NHS pensions are bleeding the taxpayer dry

uk1

bigadaj wrote: »

Similarly such set ups are absent across Asia where the new and growing vibrant economies are generally based.

Not many people know this ....:D

In Singapore under the Maintenance of Parents Act 2013, children are obligated to support their over 60 year old parents. There is a whole legal process supporting this law, but basically a 60+ parent can take their kids to court and the court basically a very speedy tribunal service, all booked online - compels the kids to provide financial support to their parents.



Jeff

BucksLady

uk1 wrote: »

I happen to know that my GP and his wife - a fellow GP - earn around £500k between them and they have a stonking pension. I also see that they are harvesting patients like a crop. Make someone come in for a blood pressure check and "kerching" even if they self-monitor. If I go over the sugar limit and they can register me as a diabetic and then it is "kerching".

Jeff

Your GP and his wife are doing exceedingly well to earn such a fortune. I'm married to a GP and his income as a Partner in a small Practice is far less than that. His brother, who specialises in advising SMEs and acts for a broad range of clients, including privately-owned and AIM-listed companies - earns twice as much.
However, it is my husband who works the longest hours, and spends much of his time worrying about the people who he has encountered that day - yes, his patients.

uk1

BucksLady wrote: »

Your GP and his wife are doing exceedingly well to earn such a fortune. I'm married to a GP and his income as a Partner in a small Practice is far less than that. His brother, who specialises in advising SMEs and acts for a broad range of clients, including privately-owned and AIM-listed companies - earns twice as much.
However, it is my husband who works the longest hours, and spends much of his time worrying about the people who he has encountered that day - yes, his patients.

There has been a lot of publicity to a small but growing number of GPs that appear to be earning more than seems right and perhaps harvesting a system. It isn't a criticism of all GPs.

We all have an opinion about what each different members of society should be paid. I don't think many think £250k would be the figure.

It wouldn't surprise me if your husband were under paid for the work he does.

Jeff

elantan

Many people that work for the NHS are underpaid, the pension is no longer as good as it used to be.

Yes there are people that are making plenty and there are people that will get a large pension, but there are many more earning £8an hour for doing incredibly hard work, they are having to put up with both physical and verbal abuse, they let their own health suffer whilst trying to ensure their patients get better, many have had little if any payrise for years now

jimi_man

uk1 wrote: »

Not many people know this ....:D

In Singapore under the Maintenance of Parents Act 2013, children are obligated to support their over 60 year old parents. There is a whole legal process supporting this law, but basically a 60+ parent can take their kids to court and the court basically a very speedy tribunal service, all booked online - compels the kids to provide financial support to their parents.



Jeff

What an appalling idea. Taking your kids to court to get them to pay for you is unlikely to be great for harmonious family relationships.

uk1

jimi_man wrote: »

What an appalling idea. Taking your kids to court to get them to pay for you is unlikely to be great for harmonious family relationships.

It would be an appalling idea in the UK, but in Singapore it is a natural extension to what is considered normal and proper in their Asian culture. It is difficult for a Brit to understand the difference. Children not looking after needy parents in Singapore would be reviled by their peers and it would be considered a disgrace to the children for their parents needing to take their kids to court.

There is a lot in other cultures we have to learn if we simply open our minds and accept the challenge they pose.

Jeff

RickyB2000

bigadaj wrote: »

It's a lovely world where you can do that but countries will generally miss out in open competition when they are loaded with the full bill of a large public sector.

If you look at teh brooding and successful countries in the world then they are generally small government, the US has performed very well with nothing like an NHS and a minimal social security system.

Similarly such set ups are absent across Asia where the new and growing vibrant economies are generally based.

European countries often adopt a large state scenario, but it's certainly not successful and if anything leads to even more generational disparity than we have in the uk. Nowhere in Southern Europe is successful, the Dutch and Nordic countries are small and certainly have challenges and even Germany is diluting benefits for younger people, trying to pay for the commitments made to older generation is proving very difficult whichever country you look at.

I fear you are right. Globalisation is reducing living standards to the lowest denominator for everyone. Well, I mean everyone who is poor. Of course the rich are getting richer and are not limited by national boarders. I am saying we should look to stop this, not just accept it and accelerate its demise through jealousy of other poor people we perseve as having more than us.

