Public sector, where where you when we needed help??

CLAPTON

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

That's a belief of your own fabrication. That is not the view I'm airing or anyone else from what I've read.

There was a time when the Public sector pensions could be afforded, it was at the same time that the private manufacturing sector was bouyant.

But times have changed, China and India etc have made those changes and facts have to be faced.
As many posters have said you can't have a poor public sector and a rich private sector and vice versa, they depend on each other.

This is simply a catching up that for some reason the government allowed to failed to feel the effect of even though it was obvious to almost everyone else. Pensions were watered down, wages frozen or cut in industry while everything was hunky dory at the "council". Ostrich syndrome at it's best.

Your analogy isn't in the least bit accurate and I'm sure is not how similar workers on either side of the fence see each other, but don't expect support for your actions, the opposite is much more likely.

As I've said in a previous post we need a grown debate about pensions in general ; what level of pensions is it reasonable to provide for retired people and how they should be financed ; that is for both private and public sector

most of the discussion is endlesss repetition of moronic 'the private sector can't afford public sector pensions' without any sensible discussion of what the provision should be.

in my view there should be better provision in the private sector but all discussion is drowned out by wanting to cut the public sector

there is a continued line of argument that all wealth comes from the private sector; my example (and it's not an analogy ) shows the nonsense of such arguments by using example of the same job with the same deliverables in both sectors.

Justy for the record Uk is the 6th biggest manufacturing country in the world

whether of not something can be 'afforded' is about a system of values and has little relation to absolute spending levels.

sadly the private sector workers are allowing the discussion to move away from their own pension provision into endless debate about the public sector; better to mobilise support and discussion about all pension provision and to ask why private sector senior managers all have massive (and increasing) pension pots while the average worker has every diminishing pots

cyclonebri1

CLAPTON wrote: »

As I've said in a previous post we need a grown debate about pensions in general ; what level of pensions is it reasonable to provide for retired people and how they should be financed ; that is for both private and public sector

most of the discussion is endlesss repetition of moronic 'the private sector can't afford public sector pensions' without any sensible discussion of what the provision should be.

in my view there should be better provision in the private sector but all discussion is drowned out by wanting to cut the public sector

there is a continued line of argument that all wealth comes from the private sector; my example (and it's not an analogy ) shows the nonsense of such arguments by using example of the same job with the same deliverables in both sectors.

Justy for the record Uk is the 6th biggest manufacturing country in the world

whether of not something can be 'afforded' is about a system of values and has little relation to absolute spending levels.

sadly the private sector workers are allowing the discussion to move away from their own pension provision into endless debate about the public sector; better to mobilise support and discussion about all pension provision and to ask why private sector senior managers all have massive (and increasing) pension pots while the average worker has every diminishing pots

I'm sorry but you are missing the very essence of my posts.

This action by the government is retrospective, they are trying to realign pb sector pension arrangements to what has had to be done to pr sector ones.

Yes it crept in by the back door but it dam well happened.

Do we need a "grown up debate" on what is an accepted fact that current pension ideas don't work with increased survival data??, no, it's an accepted fact by anyone with an ounce of brain in their head that we need to ALL make extra provisions for ourselfves, trouble is you chaps want us to pay for yours, and it aint gonna happen.:mad:

Just_landed

It all boils down to the fact the country's broke. To balance the books we have to cut back or raise taxes, looks like we might be heading back to the 70s, O the memories, who's on strike this week ?

http://hmrc.gov.uk/stats/tax_structure/incometaxrates_1974to1990.pdf

CLAPTON

Just_landed wrote: »

It all boils down to the fact the country's broke. To balance the books we have to cut back or raise taxes, looks like we might be heading back to the 70s, O the memories, who's on strike this week ?

http://hmrc.gov.uk/stats/tax_structure/incometaxrates_1974to1990.pdf

broke is a relative term

after the second world war we had a debts of 250% of gdp but life got better and better for the next 60 years because we invested and so reaped the rewards

today we have debts of less than 100% of gdp

we have choices; even if certain people say otherwise

CLAPTON

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I'm sorry but you are missing the very essence of my posts.

This action by the government is retrospective, they are trying to realign pb sector pension arrangements to what has had to be done to pr sector ones.

Yes it crept in by the back door but it dam well happened.

Do we need a "grown up debate" on what is an accepted fact that current pension ideas don't work with increased survival data??, no, it's an accepted fact by anyone with an ounce of brain in their head that we need to ALL make extra provisions for ourselfves, trouble is you chaps want us to pay for yours, and it aint gonna happen.:mad:

writing in BOLD adds nothing to the substance of the debate (a bit like shouting really)

No-one with an ounce of brain says 'accepted facts' when it comes to pensions.

There are options that need debating; assuming the 'English model' (as opposed to the European model ) is the only one possible is not having a debate

and by the way I don't work for the public sector either but I have read the Hutton report all by myself.

atush

Seems strange how you afforded that 1 Million barn conversion!;)

Just because it is worth a million today doesn't mean I paid that for it- what a numpty. Prices go up over time. And you are a cyber stalker too i suspect.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

writing in BOLD adds nothing to the substance of the debate (a bit like shouting really)

No-one with an ounce of brain says 'accepted facts' when it comes to pensions.

There are options that need debating; assuming the 'English model' (as opposed to the European model ) is the only one possible is not having a debate

and by the way I don't work for the public sector either but I have read the Hutton report all by myself.

A shaft of light appears.....this is a huge issue and there are choices. Look at what the USA achieved with the Marshall Plan and the New Deal....things were far more desperate then.

Andy_L

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I'm sorry but you are missing the very essence of my posts.

This action by the government is retrospective, they are trying to realign pb sector pension arrangements to what has had to be done to pr sector ones.

Except for the RPI/CPI switch the changes are not retrospective

Old_Slaphead

Andy_L wrote: »

Except for the RPI/CPI switch the changes are not retrospective

Debatable whether the RPI/CPI change is retrospective. At the time you finish paying into your pension plan your accrued benefits are exactly the same.

cyclonebri1

CLAPTON wrote: »

writing in BOLD adds nothing to the substance of the debate (a bit like shouting really)

No-one with an ounce of brain says 'accepted facts' when it comes to pensions.

There are options that need debating; assuming the 'English model' (as opposed to the European model ) is the only one possible is not having a debate

and by the way I don't work for the public sector either but I have read the Hutton report all by myself.

And please tell a situation where shouting doesn't add accentuation?, watched televised parlimentary broadcasts recently?

You should have highlighted the fact that you read the Hutton report all by yourself, I read it differently.

The other thing you need to realise is that we are not here to have a "debate", we are simply expressing opinions on what is a very sore topic at present. You have your views I have mine, the difference is I'm not asking someone else to pay for mine.:A