Chancellor Rishi Sunak hints at ruling out 8% pension rise

zagfles

german_keeper said:

zagfles said:

german_keeper said:

Forget the promise. Brown had to fund his expansion of the welfare state and growth in public sector headcount. One way or the other tax revenues had to be raised. Giveth with one hand and take away with the other. Burying the detail in the red book was the deceitful aspect. 

People will argue till the cows come home about the respective merits of Prime Ministers. I tend to look at how they conduct themselves when they leave office. Of recent PMs I think Gordon Brown and John Major have shown great dignity and principle since leaving office. In contrast to David Cameron and Tony Blair who seem to me to have only wanted the office to enable them to increase their personal wealth. Mind you I reckon when the current encumbent leaves office he will show that Messrs Blair and Cameron have only been playing at it on that score.

Nobody would beome PM "to increase their personal wealth". There are far easier ways to do that. CEO of a big company for instance. Footballer. BBC journalist. Better paid jobs, less pressure, less judgement, less people telling you how incompetant or nasty you are all the time.

So Blair and Cameron could have been professional footballers good enough to earn millions but they chose not to? Really? I would suggest the only route either of them had to make the money/achieve the fame that they did was the one that they chose. 

Err...no. I said there were easier routes. Not that all those routes would be open to them. The journalistic or CEO route could have been possibly.

The point was that I doubt any PM was primarily motivated by money in their career choice, any more than a footballer or a journalist. Not everything has a financial motive you know, some high profile politicans were filthy rich before even going into politics.

Andy_L

zagfles said:

german_keeper said:

Forget the promise. Brown had to fund his expansion of the welfare state and growth in public sector headcount. One way or the other tax revenues had to be raised. Giveth with one hand and take away with the other. Burying the detail in the red book was the deceitful aspect. 

People will argue till the cows come home about the respective merits of Prime Ministers. I tend to look at how they conduct themselves when they leave office. Of recent PMs I think Gordon Brown and John Major have shown great dignity and principle since leaving office. In contrast to David Cameron and Tony Blair who seem to me to have only wanted the office to enable them to increase their personal wealth. Mind you I reckon when the current encumbent leaves office he will show that Messrs Blair and Cameron have only been playing at it on that score.

Nobody would beome PM "to increase their personal wealth". There are far easier ways to do that. CEO of a big company for instance. Footballer. BBC journalist. Better paid jobs, less pressure, less judgement, less people telling you how incompetant or nasty you are all the time.

Boris was getting £1/4mill for his Telegraph column which he had to give up before he became PM

OldBeanz

Blair and Cameron were relatively young men when they left office in comparison to Churchill, Eden, McMillan, Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher - from my lifetime. Blair would have made more from the legal profession and Cameron had enough contacts to schmooze into a decent job as well - his father appeared to have done well for himself. Boris was earning more from writing for the Telegraph alone than he is presently making.

bostonerimus

zagfles said:

bostonerimus said:

I rarely find myself agreeing with this Government, but I'd support breaking the triple lock if it dictated an 8% rise to the state pension as that's a one time anomaly. The criticism I have is for politicians coming up with veinal policies like the triple lock designed to buy votes. The bigger issue is the staggeringly low level of the UK state pension compared to other developed countries and the decades of austerity forced on great British institutions by recent governments. Funding cuts to NHS, police, broadcasting, and worst of all the introduction of  students being charged university fees. and the lack of regard for rules and standards exemplified in the Grenfell disaster and the recent  conviction of Southern Water for polluting have turned the UK into a second world country...third world status looms.

This from someone who, AIRI, lives in the US What are student fees there? What is publicly funded healthcare like there? If the US is first world I prefer second world. People risk their lives to get here, from France!

You need to check your "facts" as well. NHS spending is constantly increasing, even in real terms, even before the pandemic. Don't lecture us about Grenfell till Miami is explained, the 2018 inspection would appear to have highlighted design errors.

And you complain about the state pension being "staggeringly low" but don't support an 8% rise Anyone who understands the UK benefits system knows that contributory benefits are low, but means tested benefits are among the best in the world. Plus the UK has generally better employer pension provision than countries who rely on the state more.

Why do you assume that I support the way US education and healthcare are funded and where I live is irrelevant to merit of my comments. Pointing out debacles like the Surfside condo collapse  in no way lessens the tragedy of Grenfell or the light that it should shine on systemic failings in the UK. Nothing is solved by getting defensive. Pointing out the failing of others in no way lessens your own failings.

My criticism of the 8% increase is because it’s a one off thing and does not solve the  basic low level of the state pension. 

german_keeper

zagfles said:

german_keeper said:

zagfles said:

german_keeper said:

Forget the promise. Brown had to fund his expansion of the welfare state and growth in public sector headcount. One way or the other tax revenues had to be raised. Giveth with one hand and take away with the other. Burying the detail in the red book was the deceitful aspect. 

People will argue till the cows come home about the respective merits of Prime Ministers. I tend to look at how they conduct themselves when they leave office. Of recent PMs I think Gordon Brown and John Major have shown great dignity and principle since leaving office. In contrast to David Cameron and Tony Blair who seem to me to have only wanted the office to enable them to increase their personal wealth. Mind you I reckon when the current encumbent leaves office he will show that Messrs Blair and Cameron have only been playing at it on that score.

