NHS should provide retirement housing

GeorgeHowell

I would like to understand in what ways the younger generations on the whole are deemed as being required to "suck it up".

Two oft quoted examples are housing costs and higher education costs. The former is due to increasing population, social trends creating more individual households, and overreaction by mortgage lenders to their previous reckless ways. It is not due to a Baby Boomer conspiracy dating back to the 1970s aimed at screwing up their children's futures. There are medium/long term solutions to all these problems (proper immigration controls/not subsidising procreation/rewarding marriage/sensible assertive regulation of the financial sector) but they appear to be unpalatable to much of the soft-underbellied UK.

Higher education costs stem solely from Blair's social engineering policy of putting everybody and his uncle through it without any clue how to pay for it. Return to times when only those who would really benefit went into higher education (which we now seen to be gradually doing) and the problem could be resolved (it won't because having got used to pocketing the fees the government won't give them up again).

Pensions however is another matter. State retirement pensions (and public sector pensions) are funded out of the taxes of the day, right or wrong. Nobody can be criticised for not paying enough, assuming they didn't evade tax. The present funding problem stems from increased longevity and the fact that government finances are in such a state due to the waste and irresponsibility of the Blair and Brown regimes. Trying to blame the present generation of pensioners for this situation is cras, unintelligent, and pathetic.

PaulF81

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

For someone who ally ar quite mental at least I can make a post in coherent English.

Ipad spell correct is quite cr*p. Apologies to the grammar Nazi.

PaulF81

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

I would like to understand in what ways the younger generations on the whole are deemed as being required to "suck it up".

Two oft quoted examples are housing costs and higher education costs. The former is due to increasing population, social trends creating more individual households, and overreaction by mortgage lenders to their previous reckless ways. It is not due to a Baby Boomer conspiracy dating back to the 1970s aimed at screwing up their children's futures. There are medium/long term solutions to all these problems (proper immigration controls/not subsidizing procreation/rewarding marriage/sensible assertive regulation of the financial sector) but they appear to be unpalatable to much of the soft-underbellied UK.

Higher education costs stem solely from Blair's social engineering policy of putting everybody and his uncle through it without any clue how to pay for it. Return to times when only those who would really benefit went into higher education (which we now seen to be gradually doing) and the problem could be resolved (it won't because having got used to pocketing the fees the government won't give them up again).

Pensions however is another matter. State retirement pensions (and public sector pensions) are funded out of the taxes of the day, right or wrong. Nobody can be criticized for not paying enough, assuming they didn't evade tax. The present funding problem stems from increased longevity and the fact that government finances are in such a state due to the waste and irresponsibility of the Blair and Brown regimes. Trying to blame the present generation of pensioners for this situation is cras, unintelligent, and pathetic.

I don't disagree with anything you say. I do disagree that current and near term state pension entrants should get away Scott free whilst the rest of us have our pension schemes cut, tuition fees put through the roof and other middle income benefits slashed. I am all for taking benefits away completely from those who don't contribute to the system, I do think that like my public sector pension (cut by 40% so I left, taking over a million in public sector training investment with me), private sector pension (share the pain with pensioners here via QE), medical care (which will have to get cut at some stage, make no mistake about that), pensioners should also have significant cutbacks to a scheme which is frankly unaffordable.

I agree about the 50% to uni thing in particular, my course had higher wastage rates than medicine and required 3 Bs at A level (maths and physics compulsory). I was later told that they only considered candidates predicted A or B at general studies. However, on the flip side of the coin, the investment in Further Education means university investment (our department was focusing on neural networks in aviation application) means the country as a whole benefits from the larger numbers of PhDs being completed. What SHOULD have happened was Engineering and Science courses should have been kept free whilst Arts and other nonsense should have incurred 9k fees wherever you go in the country. We DO NOT NEED more arts graduates in this country (certainly not in the numbers we were generating).

Oh, the housing thing could be solved completely by a reversal of the complete nimbyism displayed with respect to the boomers and building on the greenbelt. I drive for 40 minutes through completely rural areas on the way to work, I live in a rural area on a decent sized smallholding and you must be a complete idiot to not realize the solution to the housing crisis is relaxation of permissions for self build on green belt. Those of previous generations most definitely enjoyed these privileges, many my age with multi million pound skills would not emigrate as many are looking to do if this sort of policy was introduced.

grizzly1911

PaulF81 wrote: »

What SHOULD have happened was Engineering and Science courses should have been kept free whilst Arts and other nonsense should have incurred 9k fees wherever you go in the country. We DO NOT NEED more arts graduates in this country (certainly not in the numbers we were generating).

