Omg 18%

Albermarle

Over the longer term, yes, but it can be a bumpy ride in the short term. We have had a bumper 10 years of equity returns so I'd expect the next 10 years to be a tough ride to average things out.

For the last couple of years, there have been similar comments on the forum about the next decade being one of probable low returns. So far looks to be a good prediction, although now only 8 years left !

zagfles

saucer said:

SouthCoastBoy said:

Moby said:

I wonder whether we'll get matching increases in our ndex linked LGPS pensions this Sept. Wouldn't be surprised if the Govmt capped them!
I reckon I'll still get a larger increase than the pay increase I'd have got if I'd continued working though. 

People with public sector pensions are the lucky ones they are protected by inflation. From what the government is saying it also looks like people receiving benefits are also protected, it's the workers and people with private pensions that are going to take the hit

Of course people with public sector pensions who are still working are less well protected than those in payment. For people with ‘gilt edge’ final salary schemes inflation is of little benefit if the salary is lagging it. Wage inflation significantly lower than in private sector on average. 

Most of the public sector is now in CARE schemes aren't they, which aren't so bad when salary lags inflation as earned pension to date is uplifted by inflation not salary rises.

zagfles

sevenhills said:

SouthCoastBoy said:

 From what the government is saying it also looks like people receiving benefits are also protected, it's the workers and people with private pensions that are going to take the hit

I have not seen anything that states benefits will increase with inflation, the state pension yes.
Poor people are getting hundreds £££s towards their energy bills, they won't get an inflation increase too.
More likely nothing or an increase to match wage increases.
The minimum wage could increase by 10+%

Most benefits automatically rise with inflation. The problem at the moment is the big lag between the inflation figure used, Sept of the previous year, and when it's implemented, the following April. So they won't get the benefit of this Sept's (probably very high) inflation rate until April, which leaves a problem paying massive gas bills this winter.

What they could do as a one off is pre-pay part of the inflation increase from eg Oct/Nov as a sort of advance rise, and take it off the April increase, so basically they get part of the increase early.

zagfles

sevenhills said:

JoeCrystal said:

But considering the total remuneration, including the pension, the public sector pay is still much better than the private sector pay. Unfortunately, there are a lot of public sector workers that do not take into account of the generosity of their pension scheme. If I remember correctly, it is 7% overall with 20% premium among low-skilled public sector workers against the private sector workers.

Research shows that total remuneration in the public sector is comparable to other large organisations.
Large organisations tend to pay more.

Do they? Have you got a link?

sevenhills

daz378 said:

Surely they will cap prices  of energy at 2k a year....or will wreck the economy   believe 2 year cap  would cost 100 billion...together with rising interest rates    cost of living crisis could effect  upper working/middle class families...

It's business energy that needs capping, as there is no cap at all.
Personally I feel they should give people inflation pay rises and not cap.
Energy is just a service you can choose to buy or not.
People can choose to power their home with electric, coal, oil, wood or wind/solar. Most people choose the easiest option, quite often the cheapest too. We all have a choice, most choose one of the big six.

JoeCrystal

zagfles said:

sevenhills said:

JoeCrystal said:

But considering the total remuneration, including the pension, the public sector pay is still much better than the private sector pay. Unfortunately, there are a lot of public sector workers that do not take into account of the generosity of their pension scheme. If I remember correctly, it is 7% overall with 20% premium among low-skilled public sector workers against the private sector workers.

Research shows that total remuneration in the public sector is comparable to other large organisations.
Large organisations tend to pay more.

Do they? Have you got a link?

Well, I used ONS website to get the numbers. Link below: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/publicandprivatesectorearnings/2019

arnoldy

Personally I feel they should give people inflation pay rises and not cap.

Agree. If the price of food staples doubles does that warrant yet another special handout? Are we going to have a bread cheese and milk price cap?

The best thing we can do it to raise the interest rates in a purposeful and sustained manner, control public expenditure, and hack away at unnecessary red tape. This is the only way to control inflation, which will be hard in the short term but has to be done. Even in the 70s there was not this current level of nanny state trying to make everything rosy in the garden and pretending we can push off the belt tightening.

zagfles

JoeCrystal said:

zagfles said:

sevenhills said:

JoeCrystal said:

But considering the total remuneration, including the pension, the public sector pay is still much better than the private sector pay. Unfortunately, there are a lot of public sector workers that do not take into account of the generosity of their pension scheme. If I remember correctly, it is 7% overall with 20% premium among low-skilled public sector workers against the private sector workers.

Research shows that total remuneration in the public sector is comparable to other large organisations.
Large organisations tend to pay more.

Do they? Have you got a link?

Well, I used ONS website to get the numbers. Link below: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/publicandprivatesectorearnings/2019

Look at figure 3b, which includes pension contributions. It shows virtually all public sector workers have significantly higher remuneration, except for "upper-middle-skilled and upper-skilled workers in very large firms", where private sector are very slightly higher. The graph says it all.

NedS

daz378 said:

Surely they will cap prices  of energy at 2k a year....or will wreck the economy   believe 2 year cap  would cost 100 billion...together with rising interest rates    cost of living crisis could effect  upper working/middle class families...

Who do you think is going to pay for that? The problem with a cap is that it benefits everyone (almost equally). With limited resources, I would prefer to see what available resources we do have targeted towards those who need it most - the vulnerable and those on very low incomes. Middle Britain is going to have to suck up a lot of the pain, as they are the ones who can afford to do so. IMHO it is not right that we spend tax payers money capping or reducing energy bills of those best placed to be able to afford the increases.
I am lucky that we can afford the current price rises. It will still be very painful for us, but I will not have to choose between heating our home or putting food on the table - there are other things we can still cut back on before we have to make those kind of dire choices. Others are far less fortunate and I have no desire to see the government run up another 100 billion of debt to subsidise my energy usage. Target the help towards those who need it most.

Pat38493

NedS said:

daz378 said:

Surely they will cap prices  of energy at 2k a year....or will wreck the economy   believe 2 year cap  would cost 100 billion...together with rising interest rates    cost of living crisis could effect  upper working/middle class families...

Who do you think is going to pay for that? The problem with a cap is that it benefits everyone (almost equally). With limited resources, I would prefer to see what available resources we do have targeted towards those who need it most - the vulnerable and those on very low incomes. Middle Britain is going to have to suck up a lot of the pain, as they are the ones who can afford to do so. IMHO it is not right that we spend tax payers money capping or reducing energy bills of those best placed to be able to afford the increases.
I am lucky that we can afford the current price rises. It will still be very painful for us, but I will not have to choose between heating our home or putting food on the table - there are other things we can still cut back on before we have to make those kind of dire choices. Others are far less fortunate and I have no desire to see the government run up another 100 billion of debt to subsidise my energy usage. Target the help towards those who need it most.

In principle I agree but there are a couple of issues.

First, even relatively high earning households will find that the energy price increase alone, if it goes where some are predicting next year and stays there, will use up pretty much all their disposable income.  When they all stop spending on all discretionary items, this will obviously trigger a recession (or even potentially a depression) so this also has to be taken into account in the decision making process - maybe this is still the right thing to do, but slashing the discretionary spending of a large % of the population is not without other effects.

Second - the party that currently governs the UK gets a lot of their votes from those people that you think should pay the whole price, so even if it's the right thing to do, it's not evident that they will do it.