retirement age

[AVB]

Dunno. could start with stopping sending billions of aid outside the country.

Sending expensive military toys to Syria after having more or less created a problem there on purpose to get a war only the US seems happy with.

Actually /taxing/ these big huge companies (Seriously, 4K taxes for fecebook??).

 

There are probably many others. But the gov is capable of printing money in the region of hundred of billions to save toxic banks, they surely can do something about providing pensions to the population who actually /paid the money in/ ?

I was actually referring to your comment about pension contributions being given to private fund managers. I assumed, therefore, that you would rather give it to the government. Is that what you were suggesting?

 

I agree that a pension should be paid to those that paid in but that exactly is what a private pension is. I don't trust any government to run one though.

[grrclark]

That is only valid for state pension. The new mandatory employee pension contribution goes to private company funds.

Retirement age is only manadatory for state pension too so discussion about private funds is moot.

 

Whilst we are talking about them though they are net contributors to the public purse through taxes, etc.

 

Like the public pension fund they also pay out to those currently drawing funds, but if they are well managed they will gain more income via clever investing than they have to pay out.

 

Sadly until we achieve a surplus in the public finances then that particular pot will spend more than it takes in, hence this pesky austerity everyone likes to moan about.

 

As for large corporate taxes i agree wholeheartedly we do need to do more, but despite the pitiful sums paid by Facebook, etc they are still net contributors to the public purse, both at the corporate level, through employer and employee NI contributions, through employee taxes and all the way through the supply chain.

 

Yes they could and should pay more at a corporate level, but in terms of the public purse they're still the good guys.

[Yellow Bear]

I was actually referring to your comment about pension contributions being given to private fund managers. I assumed, therefore, that you would rather give it to the government. Is that what you were suggesting?

 

I agree that a pension should be paid to those that paid in but that exactly is what a private pension is. I don't trust any government to run one though.

Even the private funds are not safe as Robber Broon showed - If they controlled it who would get what they paid in let alone growth!!

[grrclark]

I should add that for a large amount of those drawing state pension they are actually taking more out than they paid in due to inflation, etc and also a continued provision of other public services.

[Whitebridges]

 

There is only one thing wrong regarding your request for a true leader - Joe Public wouldn't vote for him!

 

They don't like bad news, and prefer to listen to the golden tones of Tony Bliar, Gordon Brown et.

 

What a democracy we have here - the civil servants are only allowed to support ministers who want to stay in the EU as this is 'government policy'.. You just couldn't make it up.

 

Your comments make sense.

What we therefore need is a civil war. The great and powerful can then kick the lazy scum out of the country.

Look at the journals of history and tell me if this is impossible. There will be a civil uprising if we carry on this way.

 

 

 

It's not just those on benefits though, so many think the government money tree flourishes somewhere in the garden of wealth.

 

So many also think that the elite few harvest that tree all for themselves.

 

The thing is that in the UK way less than half of the population actually generate wealth for the country, anyone who works in the public sector or is indirectly employed by the public sector are consumers of government pennies.

 

Very poetic Mr grrc.

 

These government leeches you refer to are a problem. What needs to happen fast is a switch as to how they feed their children and pay the mortgage.

 

Rather than "commenting" "advising" "monitoring" and "researching" they need to be made redundant and put out to work. Most of these highly qualified "leaders" WILL fall flat on their ***** in a business environment because they are incompetent and do not know how to generate wealth and tax themselves. Also they do not understand what taking a risk means. 97.88% are nipple suckers.

Edited March 4, 2016 by Whitebridges

[Gordon R]

those in public service take more out the same pot than they put in.

 

 

grrclark - you are normally on the money, but that is incorrect.

[AVB]

 

grrclark - you are normally on the money, but that is incorrect.

Surely he is correct. If I am in public service earning £100 and paying £50 tax then I am taking out of the public purse (my salary) £50 more than I put in (my tax). If I am in private employment earning the same and paying the same tax then I take out £0 from the public purse and pay in £50. So I have a net contribution of £50.

