MSE News: Pension age rise bought forward

Gracchus_Babeuf

Aegis wrote: »

I note that yet again you glossed over the bits where your examples of people losing out on pension through no fault of their own were all shot to pieces...

Any comment on why the 30 year minimum should be reduced to 20 after seeing some additional facts?

What are you referring to?

Aegis

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

What are you referring to?

The bits of this post that you didn't respond to:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=46865741&postcount=90

gadgetmind

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

I am well aware that the government is trying to encourage (or manipulate) people into saving more, but this is not a panacea.

It's necessary but I have my doubts as to whether it will be sufficient.

it falls disproportionally on the poorest in society.

No, it doesn't. Those on low incomes will find that the state pension etc. covers much of their needs and so will only need to save a bit to "top it up".

The poorest won't bother saving anything anyway

I'm sure you're right, nor the ignorant.

and rely on the minimum pension guarantee.

Again, it seems that you have decided to launch into a tirade on pensions without understanding either the current system nor the various proposals in the green paper on the subject. That minimum guarantee will most likely be removed as it's a disincentive to save.

Perhaps you need to take a break for a few days/weeks while you do some fundamental research? As it stands, your killer combination of fervor and frequent factual howlers does little to advance your argument.

jamesd

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

Good question. Personally I would favour reducing the minimum period of contributions to 20 years.

With a £250 a week pension that would cost around £18,500 a year in national insurance, assuming 3.5% return on capital and ignoring changes in the ratio between working and retired people. That seems a little high for someone on minimum wage of £12,334 a year for 52 weeks each of 40 hours, or even for someone on the median wage of around £25,000 a year (median is what half or more of all workers get). The pension is also a raise for those on minimum wage, to £13,000 a year income.

Pincher wrote: »

Pincher may live a long lingering poverty stricken life, as opposed to one glorious twilight adventure and return to Odin in a sea battle worthy of songs.

That's completely fine, I wish Pincher well. But I don't think that Pincher deserves the pension tax relief to do that because that's not what pension tax relief is for.

What you describe as bureaucrat thinking is really taxpayer thinking: the tax relief is for retirement income and there's no need for other tax payers to subsides it with tax relief otherwise. ISAs are a good alternative...

Moby

posted by gadgetmind
Actually, most of them are *fiercely* proud of their country, and work hard to try and keep a strong UK base, but the UK's historical anti-success stance tends to drive many of them overseas

Spoken like the true corporate man you are and it brought a little tear to my eye. I never knew so many financial/company types were driven by the good of the UK.....it makes me wonder....why we are struggling financially at all in this country when we have such patriotic bankers ably encouraged by the financial deregulation of successive Governments!

dunstonh wrote: »

I cannot see any such statement that indicates that other than yours.

That's probably because you are blinded by your own limitations:)

No insult mean't of course but reading this thread made me realise the gap in communication between so many groups in our society. The corporate types who look at everything as a balance sheet and probably know the tax implications of buying a dog are always going to be limited by that outlook. Dickens wrote about them so well.

'The father of this pleasant grandfather, of the neighbourhood of Mount Pleasant, was a horny-skinned, two-legged, money-getting species of spider who spun webs to catch unwary flies and retired into holes until they were entrapped. The name of this old pagan's god was Compound Interest'. Bleak House

gadgetmind

Moby wrote: »

when we have such patriotic bankers!

Bringing up bankers seems to have taken the place of bringing up the Nazis.

I wasn't talking about bankers but UK industry, you know, our companies that create world-beating products, drive our exports, employ our graduates, and generally keep the country from sinking into the mire. Yes, they do exist, lots of them, but at times it seems that these companies survive despite the government rather than because of them.

Moby

Gadget,
I'm talking about motives though....what drives us as people....not corporate machines. I used to be a lawyer and got out because I hated the corporate speak. I became an assistant warden in a homeless men's hostel, then I joined the Probation Service and have been extremely busy these last few weeks, (riots fallout). I now do work which is far more interesting, (but for less pay of course) and that's why I come on here;)
One thing I've noticed, you reap what you sow and young people are the way they are because that's what we as the older generation have done to them. We have taught them the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Companies/business are driven by profit...that's why they exist. No problem with that....capitalism rules but don't complain when it comes back and bites you on the !!!! because no-one is saving for their pension anymore and because young people are motivated by a 'have it now', credit driven free for all! We need greater regulation and control not less. The free market creates casualties everywhere.

gadgetmind

Moby wrote: »

Gadget,
I'm talking about motives though....what drives us as people....

Many things drive people, and I see more pride and altruism than I see greed. There again, I'm not in the legal or financial professions.

no-one is saving for their pension anymore

That statement transcends being wrong and goes to an entirely new, and slightly Alice-in-wonderland, plane where a total disconnection from reality seems to have occurred.

and because young people are motivated by a 'have it now', credit driven free for all!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outgroup_homogeneity_bias

Moby

gadgetmind wrote: »

Many things drive people, and I see more pride and altruism than I see greed. There again, I'm not in the legal or financial professions.

Neither am I but i do know what i'm talking about

That statement transcends being wrong and goes to an entirely new, and slightly Alice-in-wonderland, plane where a total disconnection from reality seems to have occurred.

I think you are choosing to take my statement literally....I was of course using the phrase in its loose sense and commenting how many young people are viewed regarding their pensions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

gadgetmind

Moby wrote: »

I was of course using the phrase in its loose sense

It does get rather confusing if you mean one thing but say something significantly different. I must admit that I was previously of the view that legal training taught one to use words with precision, however, I have never benefited from such an education (engineering for me) so what do I know!

commenting how many young people are viewed regarding their pensions.

You didn't say "many young people", you said "young people", and you gave me the distinct impression that it was you that held the view rather than some other unidentified person or persons.

I'm afraid that you've left me utterly baffled regards what your actual views and arguments are.