Latest socialist madness

[Jaglover]

Graduates might have to wait until they are 70 before drawing a state pension, the head of the government's Pension Commission has suggested.
But lower-paid workers could still retire on a full pension at 65, Adair Turner told the Sunday Times

So let's get this straight you work hard all your life (funding the state all the while) and then you retire at 70 while some Chav gets a pension at 65.


If they were to change the system so all retire at 70, except those who have worked since 18, (or 16) with no significant time on benefits, who can retire those extra years early then it might be worthy of support. As it stands it is simply scr*wing the people who fund the whole gravy train.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4570151.stm

[Twincam16]

I have no truck with retiring at 70, after all, retiring at 65 is almost as old as the motorway speed limit, and just as cars these days can do well over 80 healthily, so do people these days, so just imagine what it will be like in 55 years time.

But the socialist aspect is typical chav-pandering. Sorry, if I have to retire at 70, so does everybody else.

[DocJock]

I don't suppose this is concurrent with scrapping tuition fees ?

Of course not, silly me.

[simpo two]

Let's face it, the pension is extinct. The Government version is worthless and the private ones are taxed to a standstill. The overspending of today is being paid for by our futures.

[Marki]

simpo two said:

Let's face it, the pension is extinct. The Government version is worthless and the private ones are taxed to a standstill. The overspending of today is being paid for by our futures.

im afraid you are right

[fredleicester]

So, will Mr Turner be working until 70?!

No - I dare say he'l be tucked up nice and safe in his vineyard in the south of France at 55!

F hypocrites.

And just because you're a fing graduate, your life expectancy is higher? Sounds like a crock of $h!t to me.

I'm sure the Chavs who sit on their arses all day watching "Trisha" have a much harder life than some graduate who works like a fing trojan to make something of their lives, working until they drop, whilst Wayne on the estate sits back to enjoy even more fing benefits provided by those very graduates.

There was a time when I was a Labour voter

But then there's only so much fing up the arse one person can take.

[nonegreen]

This has nothing to do with socialism it bears all the hallmarks of the sandalist lentilist movement. Time to start stoning Toyota Prius'.

[turbobloke]

nonegreen said:

This has nothing to do with socialism it bears all the hallmarks of the sandalist lentilist movement. Time to start stoning Toyota Prius'.

Nonners, your humour is getting more subtle these days - socialism, green movement, socialism, green movement ... see how easy it is to get red green colour blindness?

[groomi]

So, if we're all forced to work until we are seventy - where are all the extra jobs going to come from?

Put simply, there will be more people in the job market eeding to work, but there won't necessarily be any more jobs - therfore unemployment will, by default, be higher. And ofcourse, if unemployment is higher, then we all have to pay more in taxes to keep paying the 'job seekers' (I'll be looking so hard for a job at 65 ) their unemployment benefits.

This country really is the Unumpty Kingdom.

[speedy_thrills]

If I remember correctly the government in the UK wants more people putting into the black hole that are pension funds right? Wont this actually encourage people to keep their assets in other forms to avoid excessive taxation when they decide to retire?

[simonrockman]

groomi said:

So, if we're all forced to work until we are seventy - where are all the extra jobs going to come from?

The number of jobs isn't fixed. It's determined by the amount of money people spend.

More people working can mean more jobs for others.

If someone owns a small business and retires at 65 then he lays off all the employees.

Simon

[speedy_thrills]

simonrockman said:

If someone owns a small business and retires at 65 then he lays off all the employees.

Assuming he/she doesn’t sell the business, after all if he/she could make more money selling it than “liquidising” (is that the right term for turning assets into money?) the business he/she would surly want to sell the business on. Now the government sets the margin of taxation and it chooses to do so in a way that does not encourage long term business prosperity for small businesses.

I think we need to make a distinction of the number of jobs created as well. Over the last 10 years here in New Zealand the government has actually created many jobs, which on the face of it looks like a good thing because we have low unemployment rates etc. However at the same time what the government has failed to do is ensure that it is using the workforce to the maximum potential so we now have a situation where we have extremely low productivity per capita. I think some here would agree that the UK has a similar problem in some respects. All that glitters is not gold…

[john75]

True a graduate will live longer than a junkie on the dole but I dare say the the junkie on the dole will not pay as much NIC's and Income Tax.

The pensions Timebomb will hit us that is a fact moving the retirement age to 70 is in general a good thing but it should be for all rather than just the less able members of society who probably will not work anyhow.

There is a chinese proverb that I can not think of that so true of this.

[JagLover]

john75 said:

The pensions Timebomb will hit us that is a fact moving the retirement age to 70 is in general a good thing but it should be for all rather than just the less able members of society who probably will not work anyhow.

It was mainly the unfairness that I was objecting too, I can see good arguments for raising the retirement age, but why does it have to be in 5 year movements?- a retirement age of say 67 would solve a large part of the crises.

[groomi]

simonrockman said:

groomi said: So, if we're all forced to work until we are seventy - where are all the extra jobs going to come from? The number of jobs isn't fixed. It's determined by the amount of money people spend.

True. I'm sure the Government could install another layer of beurocracy to create a load more jobs.

Also, at this rate, why will spending more personal money create more jobs. We don't make anything in this country anymore! United Kingdom Ltd is one great big service industry, and personal expenditure doesn't create investment in big new buildings, bridges, IT etc. which provide the service sector with jobs.

All my highly cynical 2p ofcourse

[D Fender]

Jaglover said:

Graduates might have to wait until they are 70 before drawing a state pension...... .....So let's get this straight you work hard all your life (funding the state all the while) and then you retire at 70 while some Chav gets a pension at 65.

But don't forget you chose to take out a loan to fund becoming a graduate when you should have knuckled down and gone on the dole straight from school like any decent citizen, you waster, you!