. This still leaves some places where they can work effectively, but the modern managerial obsession with cutting costs and tightening deadlines places much greater stress on the worker than in previous times. I don't believe it's fair to force elderly people to work under such circumstances. It's hard enough for young people. My industry is one of the most high pressure ones on the planet, that is why I said that having post 65 employees would be unsuitable. Of course, legislation now forces the employer to keep older workers, but I feel this is unfair and puts the employer in a difficult situation as to how to make best use of such employees.0 -
Poor old marklv. I wonder if his increasing obsession with pensions is anything to do with his growing realisation that the pension he recently moved across to the public sector for is looking increasingly uncertain now that Gordon has joined Cameron and Clegg and said public spending cuts are inevitable. :-)
mark, old boy, there is a growing sense of hysteria in the tone of your posts.0 -
No hysteria, just a desire for social justice.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards