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.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. 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!
Retired people could work for pensions..
Comments
-
GeorgeHowell wrote: »Once again you miss the key point. NI contributions are only nominally hypothecated in reality, which is why employee contributions might get rolled back into income tax. It is not a fully actuarially regulated pension fund like a private final salary scheme is supposed to be. Also it has never existed solely for the purpose of funding state pensions. Furthermore being effectively a form of taxation it is subject to political influences in terms of the level of contributions. It is what it says -- an insurance, theoretically against people being thrown into penury when they no longer work. HMG underwrites it out of current taxation.
So to say people didn't pay in enough is a nonsense. Similarly to say that people of a certain age are responsible for the mistakes and inadequacies of past governments is a nonsense. Do today's younger generations intend to accept responsibility if and when in the future some of the mistakes being made by current governments jump up and bite ? For example :- failure to deal with over-population, acceptance of the creeping loss of democracy within the EU; inadequate energy policies which will cause all the lights to go out and/or bankrupt us all; the destruction of our defences by running the armed forces down to nothing; the ever-increasing and highly damaging welfare culture; allowing the economy to be far too dependent on financial services, multiculturalism ...
and what part of their taxation pays for the current level of nhs spending? you dont have to preach to me about the run down in armed forces spending. i experienced it first hand.0 -
i dont really care. In 20 years roles will be reversed and it will be patently evident what this country has been left with to pay for real term rises in nhs pension and gold plated pensions for boomers.
well, something to make your day so you can break out the champagne
in 20 years time a significant number of the oldest baby boomers will have died or be near death0 -
and what part of their taxation pays for the current level of nhs spending? you dont have to preach to me about the run down in armed forces spending. i experienced it first hand.
What is your vision for a substantially thrifted NHS ? Compulsory Liverpool Care Pathway for all patients over 75 ? 100% mixed wards ? Minimum 6 months waiting lists for all non-life threatening conditions ? Prescription charges up to £20 per item ?No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
Does anyone have an evidence based calculation of how much an individual has paid into his "notional" pension fund in their working life compared to what they take out of it in state pension when they retire.
Say someone born in 1950 who started work at 16 years of age and paid the required % of salary in NI contributions until they retire in 2015. Then say they take a state pension until they die in say 2030.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
because pensions are the largest single benefit paid out by the dwp and perhaps you need to target the biggest outflows if you hope to make a difference?
Twaddle.
You don't target reductions in government expenditure based on what is the biggest item. You target it on what society's priorities are. There may be a few loony-tunes on the fringes of political sanity who want to see state pensions severely reduced or done away with. But there is no doubt that society as a whole would identify many other areas of spending as less beneficial and ripe for cuts. That's why all the major political parties are agreed that state pensions should increase in real terms.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
Does anyone have an evidence based calculation of how much an individual has paid into his "notional" pension fund in their working life compared to what they take out of it in state pension when they retire.
Say someone born in 1950 who started work at 16 years of age and paid the required % of salary in NI contributions until they retire in 2015. Then say they take a state pension until they die in say 2030.
Someone has probably done the calculation in a think tank somewhere, but I never seen it. Interesting question and point.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
well, something to make your day so you can break out the champagne
in 20 years time a significant number of the oldest baby boomers will have died or be near death
Not only that but the millions if not billions they have tied up in property will have been passed down to younger generation.0 -
i love the double standards about how its abhorrent to suggest a rise in pension age for the boomers, but the minute it is suggested for those say in their fiftys, its all fine and dandy.
People 'say in their fiftys' are boomers, in fact some are in their forties
'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
Perhaps the same as JSA? If I had ALL the answers I'd be running in the next electionFrogletina wrote: »What would you envisage a subsistence level to be?.
I would expect that everybody got the same (minimal) amount from the state pension, and that the poorest people got additional benefits such as HB and CTB as they do now. The only people relying solely on the state pension (i.e. without some form of private pension) should be those who have never worked - those who are working now would have (say) 5 years to start paying into a private pension before the first cut was made, or 10 years before the next cut etc.At the moment, the poorest people are getting the most from the state pension when you take into consideration housing benefits. How will you reduce it further?
I'm not sure what you mean here (although I freely admit I'm not really in touch with the details of the current state pension), is it possible to only get 60% of the state pension?And can anyone explain what difference it matters whether someone retires with a full pension or a pension of perhaps 60% because surely with a guaranteed minimum pension it won't matter unless you have a private pension as well. In fact surely it is better to have less than a full pension because you will then get pension credit which is a passport to further benefits.
When I rule the world it wouldn't matter, everyone would get full state pension but it would only really be enough to "survive" on (and hopefully, one flat rate would cut distribution costs). Anything else you had added over your years of working could just be used to contribute to your quality of life.Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?
― Sir Terry Pratchett, 1948-20150 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »What is your vision for a substantially thrifted NHS ? Compulsory Liverpool Care Pathway for all patients over 75 ? 100% mixed wards ? Minimum 6 months waiting lists for all non-life threatening conditions ? Prescription charges up to £20 per item ?
quite simple really. whatever is affordable to prevent any future threat to thr wellbeing of the country and the potential of future generations.
its affordable or it is not. the moralistic element you may get confused over, but stalling cuts now will make the cuts for later generations much worse.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards