This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Pensioners up next on the Government hit list?
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
jamiemartin721  Reading 07 Oct 15 10.39am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Oct 2015 10.20am
Quote silvertop at 07 Oct 2015 9.16am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 12.39pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.29am
Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.24am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am
Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am
Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am
Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am
Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am
1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote." 2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them" What a delightful group. What an unintelligent post. Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises. The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.
As long as Public Sector pensions are led to the knacker's yard at the same time.
There is a great deal of ignorance about public sector pensions. The cliché of retired generals, high court judges and senior civil servants retiring on pensions greater than most people's working pay represents such a tiny % in terms of both number and amount as to be all but vanishingly small. Most are pretty meagre sums; local government is certainly contributory [I pay about 7%]. Hoof, do you really begrudge a wheels on meals lady her average salary pension after 40 years low pay service that she has contributed fully to? I am aware that is the other end of the spectrum but that is what your sweeping statement appears to say. In short, there is very wide a spectrum and your targets are at the far end and representing a very narrow band.
My Mrs works for Lloyds Bank as a pretty lowly paid admin clerk. Her pension entitlement has been hit as Lloyds have frozen her pensionable salary at the level it was in 2012. I don't see why any public service employee should be exempt from changes necessary to make their scheme financially viable too... especially as the tax payer funds a significant part of it. As for Judges and other high ranking government officials - their level of benefits is obscene and should have been cut back drastically years ago. A bizarrely socialist argument here, somewhere.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Hoof Hearted 07 Oct 15 10.41am | |
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 07 Oct 2015 10.39am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Oct 2015 10.20am
Quote silvertop at 07 Oct 2015 9.16am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 12.39pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.29am
Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.24am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am
Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am
Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am
Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am
Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am
1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote." 2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them" What a delightful group. What an unintelligent post. Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises. The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.
As long as Public Sector pensions are led to the knacker's yard at the same time.
There is a great deal of ignorance about public sector pensions. The cliché of retired generals, high court judges and senior civil servants retiring on pensions greater than most people's working pay represents such a tiny % in terms of both number and amount as to be all but vanishingly small. Most are pretty meagre sums; local government is certainly contributory [I pay about 7%]. Hoof, do you really begrudge a wheels on meals lady her average salary pension after 40 years low pay service that she has contributed fully to? I am aware that is the other end of the spectrum but that is what your sweeping statement appears to say. In short, there is very wide a spectrum and your targets are at the far end and representing a very narrow band.
My Mrs works for Lloyds Bank as a pretty lowly paid admin clerk. Her pension entitlement has been hit as Lloyds have frozen her pensionable salary at the level it was in 2012. I don't see why any public service employee should be exempt from changes necessary to make their scheme financially viable too... especially as the tax payer funds a significant part of it. As for Judges and other high ranking government officials - their level of benefits is obscene and should have been cut back drastically years ago. A bizarrely socialist argument here, somewhere.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Lyons550 Shirley 07 Oct 15 10.47am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Oct 2015 10.20am
Quote silvertop at 07 Oct 2015 9.16am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 12.39pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.29am
Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.24am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am
Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am
Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am
Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am
Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am
1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote." 2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them" What a delightful group. What an unintelligent post. Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises. The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.
As long as Public Sector pensions are led to the knacker's yard at the same time.
There is a great deal of ignorance about public sector pensions. The cliché of retired generals, high court judges and senior civil servants retiring on pensions greater than most people's working pay represents such a tiny % in terms of both number and amount as to be all but vanishingly small. Most are pretty meagre sums; local government is certainly contributory [I pay about 7%]. Hoof, do you really begrudge a wheels on meals lady her average salary pension after 40 years low pay service that she has contributed fully to? I am aware that is the other end of the spectrum but that is what your sweeping statement appears to say. In short, there is very wide a spectrum and your targets are at the far end and representing a very narrow band.
My Mrs works for Lloyds Bank as a pretty lowly paid admin clerk. Her pension entitlement has been hit as Lloyds have frozen her pensionable salary at the level it was in 2012. I don't see why any public service employee should be exempt from changes necessary to make their scheme financially viable too... especially as the tax payer funds a significant part of it. As for Judges and other high ranking government officials - their level of benefits is obscene and should have been cut back drastically years ago. Yeah but those shares will fly over the next 18months. you'll be fine on the dividends
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Hoof Hearted 07 Oct 15 12.30pm | |
|---|---|
|
Quote Lyons550 at 07 Oct 2015 10.47am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Oct 2015 10.20am
Quote silvertop at 07 Oct 2015 9.16am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 12.39pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.29am
Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.24am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am
Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am
Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am
Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am
Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am
1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote." 2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them" What a delightful group. What an unintelligent post. Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises. The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.
As long as Public Sector pensions are led to the knacker's yard at the same time.