Nobody would beome PM "to increase their personal wealth". There are far easier ways to do that. CEO of a big company for instance. Footballer. BBC journalist. Better paid jobs, less pressure, less judgement, less people telling you how incompetant or nasty you are all the time.

So Blair and Cameron could have been professional footballers good enough to earn millions but they chose not to? Really? I would suggest the only route either of them had to make the money/achieve the fame that they did was the one that they chose. 

Err...no. I said there were easier routes. Not that all those routes would be open to them. The journalistic or CEO route could have been possibly.

The point was that I doubt any PM was primarily motivated by money in their career choice, any more than a footballer or a journalist. Not everything has a financial motive you know, some high profile politicans were filthy rich before even going into politics.

So you quoted 3 jobs but you really meant only 2 of them were realistic. Sorry I wasn't clever enough to realise that. I'll try and do better in future.

zagfles

bostonerimus said:

zagfles said:

bostonerimus said:

I rarely find myself agreeing with this Government, but I'd support breaking the triple lock if it dictated an 8% rise to the state pension as that's a one time anomaly. The criticism I have is for politicians coming up with veinal policies like the triple lock designed to buy votes. The bigger issue is the staggeringly low level of the UK state pension compared to other developed countries and the decades of austerity forced on great British institutions by recent governments. Funding cuts to NHS, police, broadcasting, and worst of all the introduction of  students being charged university fees. and the lack of regard for rules and standards exemplified in the Grenfell disaster and the recent  conviction of Southern Water for polluting have turned the UK into a second world country...third world status looms.

This from someone who, AIRI, lives in the US What are student fees there? What is publicly funded healthcare like there? If the US is first world I prefer second world. People risk their lives to get here, from France!

You need to check your "facts" as well. NHS spending is constantly increasing, even in real terms, even before the pandemic. Don't lecture us about Grenfell till Miami is explained, the 2018 inspection would appear to have highlighted design errors.

And you complain about the state pension being "staggeringly low" but don't support an 8% rise Anyone who understands the UK benefits system knows that contributory benefits are low, but means tested benefits are among the best in the world. Plus the UK has generally better employer pension provision than countries who rely on the state more.

Why do you assume that I support the way US education and healthcare are funded and where I live is irrelevant to merit of my comments. Pointing out debacles like the Surfside condo collapse  in no way lessens the tragedy of Grenfell or the light that it should shine on systemic failings in the UK. Nothing is solved by getting defensive.

My criticism of the 8% increase is because it’s a one off thing and does not solve the  basic low level of the state pension. 

So what countries don't have one off tragic events which kill 70 odd people then, eh? The pandemic has killed 4 million worldwide. 2000 people die every single day of natural causes in the UK. Try getting a sense of proportion before hysterical comments about systemic failures and becoming a third world country. I'd prefer living here to the vast majority of countries in the world, definitely including the US.

michaels

bostonerimus said:

zagfles said:

bostonerimus said:

I rarely find myself agreeing with this Government, but I'd support breaking the triple lock if it dictated an 8% rise to the state pension as that's a one time anomaly. The criticism I have is for politicians coming up with veinal policies like the triple lock designed to buy votes. The bigger issue is the staggeringly low level of the UK state pension compared to other developed countries and the decades of austerity forced on great British institutions by recent governments. Funding cuts to NHS, police, broadcasting, and worst of all the introduction of  students being charged university fees. and the lack of regard for rules and standards exemplified in the Grenfell disaster and the recent  conviction of Southern Water for polluting have turned the UK into a second world country...third world status looms.

This from someone who, AIRI, lives in the US What are student fees there? What is publicly funded healthcare like there? If the US is first world I prefer second world. People risk their lives to get here, from France!

You need to check your "facts" as well. NHS spending is constantly increasing, even in real terms, even before the pandemic. Don't lecture us about Grenfell till Miami is explained, the 2018 inspection would appear to have highlighted design errors.

And you complain about the state pension being "staggeringly low" but don't support an 8% rise Anyone who understands the UK benefits system knows that contributory benefits are low, but means tested benefits are among the best in the world. Plus the UK has generally better employer pension provision than countries who rely on the state more.

Why do you assume that I support the way US education and healthcare are funded and where I live is irrelevant to merit of my comments. Pointing out debacles like the Surfside condo collapse  in no way lessens the tragedy of Grenfell or the light that it should shine on systemic failings in the UK. Nothing is solved by getting defensive.

My criticism of the 8% increase is because it’s a one off thing and does not solve the  basic low level of the state pension. 

The only way to 'solve' that problem is for current workers to pay much more tax - seems like a good solution for those who are so convinced they have already paid their share towards their pensions whilst they were working.

zagfles

german_keeper said:

zagfles said:

german_keeper said:

zagfles said:

german_keeper said:

Forget the promise. Brown had to fund his expansion of the welfare state and growth in public sector headcount. One way or the other tax revenues had to be raised. Giveth with one hand and take away with the other. Burying the detail in the red book was the deceitful aspect. 

