Triple Lock Becomes Double Lock For 1 Year

Andy_L

Silvertabby said:

Andy_L said:

Silvertabby said:

I know people are howling about broken manifesto promises, but that was written before we knew that a global pandemic would knock the whole world on its a.r.s.e.

Of course it will have to be paid for, by the fairest means possible - and paying pensioners a wildly inflated 8.8% wouldn't have been fair.

And I've never understood why people suddenly stopped paying NI on their earnings, no matter how high, simply because they reached a certain age.

Stand by for the screaming from those who want it all on a butty - as long as someone else pays for it.

because most of the benefits that NI entitles you to aren't available to those over state pension age 

You mean like the NHS?

I said most. 

It's only the 1% levy on NI that goes to the NHS, so its a small proportion of NI that goes towards it compared to the other NI benefits

[Deleted User]

jamesd said:

Torry_Quine said:

I can remember my mother crying over bills, my father having no money for himself etc. Our standard of living was low. 

As it was for many, my own family not being particularly well off either in the 70s, but generally times were improving even if it was patchy for individual families.

Stagflation is when you have very high inflation combined with low growth.  Thats what happened in the 70s. Not just in the UK but UK was particularly badly impacted.  UK was rapidly losing out internationally in terms of real GDP per person and real income per person. Strong unions were not the only reason for the winter of discontent.   Houses were cheaper relative to salaries but far fewer people could afford them. 

“Generally times were improving” is not a particularly meaningful claim. 

itwasntme001

Deleted_User said:

jamesd said:

Torry_Quine said:

I can remember my mother crying over bills, my father having no money for himself etc. Our standard of living was low. 

As it was for many, my own family not being particularly well off either in the 70s, but generally times were improving even if it was patchy for individual families.

Stagflation is when you have very high inflation combined with low growth.  Thats what happened in the 70s. Not just in the UK but UK was particularly badly impacted.  UK was rapidly losing out internationally in terms of real GDP per person and real income per person. Strong unions were not the only reason for the winter of discontent.   Houses were cheaper relative to salaries but far fewer people could afford them. 

“Generally times were improving” is not a particularly meaningful claim. 

You are changing the subject to suit your argument.  We are not really discussing the relative standards of living across different countries (which may very well show UK getting worse during the 70s).  We are talking about the standard of living for just the UK population during the 70s, and as measured by real GDP per capita, these standards did go up in the 70s.

Real GDP per capita probably understates the improvement in living standard.  It is a mean measure.  A median real GDP per capita is more relevant (but it is impossible to calculate).  Even still, GDP itself doesn't capture everything about living standards (median income in real terms per capita is more suitable).

https://ercouncil.org/2016/chart-of-the-week-week-30-2016-uk-gdp-per-capita/

xylophone

ie there is already no link between paying NI and getting more pension 

But as explained above, the NI covers more than just the pension - if you lose your job when under SPA, it can cover you for unemployment benefits.

If you become sick when under SPA, it can cover you for statutory sick pay.

It covers maternity benefits for those who are eligible.

And to my mind, a pension is not "unearned" income.

It is income "earned" over a working life and if it is high enough, then income tax will be payable on it.

Thrugelmir

Torry_Quine said:

Thrugelmir said:

Torry_Quine said:

Thrugelmir said:

Torry_Quine said:

itwasntme001 said:

Deleted_User said:

jamesd said:

Deleted_User said:

Setting the wonderful 1970s as the golden standard is smart. Britain was doing so well, who wouldn’t want to try that again? 

"the truth is that most ordinary families in 1970s Britain were better off than ever"

That's in spite of organised labour driving Labour out of government and getting us Thatcher and more riots, including a few hundred meters from where I was living in London at the time.

Nice try at distraction.

Yep. Stagflation (including 30% inflation) and lowering of the level of life is what we should aim at.  Bound to help retirees make ends meet.  If the Beeb says that The Sick Men of Europe had it best then it must be true.   

jamesd is correct.  Living standards were pretty good in the 1970s for ordinary, working class people.  You had 30% inflation for like a year or so.  But you miss the fact that incomes rose also - such that real incomes were growing for nearly all years in the 1970s (and quite a bit more than they have done for the last 20 years).

This was also at a time when housing was cheap. ......

Not all working class families did well
 My family certainly struggled through every decade. This is why I don't like sweeping statements. 

Standard of living has generally improved across the board. Struggle is a relative term. 

I can remember my mother crying over bills, my father having no money for himself etc. Our standard of living was low. 

Never been unemployed yourself? 

Not sure why you're asking.
No I've never been unemployed although now disabled and not working

It's tough. Happens to many people in their working lives. 

[Deleted User]

itwasntme001 said:

Deleted_User said:

jamesd said:

Torry_Quine said:

I can remember my mother crying over bills, my father having no money for himself etc. Our standard of living was low. 

As it was for many, my own family not being particularly well off either in the 70s, but generally times were improving even if it was patchy for individual families.