I do believe in DB reforms. I just think most companies have taken the easy way out that suits their owners and shareholders. I think those who are envious of public sector pensions should be looking at why their pension provision is so poor in comparison rather than trying to shut down the public sector schemes. Unless i have mis-judged this thread and this is actually a debate about whether we should remove already earned pensions?

Also, does the pension liability reflect the fact that at least some of the money paid out will come back in tax in one form or another? Income tax, VAT, company tax etc. I guess that which doesn't ends up in the pockets of the very rich......

uk1

RickyB2000 wrote: »

I fear you are right. Globalisation is reducing living standards to the lowest denominator for everyone. Well, I mean everyone who is poor. Of course the rich are getting richer and are not limited by national boarders. I am saying we should look to stop this, not just accept it and accelerate its demise.

I do believe in DB reforms. I just think most companies have taken the easy way out that suits their owners and shareholders. Unless i have mis-judged this thread and this is actually a debate about whether we should remove already earned pensions?

Also, does the pension liability reflect the fact that at least some of the money paid out will come back in tax in one form or another? Income tax, VAT, company tax etc. I guess that which doesn't ends up in the pockets of the very rich......

I like this post .... not all of yours ...;) ... but certainly this one.:D

I was an out and out capitalist, but with the worst aspects of globalisation taking their toll on too many people, I've changed my mind a bit and "gone all socialist". Well nearly.

There is a balance to be drawn between the advantages of globalisation and capitalism on the one side and the obligation we all have that people that try are not let down and they receive protection from exploitation.

With respect to DB schemes, I don't think the principle of benefits already earned are really at risk, although not entirely. CPI v RPI might be a nibbling away at accrued rights.

Jeff

RickyB2000

uk1 wrote: »

I like this post .... not all of yours ...;) ... but certainly this one.:D

I was an out and out capitalist, but with the worst aspects of globalisation taking their toll on too many people, I've changed my mind a bit and "gone all socialist". Well nearly.

There is a balance to be drawn between the advantages of globalisation and capitalism on the one side and the obligation we all have that people that try are not let down and they receive protection from exploitation.

With respect to DB schemes, I don't think the principle of benefits already earned are really at risk, although not entirely. CPI v RPI might be a nibbling away at accrued rights.

Jeff

I would never have called myself a socialist . Having first hand experience of a DB scheme being closed down in the private sector, I am annoyed that we didn't do more to try to save it (both employees and management). Rather than directing anger at other poor people who still have DB schemes as having more than me, I think it is better targeted at those at the top who are ultimately making these decisions. We should be questioning whether this ultimately allowed them to close schemes to increase profits / boardroom bonus / dividend payments.

The rich and powers that be love it when poor people are all squabbling that other poor people have more. Gives them justification to take more from those other poor people. OK, now I sound very much like a socialist.

I would consider your £500k doctors as rich, but not your average nurse. Reform the system fairly, don't just shut it down.

uk1

RickyB2000 wrote: »

I would never have called myself a socialist . Having first hand experience of a DB scheme being closed down in the private sector, I am annoyed that we didn't do more to try to save it (both employees and management). Rather than directing anger at other poor people who still have DB schemes as having more than me, I think it is better targeted at those at the top who are ultimately making these decisions. We should be questioning whether this ultimately allowed them to close schemes to increase profits / boardroom bonus / dividend payments.

The rich and powers that be love it when poor people are all squabbling that other poor people have more. Gives them justification to take more from those other poor people. OK, now I sound very much like a socialist.

I would consider your £500k doctors as rich, but not your average nurse. Reform the system fairly, don't just shut it down.

The closing of DB systems to me, and I say this grudgingly, is simply an inevitable consequence of common sense. In reality, unpopular as my view is, I do not believe it was sensible to offer them in the first place. Or perhaps it was but various issues prevented them ever really being affordable in a sensible way. I say that as a person receiving a DB pension since 50. In reality I paid very little compared to the benefit.

The problem is the DC is never going to be enough for most people, so future generations will simply have to think of retirement differently from earlier generations.

I realised that I was developing socialist tendencies when I realised that even though I am an ex-employer I totally believe in a genuine - and even worst, a more generous "living wage". I never bought it causes harm. The main thing is to ensure everyone complies and isn't allowed to weedle their way out of it. So it is the same for all employers and they compete with people on equal ground. Everyone that works a full week should have enough income to live on.

Anyway ... we digress.

Jeff