[Gordon R]

I presume grrclark was talking about pensions - as the thread is about retirement.

[SNS]

Surely he is correct. If I am in public service earning £100 and paying £50 tax then I am taking out of the public purse (my salary) £50 more than I put in (my tax). If I am in private employment earning the same and paying the same tax then I take out £0 from the public purse and pay in £50. So I have a net contribution of £50.

Plus the non contributory pensions......

[UKPoacher]

It's not just those on benefits though, so many think the government money tree flourishes somewhere in the garden of wealth.

 

So many also think that the elite few harvest that tree all for themselves.

 

The thing is that in the UK way less than half of the population actually generate wealth for the country, anyone who works in the public sector or is indirectly employed by the public sector are consumers of government pennies.

Where would we be without the doctors, nurses, teachers. firemen and police officers consuming government pennies?

Edited March 4, 2016 by UKPoacher

[grrclark]

I presume grrclark was talking about pensions - as the thread is about retirement.

Was talking in broad terms Gordon given the wider discussion, but understand the mix up

[subsonicnat]

My Father in Law died at 62, His Pension Died With Him, My Mother in Law had To Go Cleaning at The Hospital to make ends meet.

Does this sound right when people can claim benefits who have NEVER Put ANYTHING In.??.

[grrclark]

Where would we be without the doctors, nurses, teachers. firemen and police officers consuming government pennies?

Now that is leaping to a deductively illogical conclusion and suggesting an inference that does not exist in my post.

 

Talking about monetary contribution only then all public service workers are net consumers of public funds, but to be absolutely clear in no way does that make them bad or less worthy.

 

It is simply something that is true in economic terms, but not very well understood. AVB's simple example explains why.

 

In the UK we have a disproportionately high level of state derived income, including indirect employment and welfare/pension payments it is more than 50% of our gross domestic income. That is a hugely important factor when considering things like the state pension burden.

 

In Scotland, seeing as that was mentioned earlier, the ratio is higher still which made the comments by comrades Salmond and Sturgeon even less credible.

 

So put simply all of us rely on less than half of those in employment to be net wealth (monetary) creators for all government expenditure. So when we bang the drum about more money for the NHS, education, pensions, police, welfare, public sector pay, etc it just needs to be recognised that in our current societal make up that it is paid for by a disproportionately smaller number of people.

 

Of course contribution to society extends well beyond money and public service workers of all flavours make a contribution in wider terms that is equal to that of anybody else.

 

Edit to add: I missed Poontang's comment from earlier in the thread, we are in absolute agreement.

Edited March 4, 2016 by grrclark

[kent]

 

 

Exactly this.

 

The ONLY way to have a fully funded and functioning public sector is to have a thriving and competitive private sector.

 

Without profitable businesses there simply would be no money to fund the likes of the NHS, the benefits system, pensions, the armed forces and police etc.

 

The only way to address the situation we find ourselves in at the moment is to either create far more private business opportunities or cut the public services and wage bill.

Yep

My Father in Law died at 62, His Pension Died With Him, My Mother in Law had To Go Cleaning at The Hospital to make ends meet.

Does this sound right when people can claim benefits who have NEVER Put ANYTHING In.??.

It does to the rest of Europe as long as it's British taxpayer funded

[krugerandsmith]

My Father in Law died at 62, His Pension Died With Him, My Mother in Law had To Go Cleaning at The Hospital to make ends meet.

Does this sound right when people can claim benefits who have NEVER Put ANYTHING In.??.

 

I worked with five electricians .... for C

[krugerandsmith]

My Father in Law died at 62, His Pension Died With Him, My Mother in Law had To Go Cleaning at The Hospital to make ends meet.

Does this sound right when people can claim benefits who have NEVER Put ANYTHING In.??.

