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..

1353638404152

Comments

  • PaulF81
    PaulF81 Posts: 1,727 Forumite
    edited 13 November 2012 at 8:14PM
    CLAPTON wrote: »
    complete rubbish

    the 250% of GDP was the figure, the debt was reduced over an extended period of time

    inflation was indeed a significant factor and so it will be again

    the significance of the debt is that the repayments and interest lower the potential standard of living; all the people, youn,g medium and old shared that reduced living standard.

    whilst suffering that lowered standard of living, those people invested heavily in rebuilding the infrastucture of this country so that people like you can benefit from the existing infrastructure, education, health etc for which you have made only a modest contribution
    You are the one talking rubbish.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_GDP.png

    And how interest payments compared to now:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_National_Debt_interest.png
    The nation, on average, was paying debt off at barely 1% of GDP over the figure we are paying currently. Thats our overseas development budget right there. The vast majority of the debt, over 150% of GDP equivalent was seen off before the boomers were even in work. That left the remainder to be inflated away during the 70s and early 80s of course, the trashing your generation gave the purchasing power of the pound helped no end. As I said, the majority of the 250% figure was down to recovery of the economy (you divide by a bigger GDP, the debt to GDP ratio gets smaller, funny old thing).

    Trashing the ppi of the pound helped of course. It's a shame coal costs so much now than when you got to buy it. Cheers for that.

    http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/rp99-020.pdf

    Chart 3.
  • Dunroamin wrote: »
    I thought that you were in SERPS unless you'd contracted out and were paying into an occupational pension - it's one or the other, isn't it?

    ETA

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Earnings-Related_Pension_Scheme

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

    Yes, you are correct,someone who is in an Occupational Pension Scheme will not usually contribute to SERPS as well; also it is earnings-related.
    (AKA HRH_MUngo)
    Member #10 of £2 savers club
    Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology: Terry Eagleton
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Dunroamin wrote: »
    I thought that you were in SERPS unless you'd contracted out and were paying into an occupational pension - it's one or the other, isn't it?

    ETA

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Earnings-Related_Pension_Scheme

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

    Yes the contribution was either paid to the state or invested in a personal pension (contracted out) as I said the state second pension/serps was contributory similar to a personal pension.
    '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 Thatcher
  • ash28
    ash28 Posts: 1,789 Forumite
    Mortgage-free Glee! Debt-free and Proud!
    PaulF81 wrote: »
    Fine, NHS enhanced entitlement past 75 for those having served their country in ww2 or any conflict thereafter.

    We have already established this. The 250% figure was distorted by post ww2 GDP and besides, the boomers paid very little once the inflation of the 70s had seen off the capital.

    35% basic rate of tax? Through out the 70s basic rate income tax varied between 30% and 35%. The lowest of the higher rates was 40%.

    It didn't go to 25% until the end of the 1980s.

    Personal tax allowances were very low too - especially if you were single.

    So inflation may have been high but so was tax - the government still got it's slice.

    It was a joy....
  • PaulF81
    PaulF81 Posts: 1,727 Forumite
    ash28 wrote: »
    35% basic rate of tax? Through out the 70s basic rate income tax varied between 30% and 35%. The lowest of the higher rates was 40%.

    It didn't go to 25% until the end of the 1980s.

    Personal tax allowances were very low too - especially if you were single.

    So inflation may have been high but so was tax - the government still got it's slice.

    It was a joy....

    How the uk retained its grafters I will never know...
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    ash28 wrote: »
    35% basic rate of tax? Through out the 70s basic rate income tax varied between 30% and 35%. The lowest of the higher rates was 40%.

    ..

    The highest marginal rate of tax 98%, I wonder what Biggles would have made of that :eek:
    '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 Thatcher
  • PaulF81
    PaulF81 Posts: 1,727 Forumite
    StevieJ wrote: »
    The highest marginal rate of tax 98%, I wonder what Biggles would have made of that :eek:

    Already commented thanks stevie, if that's aimed at me. Why voting labour is bad for your wealth.
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    PaulF81 wrote: »
    Already commented thanks stevie, if that's aimed at me. Why voting labour is bad for your wealth.

    True, it was only 90% under the Tories ;)
    '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 Thatcher
  • ash28
    ash28 Posts: 1,789 Forumite
    Mortgage-free Glee! Debt-free and Proud!
    PaulF81 wrote: »
    How the uk retained its grafters I will never know...

    It didn't, as I'm sure you know - ourselves included. We left and worked in the Middle East for a number of years. I say "we" but where we were I couldn't work or drive, but I did meet some very interesting people and learn how to make beer and wine and use a still - used to make a liquor called sadiqi - means friend in Arabic - it certainly made us lots of those. The American PX was great - cans of malt and grape concentrate!!

    I'm sure people think that life was a breeze in the 1970s but it wasn't it was tough. One of the reasons we left was because we were so bloody poor, and there seemed to be no way out for us - couldn't afford a house - couldn't find anywhere decent to rent - never had any money or any real prospect of getting any. Taxed to death and inflation outstripping any pay rises we got. It just got harder and harder. Going overseas was the best thing we ever did.

    I'm not moaning or complaining - it was what it was.

    When we decided to start a family back we came.
  • PaulF81
    PaulF81 Posts: 1,727 Forumite
    ash28 wrote: »
    It didn't, as I'm sure you know - ourselves included. We left and worked in the Middle East for a number of years. I say "we" but where we were I couldn't work or drive, but I did meet some very interesting people and learn how to make beer and wine and use a still - used to make a liquor called sadiqi - means friend in Arabic - it certainly made us lots of those. The American PX was great - cans of malt and grape concentrate!!

    I'm sure people think that life was a breeze in the 1970s but it wasn't it was tough. One of the reasons we left was because we were so bloody poor, and there seemed to be no way out for us - couldn't afford a house - couldn't find anywhere decent to rent - never had any money or any real prospect of getting any. Taxed to death and inflation outstripping any pay rises we got. It just got harder and harder. Going overseas was the best thing we ever did.

    I'm not moaning or complaining - it was what it was.

    When we decided to start a family back we came.
    I have spent the last 5 years in and out of the Middle East. We're you in Kuwait, Saudi or UAE? I am preparing for a move to the UAE potentially in the next 5 years. I love it out there and love the ethic out there.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

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
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.