There is a great deal of ignorance about public sector pensions. The cliché of retired generals, high court judges and senior civil servants retiring on pensions greater than most people's working pay represents such a tiny % in terms of both number and amount as to be all but vanishingly small. Most are pretty meagre sums; local government is certainly contributory [I pay about 7%]. Hoof, do you really begrudge a wheels on meals lady her average salary pension after 40 years low pay service that she has contributed fully to? I am aware that is the other end of the spectrum but that is what your sweeping statement appears to say. In short, there is very wide a spectrum and your targets are at the far end and representing a very narrow band.
My Mrs works for Lloyds Bank as a pretty lowly paid admin clerk. Her pension entitlement has been hit as Lloyds have frozen her pensionable salary at the level it was in 2012. I don't see why any public service employee should be exempt from changes necessary to make their scheme financially viable too... especially as the tax payer funds a significant part of it. As for Judges and other high ranking government officials - their level of benefits is obscene and should have been cut back drastically years ago. Yeah but those shares will fly over the next 18months. you'll be fine on the dividends
Hopefully you'll be right.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| rob1969 Banstead Surrey 07 Oct 15 1.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 05 Oct 2015 9.49am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 9.33am
Protected, cossetted group sitting fat and happy on final salary pension schemes that they didn't pay nearly enough for and massive housing equity growth. In the very pleasant position of being able to dole out their largesse to the coming generation as they see fit, maintaining control over them. And they can avoid inheritance tax if they do that too. I see no reason they should get special treatment either way but I would err on the side of redistribution of wealth rather than giving them free bus journeys and fuel benefits without means testing. I actually fail to see why they are exempt from National Insurance payments (even when they are still working), they take so much out of the system it's hard to understand why they should consider that they have 'already paid their dues'. The politic of envy. My immediate thought too on reading some of these comments. Don't know whether it is just sad - or more worrying then that - the attitude of some contributors towards the older generation who they seem to consider 'owe' them.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
twist  Miami, Florida 07 Oct 15 1.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Sounds like Illinois where they gave a bunch of tax breaks to businesses, then when they realized 12 months later they had a budget shortfall, they tried to go after retirement income!!! Corporations pay less and less % of the entire tax bill each year with creative accounting, yet its the government pensions they go after. They have no balls. Here is an interesting article from CNN: In 1950, Corporations paid 30% of the total US tax bill. Today they pay 11%
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 07 Oct 15 1.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote rob1969 at 07 Oct 2015 1.07pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 05 Oct 2015 9.49am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 9.33am
Protected, cossetted group sitting fat and happy on final salary pension schemes that they didn't pay nearly enough for and massive housing equity growth. In the very pleasant position of being able to dole out their largesse to the coming generation as they see fit, maintaining control over them. And they can avoid inheritance tax if they do that too. I see no reason they should get special treatment either way but I would err on the side of redistribution of wealth rather than giving them free bus journeys and fuel benefits without means testing. I actually fail to see why they are exempt from National Insurance payments (even when they are still working), they take so much out of the system it's hard to understand why they should consider that they have 'already paid their dues'. The politic of envy. My immediate thought too on reading some of these comments. Don't know whether it is just sad - or more worrying then that - the attitude of some contributors towards the older generation who they seem to consider 'owe' them.
I am highly pro-pensioner. I also wholly approve of people investing in pensions. I just don't like what happened with Defined Benefit schemes. They ended up giving excessive and unfunded benefits that are requiring coming generations to make good on the schemes. And this happens to coincide with other good fortune such as the ridiculous increase in the value of housing. The younger generation is becoming increasingly dependent, especially as the housing stock is locked up by us oldies. And don't forget coming generations have to pay for their own education and won't get MIRAS. We have fooked our children. Still, who cares...
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| rob1969 Banstead Surrey 07 Oct 15 1.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Mapletree at 07 Oct 2015 1.19pm
Quote rob1969 at 07 Oct 2015 1.07pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 05 Oct 2015 9.49am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 9.33am
Protected, cossetted group sitting fat and happy on final salary pension schemes that they didn't pay nearly enough for and massive housing equity growth. In the very pleasant position of being able to dole out their largesse to the coming generation as they see fit, maintaining control over them. And they can avoid inheritance tax if they do that too. I see no reason they should get special treatment either way but I would err on the side of redistribution of wealth rather than giving them free bus journeys and fuel benefits without means testing. I actually fail to see why they are exempt from National Insurance payments (even when they are still working), they take so much out of the system it's hard to understand why they should consider that they have 'already paid their dues'. The politic of envy. My immediate thought too on reading some of these comments. Don't know whether it is just sad - or more worrying then that - the attitude of some contributors towards the older generation who they seem to consider 'owe' them.