People will argue till the cows come home about the respective merits of Prime Ministers. I tend to look at how they conduct themselves when they leave office. Of recent PMs I think Gordon Brown and John Major have shown great dignity and principle since leaving office. In contrast to David Cameron and Tony Blair who seem to me to have only wanted the office to enable them to increase their personal wealth. Mind you I reckon when the current encumbent leaves office he will show that Messrs Blair and Cameron have only been playing at it on that score.

Nobody would beome PM "to increase their personal wealth". There are far easier ways to do that. CEO of a big company for instance. Footballer. BBC journalist. Better paid jobs, less pressure, less judgement, less people telling you how incompetant or nasty you are all the time.

So Blair and Cameron could have been professional footballers good enough to earn millions but they chose not to? Really? I would suggest the only route either of them had to make the money/achieve the fame that they did was the one that they chose. 

Err...no. I said there were easier routes. Not that all those routes would be open to them. The journalistic or CEO route could have been possibly.

The point was that I doubt any PM was primarily motivated by money in their career choice, any more than a footballer or a journalist. Not everything has a financial motive you know, some high profile politicans were filthy rich before even going into politics.

So you quoted 3 jobs but you really meant only 2 of them were realistic. Sorry I wasn't clever enough to realise that. I'll try and do better in future.

Glad to hear it. As you now probably understand, the point was that many other careers would lead to better income. The actual career is not really the point. But as pointed out above, some were definitely in reach of recent PMs as proved above. So the idea they were motivated to become PM by money is unlikely. 

Thrugelmir

german_keeper said:

Forget the promise. Brown had to fund his expansion of the welfare state and growth in public sector headcount. One way or the other tax revenues had to be raised. Giveth with one hand and take away with the other. Burying the detail in the red book was the deceitful aspect. 

People will argue till the cows come home about the respective merits of Prime Ministers.

Seems that you've overlooked the fact that Brown was Chancellor of the Exchequer not the Prime Minster for many years. Chancellors have powers that can materially impact the wealth of the nation long after they have held office. There's much to be said for the German law , introduced post unification, that requires balance budgets. That stops politicians playing God simply to win peoples hearts. Results in a more mature and informed level of debate. Than is normally found on social media these days. Where financial literacy appears at all time lows. 

bostonerimus

zagfles said:

bostonerimus said:

zagfles said:

bostonerimus said:

I rarely find myself agreeing with this Government, but I'd support breaking the triple lock if it dictated an 8% rise to the state pension as that's a one time anomaly. The criticism I have is for politicians coming up with veinal policies like the triple lock designed to buy votes. The bigger issue is the staggeringly low level of the UK state pension compared to other developed countries and the decades of austerity forced on great British institutions by recent governments. Funding cuts to NHS, police, broadcasting, and worst of all the introduction of  students being charged university fees. and the lack of regard for rules and standards exemplified in the Grenfell disaster and the recent  conviction of Southern Water for polluting have turned the UK into a second world country...third world status looms.

This from someone who, AIRI, lives in the US What are student fees there? What is publicly funded healthcare like there? If the US is first world I prefer second world. People risk their lives to get here, from France!

You need to check your "facts" as well. NHS spending is constantly increasing, even in real terms, even before the pandemic. Don't lecture us about Grenfell till Miami is explained, the 2018 inspection would appear to have highlighted design errors.

And you complain about the state pension being "staggeringly low" but don't support an 8% rise Anyone who understands the UK benefits system knows that contributory benefits are low, but means tested benefits are among the best in the world. Plus the UK has generally better employer pension provision than countries who rely on the state more.

Why do you assume that I support the way US education and healthcare are funded and where I live is irrelevant to merit of my comments. Pointing out debacles like the Surfside condo collapse  in no way lessens the tragedy of Grenfell or the light that it should shine on systemic failings in the UK. Nothing is solved by getting defensive.

My criticism of the 8% increase is because it’s a one off thing and does not solve the  basic low level of the state pension. 

So what countries don't have one off tragic events which kill 70 odd people then, eh? The pandemic has killed 4 million worldwide. 2000 people die every single day of natural causes in the UK. Try getting a sense of proportion before hysterical comments about systemic failures and becoming a third world country. I'd prefer living here to the vast majority of countries in the world, definitely including the US.

Agreed there are one off accidents and tragedies everywhere everyday and the pandemic is awful. Human error can be excused when it is a legitimate error and not a pattern of disregard for rules and regulations and for safety. Florida might have an issue with the time scale of building inspections, the contractors didn't do a good job and the condo association and the building owners did not act swiftly enough to repair the building. There might be systemic issues through out Florida. With Grenfell we now know that thousands of buildings are have dangerous cladding and fire safety not up to code. That tragedy unveiled an massive problem in the implementation of UK building regulations and a willingness to cut corners to save money.

I would also prefer to live in the UK over most countries, but that doesn't mean there are not things that I want to see improved and changed. I would never live in Florida or vast regions of the US as they are worse than the UK ;-).