MP's want compensation for pensioners suffering low interest rates

FTBFun

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You do realise the treasury select committee is based on members from all political parties? Even the SNP are involved.

So trying to write this off as a vote buying exercise is poor.

I'm aware of how committees work.

I'm also incredibly cynical about the motives of politicians.

Radiantsoul

grizzly1911 wrote: »

IMO pensions as we know them have run their course.

A new set of vehicles are required.

I think there is a lot of truth in this. It seems that no government has really resolved how to encourage people to save for the long term.
It probably requires some sort of cross party consensus. I would have thought some sort of ISA type investment without any annuity requirement, a time limit before withdraws and some matching from employers ought to do it.

chewmylegoff

Radiantsoul wrote: »

I think there is a lot of truth in this. It seems that no government has really resolved how to encourage people to save for the long term.
It probably requires some sort of cross party consensus. I would have thought some sort of ISA type investment without any annuity requirement, a time limit before withdraws and some matching from employers ought to do it.

so basically a pension without an annuity requirement?

all a pension is is a tax-free wrapper. the pensions industry and the way that people's pension funds are managed and required to be invested on retirement certainly are ripe for reform though.

Graham_Devon

FTBFun wrote: »

I'm aware of how committees work.

I'm also incredibly cynical about the motives of politicians.

What is there to be cynical about exactly? Who would this benefit? Which party or MP?

You've made out that this is likely to be purely to benefit the politicians, but what benefit does it bring a group from all different parties?

wotsthat

Radiantsoul wrote: »

I think there is a lot of truth in this. It seems that no government has really resolved how to encourage people to save for the long term.
It probably requires some sort of cross party consensus. I would have thought some sort of ISA type investment without any annuity requirement, a time limit before withdraws and some matching from employers ought to do it.

...and some compulsion.

Probably the biggest favour today's hand wringing politicians could do for future pensioners.

A._Badger

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What is there to be cynical about exactly? Who would this benefit? Which party or MP?

You've made out that this is likely to be purely to benefit the politicians, but what benefit does it bring a group from all different parties?

That depends whether you think there is a significant difference between them.

Many are starting to regard them all as 'the political class'.with little of substance to choose between them.

As for what they stand to gain, you do know how much MPs are paid, I assume? And that ignores the fringe benefits and ego stroking.

Pennywise

Radiantsoul wrote: »

I think there is a lot of truth in this. It seems that no government has really resolved how to encourage people to save for the long term.
It probably requires some sort of cross party consensus. I would have thought some sort of ISA type investment without any annuity requirement, a time limit before withdraws and some matching from employers ought to do it.

All well and good in theory, but what about those who don't/can't/won't pay into such a scheme. Then you need a safety net, and with that comes back the inherent challenge of the arguments about what the point is of saving if you're barely better off than not saving. That's the real crux of the issue. People simply won't bother saving at all unless they're going to be considerably better off than those who havn't. This is where it all goes wrong. Like we have at the moment with the pension credit where someone with a small private pension gets no benefit because the same amount is knocked off their pension credit, so what was the point in paying in for it? Like too many things at the moment, those at the bottom are protected by the welfare state, those at the top can afford to feather their nest, but the poor sods in the middle pay in and don't see much from it.

CLAPTON

the principles of pension are sadly not understood (a bit like the paradox of thrift/savings)

savings for retirement can benefit an individual or a few in society as that means thst some of us can be richer than the others

if everyone saves for retirement then we might just as well have a an increased state pension

ILW

When you have a BoE that by it's actions virtually states that saving is for mugs and if you overborrow you will be bailed out. Can you blame people for not putting something away?

DaddyBear

Here's an idea. Why don't they sell the houses they paid a few grand for, and are now worth several hundred thousand pounds. The notion of young workers paying more in tax to allow the luckiest generation in history to live easier is preposterous. I'm sure pensioner's votes has nothing to do with this idea.