 

In my working life I have worked offshore and abroad for my company with four electricians and five Crane drivers + lots of friends... Non of whom reached pensionable age ....... Living Longer b.....it. Don't be taken for fools, if the French will not accept an increase in age limit neither should you.

[AVB]

My Father in Law died at 62, His Pension Died With Him, My Mother in Law had To Go Cleaning at The Hospital to make ends meet.

Does this sound right when people can claim benefits who have NEVER Put ANYTHING In.??.

The benefit of the changes made to the pension system last year was that the pension doesn't die with you. You no longer have to buy a long term annuity. You can treat it as a cash/investment fund to do with as you wish.

 

As for others saying that people are not living longer. Rubbish. Yes there will always be people who die younger than others but the facts are that we are living longer on average.

[krugerandsmith]

The benefit of the changes made to the pension system last year was that the pension doesn't die with you. You no longer have to buy a long term annuity. You can treat it as a cash/investment fund to do with as you wish.

 

As for others saying that people are not living longer. Rubbish. Yes there will always be people who die younger than others but the facts are that we are living longer on average.

 

I noticed that you are still in your fifties .... Hope for yourself that you are right.

[AVB]

 

I noticed that you are still in your fifties .... Hope for yourself that you are right.

 

Who can tell what is around the corner.

 

These sets of stats (and there're many out there) graphically show the increase. For example, for a male the average age of death has increased from 70.8 years in 1980–1982 to 79.1 years in 2012–2014. That tis a big increase in a relatively short space of time.

 

http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/nationallifetablesunitedkingdom/2015-09-23

[buze]

 

Who can tell what is around the corner.

 

These sets of stats (and there're many out there) graphically show the increase. For example, for a male the average age of death has increased from 70.8 years in 1980–1982 to 79.1 years in 2012–2014. That tis a big increase in a relatively short space of time.

 

http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/nationallifetablesunitedkingdom/2015-09-23

 

Don't be fooled, the people over 70 who die now have been retired for 20+ years, thats WHY they reached 75. The measurement is completely skewed, it can't be hard to understand that really.

[rodp]

 

Who can tell what is around the corner.

 

These sets of stats (and there're many out there) graphically show the increase. For example, for a male the average age of death has increased from 70.8 years in 1980–1982 to 79.1 years in 2012–2014. That tis a big increase in a relatively short space of time.

 

http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/nationallifetablesunitedkingdom/2015-09-23

I would very much like to see a breakdown of race in these figures. Over the last few years I've seen what appears to be groups of incredibly old asian gentlemen in groups sat on benches taking the sun. Any effect on the figures ??

[grrclark]

Don't be fooled, the people over 70 who die now have been retired for 20+ years, thats WHY they reached 75. The measurement is completely skewed, it can't be hard to understand that really.

Any basis for that comment or just conjecture based on some sort of conspiracy theory?

[AVB]

 

Don't be fooled, the people over 70 who die now have been retired for 20+ years, thats WHY they reached 75. The measurement is completely skewed, it can't be hard to understand that really.

So nothing to do with advances in medical/drugs/science then? The scientists and doctors must be so disappointed that their work has had no effect on helping people live longer.

[poontang]

 

Don't be fooled, the people over 70 who die now have been retired for 20+ years, thats WHY they reached 75. The measurement is completely skewed, it can't be hard to understand that really.

 

I must admit I'm finding it hard to understand where you're coming from here.

 

Are you saying people over 70 have been retired 20+ years, meaning they retired in their 50's?

 

I'm confused.

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

 

Don't be fooled, the people over 70 who die now have been retired for 20+ years, thats WHY they reached 75. The measurement is completely skewed, it can't be hard to understand that really.

 

Well, that last comment takes the biscuit for dashing to the keyboard with undue haste.

 

Nothing at all to do with improved diet (for some), better healthcare (for all), less manual labour jobs (for some), less people smoking etc., etc?