Stagflation is when you have very high inflation combined with low growth.  Thats what happened in the 70s. Not just in the UK but UK was particularly badly impacted.  UK was rapidly losing out internationally in terms of real GDP per person and real income per person. Strong unions were not the only reason for the winter of discontent.   Houses were cheaper relative to salaries but far fewer people could afford them. 

“Generally times were improving” is not a particularly meaningful claim. 

You are changing the subject to suit your argument.  We are not really discussing the relative standards of living across different countries (which may very well show UK getting worse during the 70s).  We are talking about the standard of living for just the UK population during the 70s, and as measured by real GDP per capita, these standards did go up in the 70s.

Real GDP per capita probably understates the improvement in living standard.  It is a mean measure.  A median real GDP per capita is more relevant (but it is impossible to calculate).  Even still, GDP itself doesn't capture everything about living standards (median income in real terms per capita is more suitable).

https://ercouncil.org/2016/chart-of-the-week-week-30-2016-uk-gdp-per-capita/

Let me help. Contrary to your belief, stagnation does not actually improve average living standards.  Have a look at Figure 9.  Living standards went up during dumb monetary policy of the early 70s. Then contraction started (also alongside dumb monetary policy, high inflation, low growth and wage controls).  

Living standards went down between 1973 and 1974, 1974 and 1975, 1975 and 1976 and did not get back to 1973 levels until 1978/1979. 

http://zippy.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn85.pdf

Andy_L

xylophone said:

ie there is already no link between paying NI and getting more pension 

But as explained above, the NI covers more than just the pension - if you lose your job when under SPA, it can cover you for unemployment benefits.

If you become sick when under SPA, it can cover you for statutory sick pay.

No it doesn't - Employers have to pay SSP. They used to be able to claim it back via employers NI contributions but that was stopped years ago (I think it might be the same for stat maternity pay as well)

xylophone

Employers have to pay SSP. They used to be able to claim it back via employers NI contributions but that was stopped years ago 

Thank you for the information.

It doesn't change the position on unemployment, maternity, bereavement or incapacity benefit.

See https://www.which.co.uk/money/tax/national-insurance/national-insurance-and-benefits-ac0lg0d8m4uw#:~:text=When you make National Insurance,qualify for statutory maternity pay

itwasntme001

Deleted_User said:

itwasntme001 said:

Deleted_User said:

jamesd said:

Torry_Quine said:

I can remember my mother crying over bills, my father having no money for himself etc. Our standard of living was low. 

As it was for many, my own family not being particularly well off either in the 70s, but generally times were improving even if it was patchy for individual families.

Stagflation is when you have very high inflation combined with low growth.  Thats what happened in the 70s. Not just in the UK but UK was particularly badly impacted.  UK was rapidly losing out internationally in terms of real GDP per person and real income per person. Strong unions were not the only reason for the winter of discontent.   Houses were cheaper relative to salaries but far fewer people could afford them. 

“Generally times were improving” is not a particularly meaningful claim. 

You are changing the subject to suit your argument.  We are not really discussing the relative standards of living across different countries (which may very well show UK getting worse during the 70s).  We are talking about the standard of living for just the UK population during the 70s, and as measured by real GDP per capita, these standards did go up in the 70s.

Real GDP per capita probably understates the improvement in living standard.  It is a mean measure.  A median real GDP per capita is more relevant (but it is impossible to calculate).  Even still, GDP itself doesn't capture everything about living standards (median income in real terms per capita is more suitable).

https://ercouncil.org/2016/chart-of-the-week-week-30-2016-uk-gdp-per-capita/

Let me help. Contrary to your belief, stagnation does not actually improve average living standards.  Have a look at Figure 9.  Living standards went up during dumb monetary policy of the early 70s. Then contraction started (also alongside dumb monetary policy, high inflation, low growth and wage controls).  

Living standards went down between 1973 and 1974, 1974 and 1975, 1975 and 1976 and did not get back to 1973 levels until 1978/1979. 

http://zippy.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn85.pdf

That is a fair point about the period between 1973 and 1976, however you could also say, generally, that the 1970s saw real median incomes rise overall by about 15-20% or so.  So from that perspective the 70s were a period of rising living standards, albeit with some volatility due to 2 recessions.

Compare that to today (which is missing from your chart), living standards were certainly rising more rapidly during the 70s.

But I also don't think the median income figure captures the full picture about living standards for the working class.  Mostly, it was a period where debt became much more manageable as the real value of household debts eroded.  That obviously can't be captured in the median income statistics.

Perhaps disposable real income per capita gets us closer to what we are debating about?

[Deleted User]

Perhaps disposable real income per capita gets us closer to what we are debating about?

I am too lazy to google but it won’t be pretty. Long periods of declining disposable incomes. Stagflation is nasty. We don’t actually want it. We already have the low growth part of the equation. Adding high inflation would be devastating. Particularly to retirees. Money printing has got to stop.