Something I do agree on.;)

paso11

Getting back to the topic at hand...

All this talk about retirement housing from the NHS, its almost pointless debating until:

-We know the projected cost
-The means of paying for it?

GeorgeHowell

PaulF81 wrote: »

Ipad spell correct is quite cr*p. Apologies to the grammar Nazi.

It's spelling, not grammar, actually which is of issue. And use of that N-word is deeply disagreeable especially to those who remember WWII or its aftermath. I suspect that you would not use the other n-word, even on an internet forum, so why this one ?

I notice also that anyone with whom you disagree has to be mental, an idiot, or a dementia case. As someone who is a clearly not a complete moron in other respects, your posts and arguments would hold more credibility if you could refrain from such blatant and puerile insulting of your opponents in debate.

And by the way it isn't only baby Boomers who are NIMBYS (or BANANAS). There are plenty of people of all age groups who take a more holistic view of the overall quality of life, and who do not see the COSE (Concrete Over the South of England) policy as the long-term solution. We are an overcrowded island and the answer lies in population control. Adding to the overcrowdedness will only deteriorate the quality of life further and make people such as yourself even more angry and embittered.

PaulF81

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

It's spelling, not grammar, actually which is of issue. And use of that N-word is deeply disagreeable especially to those who remember WWII or its aftermath. I suspect that you would not use the other n-word, even on an internet forum, so why this one ?

I notice also that anyone with whom you disagree has to be mental, an idiot, or a dementia case. As someone who is a clearly not a complete moron in other respects, your posts and arguments would hold more credibility if you could refrain from such blatant and puerile insulting of your opponents in debate.

And by the way it isn't only baby Boomers who are NIMBYS (or BANANAS). There are plenty of people of all age groups who take a more holistic view of the overall quality of life, and who do not see the COSE (Concrete Over the South of England) policy as the long-term solution. We are an overcrowded island and the answer lies in population control. Adding to the overcrowdedness will only deteriorate the quality of life further and make people such as yourself even more angry and embittered.

Who will pay your ridiculous over entitled pensions if you plan to shrink the uk population, or haven't you properly thought this through, seeing as the uk state pension is the biggest ponzu scheme going?

As for calling it the n word, give over. Grammar Nazi, not nazi. Offence is taken its not given. Get back to your guardian.

Graham_Devon

Isn't the reality that it's far more socially and politically acceptable to cut benefits and income for the younger generation than it is to cut for the older generation?

No one votes for their own lifestyle to worsen, thereofre pretty much everyone votes for something that won't effect them.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

grizzly1911 wrote: »

As for the comfortable retirement - save and take out a pension like many of have done and do not rely on the state pension to do it in isolation.

Surely it's not that straightforward? You'll be telling us next that in order to save money you need to spend less than you earn.

The usual suspects on here will be up in arms, it's impossible to do anything to improve your circumstances, especially with straighforward, common sense solutions! The only option available is to flood internet forums with their interminable rants about how life has dealt them a poor hand.

One poster has textual diarrhea whenever fuel prices go up, yet is unwilling to get a job closer to his house or house closer to his job. It's all just too damned difficult!!!!

GeorgeHowell

PaulF81 wrote: »

Who will pay your ridiculous over entitled pensions if you plan to shrink the uk population, or haven't you properly thought this through, seeing as the uk state pension is the biggest ponzu scheme going?

As for calling it the n word, give over. Grammar Nazi, not nazi. Offence is taken its not given. Get back to your guardian.

I've never heard of a ponzu scheme.

The term Nazi is offensive, whether you care to acknowledge it or not. Considering what they did it should not be used lightly, and all the bluster in the world will not change that.

If you have seen many of my posts you surely could not make such a fatuous remark as to suggest that I would read that paper. In your own words -- give over.

Regarding whether I have thought through the question of funding UK state pensions I would like to understand what your proposed solution is. Is it to summarily reduce current state pensions, thus throwing many existing pensioners into penury (which could include you one day), so that the younger generation can continue with their new IPad every year, and frequent stag and hen weeks in Barcelona ? HMG's policy appears to be in the opposite direction and I can't see Labour overturning that if they get in. Or is it to encourage ever-increasing procreation so there are more young to fund the pensions ? The logical conclusion of that is that eventually that we would become so overcrowded that starvation would get us if fatal incurable epidemics did not do so first.

If I haven't thought it through, then perhaps you'd like to put up a convincing case as to how you have done so (preferably on a proper PC and not the Apple toy, so we can understand it without eye strain)