I am highly pro-pensioner. I also wholly approve of people investing in pensions. I just don't like what happened with Defined Benefit schemes. They ended up giving excessive and unfunded benefits that are requiring coming generations to make good on the schemes. And this happens to coincide with other good fortune such as the ridiculous increase in the value of housing. The younger generation is becoming increasingly dependent, especially as the housing stock is locked up by us oldies. And don't forget coming generations have to pay for their own education and won't get MIRAS.We have fooked our children. Still, who cares... Speak for yourself. For my family - each generation has done better than the previous. I have achieved more than my parents and my children have already
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 07 Oct 15 1.49pm |
|
|---|---|
|
I am already planning a fairly major downsize in about eleven years to help my kids who are now 11 and 7 get their foot on the property ladder once they leave University. London, of course, is all but impossible unless you have benefactors or a very high wage. But here even in Devon where average wages are much lower a one bed flat is now usually around 90k-120k. If my kids were growing up in the south east i would see absolutely no future for them property owning wise.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 07 Oct 15 1.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote rob1969 at 07 Oct 2015 1.42pm
Quote Mapletree at 07 Oct 2015 1.19pm
Quote rob1969 at 07 Oct 2015 1.07pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 05 Oct 2015 9.49am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 9.33am
Protected, cossetted group sitting fat and happy on final salary pension schemes that they didn't pay nearly enough for and massive housing equity growth. In the very pleasant position of being able to dole out their largesse to the coming generation as they see fit, maintaining control over them. And they can avoid inheritance tax if they do that too. I see no reason they should get special treatment either way but I would err on the side of redistribution of wealth rather than giving them free bus journeys and fuel benefits without means testing. I actually fail to see why they are exempt from National Insurance payments (even when they are still working), they take so much out of the system it's hard to understand why they should consider that they have 'already paid their dues'. The politic of envy. My immediate thought too on reading some of these comments. Don't know whether it is just sad - or more worrying then that - the attitude of some contributors towards the older generation who they seem to consider 'owe' them.
I am highly pro-pensioner. I also wholly approve of people investing in pensions. I just don't like what happened with Defined Benefit schemes. They ended up giving excessive and unfunded benefits that are requiring coming generations to make good on the schemes. And this happens to coincide with other good fortune such as the ridiculous increase in the value of housing. The younger generation is becoming increasingly dependent, especially as the housing stock is locked up by us oldies. And don't forget coming generations have to pay for their own education and won't get MIRAS.We have fooked our children. Still, who cares... Speak for yourself. For my family - each generation has done better than the previous. I have achieved more than my parents and my children have already
I have some Defined Benefit pension rights in three schemes. Each of those has been requiring top-up payments from the Company for years and that will continue. It will be a long time before investment funds stop being drained by historic pension issues. So I sit on the back of my - and your - children. Edited by Mapletree (07 Oct 2015 5.47pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Lyons550 Shirley 07 Oct 15 2.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Oct 2015 12.30pm
Quote Lyons550 at 07 Oct 2015 10.47am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Oct 2015 10.20am
Quote silvertop at 07 Oct 2015 9.16am
Quote Mapletree at 05 Oct 2015 12.39pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.29am
Quote silvertop at 05 Oct 2015 11.24am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 05 Oct 2015 11.16am
Quote aquickgame2 at 05 Oct 2015 11.14am
Quote susmik at 05 Oct 2015 10.55am
Quote matt_himself at 05 Oct 2015 9.35am
Quote Kermit8 at 05 Oct 2015 7.25am
1) "because they might die before the next election so can't vote." 2) "because they will probably forget who did it to them" What a delightful group. What an unintelligent post. Pensioners are the richest age group in the country. Benefits are universal and not means tested, as a result the poorest pensioners get the same as those who go on regular cruises. The fact is that that universal benefits for pensioners is not fair. The system needs reviewing and change.
As long as Public Sector pensions are led to the knacker's yard at the same time.
There is a great deal of ignorance about public sector pensions. The cliché of retired generals, high court judges and senior civil servants retiring on pensions greater than most people's working pay represents such a tiny % in terms of both number and amount as to be all but vanishingly small. Most are pretty meagre sums; local government is certainly contributory [I pay about 7%]. Hoof, do you really begrudge a wheels on meals lady her average salary pension after 40 years low pay service that she has contributed fully to? I am aware that is the other end of the spectrum but that is what your sweeping statement appears to say. In short, there is very wide a spectrum and your targets are at the far end and representing a very narrow band.
My Mrs works for Lloyds Bank as a pretty lowly paid admin clerk. Her pension entitlement has been hit as Lloyds have frozen her pensionable salary at the level it was in 2012. I don't see why any public service employee should be exempt from changes necessary to make their scheme financially viable too... especially as the tax payer funds a significant part of it. As for Judges and other high ranking government officials - their level of benefits is obscene and should have been cut back drastically years ago. Yeah but those shares will fly over the next 18months. you'll be fine on the dividends
Hopefully you'll be right. I know, have a crapload in my ISA and have been watching them like a hawk for the last couple of years since I got them
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.