Public sector wellcome to the real world

Uglymug

The_White_Horse wrote: »

i think, having read this thread, that we can all agree that the public sector workers are greedy grasping filth who have no idea how anything works - having never created anything in their miserable insulated lives. they have no idea what the value of money is. they are the lowest of the low. they should all have a 30% pay cut across the board and be forced to make larger pension contributions into defined contribution pensions. if they don't like it, they can work in the private sector. they would last all of 3 minutes. bunch of mardy jokers.

Totally agree, So called public servants trying to become public masters. Refusing to Educate our children, wonder what their next ploy will be - won't suprise me if they hold them hostage, put a gun to their heads and say "pay up or else".

2sides2everystory

jem16 wrote: »

A climate of no investment growth over 40 years - doubtful.

Even the FTSE100 has a historic yield of around 3%pa.

Yes isn't hindsight a wonderful thing (of mediocrity).

EclipsedMind

So here is the facts upon which we are told it is affordable:
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0910/public_service_pensions.aspx

Public Sector Pension costs are going to go up. So its more expensive right?

Total payments to more than 2 million pensioners in the UK’s four largest pay-as-you-go pension schemes (also known as unfunded schemes – where current employee and employer contributions are used to pay current pensions) were £19.3 billion in 2008-09, a real terms increase of 38 per cent since 1999-2000. This is driven by more employees retiring each year, which is a substantially more significant factor than longer lifespans.

Expressed in terms of constant 2008-09 prices, the Government Actuary’s Department projects total payments rising to over £79 billion a year by 2059-60. This is before allowing for income from employee contributions.

So thats roughly a 10% rise per year from the current cost. So its not affordable? Well maybe it is as GDP is assumed to rise (pray we avoid stagflation).

However, expressed as a proportion of GDP, the projected increase is less stark, as GDP is also assumed to rise. Projected payments are estimated to reach a peak of 1.9 per cent of GDP between 2018-19 and 2033-34 then fall to 1.7 per cent by 2059-60.

So that means we will be richer and so it will be a lower percentage of our income and hence more affordable although it will be costing us more. However I can't help but wonder if tax receipts really keep pace with GDP (especially when I see Barclay's tax bill) and whether the Govt will actually find itself as easily able to afford them. Could it be looking at the public pension bill in relation to GDP is disingenuous? Perhaps we should be looking at it as a percentage of Govt revenue?

For completeness the NAO assumptions

Estimates of future payments depend on assumptions (covering matters such as life expectancy, earnings growth, the size of the public sector workforce and recent changes to contain costs) used as the basis of calculations. Changes to these assumptions can have a large impact on the projections.

So that would be the 500k less public servants and some of the pension changes such as rpi to cpi etc?

The bottom line is that the public pensions will cost more as the years roll on but it won't seem too bad if GDP grows every year and outpaces it but it will hurt a bit more before 2019 and after that it may then appear to get better due to growth in GDP.

And my point was? I don't really have one other than to let those who want to argue about affordable or not do so based on the numbers.

EM

ILW

Why do they assume that that GDP will just keep growing? There is no law that says it must.

2sides2everystory

Moby wrote: »

2sides2everystory Actually I think you'll see may 'like minded individuals' bitters on this thread. As for being one of life's more 'contented players'......ah yes that's why you spend your early hours of the morning writing long missives about the injustices of the world on this forum! You say you are a member of Unison and are still paying a subscription. My advice to you then is get off your backside and get on the picket lines when the rest of us go out in the autumn. I'll see you there!

So now you are telling me I cannot be content because I use the small hours to write about injustices, and you have deduced incorrectly that I am a Unison member too? No I shall not see you on any Union picket line in 2011. It would take at least 10 years for the union movement to get back to anything half decent as a real force for good in the UK.

The biggest unions are currently a sorry shadow of their former constituent parts. As I said, I am not sure why I keep paying the subscription to that particular group of insiders either. I don't feel part of anything useful by having 'bought in' to that one.

Old_Slaphead

Interested_Taxpayer wrote: »

Why did you say they have gold-plated pensions in your post then?

Not sure that Lord Hutton's terminology should proscribe what I post on MSE. 'Gold plated' is a term often used to describe a premium product.

And why did the Government also move all public sector pension indexing from the RPI to the CPI? Does this not go beyond Hutton? I am led to believe that all the UK statistical expert advice is that the CPI is not a proper measure of pensioner inflation.

Hutton accomodates this change. A lot of people think it is a more accurate measure of general inflation levels. Anyway - we've done that topic to death on other threads.

For the life of me, I can' t find anything in Hutton recommending this move. Surely the Government don't want public sector workers to pay more for their pensions, work longer for them and then lose between 15% and 25% of that pension over a lifetime if and when they eventually get it because the indexing does not stand up?

Given that I'm sure people are living much longer I think these changes are reasonable and will reduce the heavy burden on future generations. You'll still be getting a pension that most private sector workers can only dream of.

Are they mad?

They're politicians - of course they are

Just_landed

Would this not be possible :- Civil Servants pensions are paid by the tax payer (no pension pot). So why not set up a Pension fund for them to pay into to build a pension pot, job sorted and then someone like Gordon Brown can come along and take £ 100 Million out of it.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

cyclonebri1

jem16 wrote: »

So how much do you pay into your pension scheme and how much does you wife pay?

What pension will your wife get and what is the projection for yours?

Doesn't dilute what the chap said regardless;)

atush

Moby wrote: »

2sides2everystory Actually I think you'll see may 'like minded individuals' bitters on this thread. As for being one of life's more 'contented players'......ah yes that's why you spend your early hours of the morning writing long missives about the injustices of the world on this forum! You say you are a member of Unison and are still paying a subscription. My advice to you then is get off your backside and get on the picket lines when the rest of us go out in the autumn. I'll see you there!:beer:

My advice is to get off your backside and have some fun, but not on a picket line. Maybe you should have a lazy duvet day.;)

Starship9

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

....Given that I'm sure people are living much longer I think these changes are reasonable and will reduce the heavy burden on future generations. You'll still be getting a pension that most private sector workers can only dream of.....

The pension schemes of the public sector have been public knowledge for decades.

I know that and you know that. The difference is that I joined the public sector and stayed with it for 30 or so years so before taking an early retirement package to "help reduce the size of the Civil Service"

So, at 51, I can draw my indexed pension and the tax free lump sum with it having been enhanced by a few years. Oh, and pocket a PILON payment because they screwed up the notice period.

While the private sector dream, I'll take and enjoy the fruits of making an informed decision, with any luck for more years than I worked.

This discussion is fuelled by one ingredient - ENVY