oowee

Me too. If it gets too long I cant mulch it. Taking the cutting off takes me three times as long.

I have this (50mm celotex) as part of the house remodel. It's a great improvement although sight lines on the window frames are a little reduced.

👍

👍 That's the way to do it.

Islam and islamists are not the same. Islamists refers to those that want a political system based on fundamental Islamic law. In the same way as you would not describe white extremists as representative of the white population the same is true of those that follow Islam.

^^^^^^ This. Golf is a man's game you can't possibly know anything about it.

Crikey that's some mod.

Lovely sight, what a privilege seeing them in daylight. I was shooting at night out on the levels last year when one jumped into the rean next to me. Scared the life out of me. They are big close up.

😁

It's been ruined by people living too long.

Yes.

He is.

It's a reflection of the culmination of democracy where we start to tie ourselves in knots and unable to make meaningful change. We start to prefer extreme politics throwing out institutions and the rule of law in an effort to make change. Next comes autocracy as the likes of Trump and other extremists throw democracy out to replace it with autocracy.

I take the beads off my shotguns to stop me aiming after having used the rifles. It's a huge benefit shooting instinctively particularly when shooting ducks at night.

? Worth having and not paid for (by most) is a benefit? The cost of an index linked annuity at 66 to buy the state pension would be around £200k. The payments come from the social security benefits budget. The payment is a universal benefit. JSA is not payable unless you have contributed class 1 NI. Most pensioners like most JSA claimants are likely (i guess as its short term) to have contributed proportionally more for the return than the average pensioner has contributed for their pension. My point rather than looking at contributions is about the value. If the pension payment is considered the minimum to keep people out of poverty then why is it not applied as a minimum universally?

I think that what I said, when I said the age at which you can draw it has increased. My wife retired at 48 and was expecting to draw Sipp at 55 but that has been pushed back two years. Also the pension contribution allowance for tax purposes was made subject to taper. The more you earned the less tax relief was available. The point I wanted to make is not so much the individual changes but the speed with which they are introduced or otherwise makes it difficult to plan.

State pension is the cheapest pension you can buy far better return than any private pension. Brown merely taxed dividends on income paid to funds, putting them in exactly the same position as other businesses. Subsequent governments have not reversed the change. This govt has changed the receipt age for Sipp pension withdrawal. Many were encouraged to pay into Sipp (a private pension pot) with an agreement that they could withdraw at 55. This has been changed on a whim, not part of the contract for those paying in their own cash. The whole purpose for some being to use the cash to provide a pension before other schemes kick in. This govt has cut tax relief on private pension contributions and restricted the life time allowances. Whatever changes are made need to be slower so that people have the opportunity to adjust savings accordingly. Retrospective changes should not be permitted. Unfortunately we have lost the protection of article 41 of the EU so it would be reasonable to expect changes to be less fair going forward.

It is the current Govt that is taxing at the highest rates ever. We currently have income tax rates of very nearly upto 100%.

Exactly. We cannot have it all ways. It does not add up. The more we pay in benefits the more we have to tax. The more we pay in benefits the less the incentive to work. The more we incentivise a lack of effort the less effort will be put in. It needs to be a balance that favours those that work harder, with a very minimum safety net for those that cannot contribute so much.

State pensions are rising at 3x the average private sector pay increase.

The majority will not have paid enough in to justify the benefit. The govt does not invest any of the cash paid in. Some would say the more benefits we take out the higher levels of migration we will need to pay for it. It's perhaps easier to blame everyone and everything else for our own failings?

Who would you tax to raise the money? The thresholds have been frozen so a large proportion (11% ) are already paying 40% and this is set to increase to 14%. Rather than tax people more we could take house value to pay for social care.

What about job seekers allowance? Should we apply the triple lock to that? Should it be increased to match pensions? It is not sustainable to pay benefits at these levels. We need to better manage freeloading on our economy. In my view the pension should be scrapped (phased out) and replaced by a minimum benefit. Workers should be required to pay into a pension fund from day one and that fund should be invested in UK plc. Cut the government out of the equation and privatise the lot. The current pension system is unfunded. Its based upon a growing economy with more and more workers. We have neither. It's currently the private pension equivalent of having saved £225000 over a life time.

The pension like all benefits should be based on levels of subsistence. Anything over that should be paid out of pension savings made during working life. Why should pensioners get paid more benefit than those on job seekers allowance?

Triple lock is a joke. These benefits are out of hand and need to be capped and cut back to something more affordable. We cannot afford to pay these benefits without more tax. We already have the highest taxes ever something has to give. The choice is simple. Cut benefits or generate more tax. Every time we increase benefits for pensioners we take money out of the pocket of workers.