Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Dorkins

Members
  • Posts

    15,826
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dorkins

  1. 17 minutes ago, Timm said:

    He was a Tory. (Once)

    He left the Conservative party in 1960, apparently because of their stance on apartheid.

     

    Frank Field was basically a lifelong Tory MP who wore a red rosette so he could get elected in a safe Labour seat. There were lots of them in the Blair-Brown years e.g. Michael Dugher, Ian Austin, Tom Harris, Kate Hoey etc etc. Since the end of the Blair-Brown years a lot of them came out as explicit Tory supporters.

  2. Same old neoliberal TINA line we've all been fed for the last 40+ years. Funny how the answer is always to to raise pension ages and cut public services. The productivity problem couldn't possibly be down to far too much investment being allocated to bidding up real estate prices instead of creating new productive capital.

  3. 45 minutes ago, kzb said:

    The DC pension contributions are taken out of the current economy though, so it is not all one-way.

    There are only so many real resources on the table today, they can either be consumed or invested in capital projects. When somebody pays into their DC pension they are putting some of their share of resources into capital investment instead of consuming it. Nothing is "taken out", it is just a decision by an individual about whether to eat their corn or plant it. The corn still goes somewhere. The creation of capital projects is also economic activity.

  4. 11 minutes ago, Drat said:

    Can I just have it recorded that, as a taxpayer, I do not agree to defer part of a fireman's current salary (or any civil service salaries) until after they retire.  Why are civil service pensions still DB, when private companies realised 20 years ago they were not affordable?  OK sure, no change has been made (even though it should have been) so pay what is owed, but why can we not, from this day forth, freeze all civil service DB pensions and switch them all to DC??  And please note, when private companies pensions were switched from DB to DC no one got a pay rise.

    Yes, 100% this. If the rest of us have to pile up large quantities of capital to fund our own retirements I don't see why public sector employees should be any different.

  5. 20 hours ago, kzb said:

    ALL pensions are paid out of the productivity of the current workers.

    Wrong, economic output is a function of both capital and labour. Future output can be increased by investing in productive capital now so that economic output will be higher in future even with the same labour force. With unfunded pensions there is zero attempt to create new productive capital to help meet that future expense.

  6. On 20/10/2021 at 12:06, kzb said:

    The taxpayer and the fireman agreed to defer part of the fireman's salary until after he retired.

    The 1995 government and 1995 fireman both agreed the fireman's pension would be some future taxpayer's problem and no pot would be set aside to help the future taxpayer make the pension payments when the time came. The future taxpayer was not consulted on this.

  7. 22 hours ago, byron78 said:

    Corbs and co were the best bet you lot will have for at least the next few decades to get a government focussed on building from the ground up.

    The Establishment learned a lot from Corbyn, before him they assumed the plebs could always be convinced to vote against their best interests (which is why from 2015-17 they just laughed at him rather than attacking him) but he got very close to disproving that in 2017. They will surely do a much better job of preventing another Corbyn from now on e.g. by making sure nobody like that ever gets to the top of a major UK political party again and attacking that person relentlessly if they do.

  8. 58 minutes ago, AThirdWay said:

    There's definitely a need for a two-tier system in social media outlets, perhaps even forums such as this.

    You can have a verified account, you can have an anonymous account. Users can then choose whether to restrict their accounts to verified only. If you've got a legitimate beef with your MP and he/she only allows access to the former, then you can raise this through your verified account without the threats and abuse. You can then rant, rave and threaten to your hearts content on the platforms that allow anonymous posts. 

    The suggestion that, if you can't abuse your MP online then your more likely to physically attack them, is ridiculous.

    On Twitter I'd love to have an option to mute the verified accounts, they are the ones that really make it toxic. When Twitter accidentally blocked all the blueticks for a day it was great, the plebs were free to chat amongst themselves without the professional propaganda, lies and aggravation pump in full flow via the bluetick accounts.

  9. 2 hours ago, Si1 said:

    Well yeah but they're not for profit and govt funded. As are academies and colleges, which are also considered public sector-but-its-not-that-simple.

    HAs are a bit of a grey zone but one major difference with fully public sector organisations is that at least some of their employees are on DC pensions. Don't get that in the proper public sector.

    https://www.tpt.org.uk/schemes/shps-dc-employer

  10. 33 minutes ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

    I thought there a valuation question mark on those?

    That's the danger of any pension scheme that piles a load of people's fortunes in together, there's always a question of whether the levels of inflows and outflows and the current contents of the pot are actually going to add up. Really the only way not to have that question mark is individual SIPPs where you get whatever's in your pot and that's it.

  11. On 17/10/2021 at 11:07, msi said:

    All this talk of a 'hidden agenda' with E10 is straight out of the 5G in vaccines playbook.  Everyone here suddenly becomes a chemical engineer fully versed in internal combustion and power dynamics.

    I'm not a fan of this "oh you're not an expert so pipe down chum" intellectual snobbery. I have no problem with laypeople attempting to engage with technical subject matter, fair play to them for making the effort as most people don't.

    As Robert Heinlein said, specialisation is for insects.

  12. 1 hour ago, Confusion of VIs said:

    Pensions are deferred pay, the liabilities are accrued day by day throughout an employees career. It was the  governments choice to pay pensions out of current spending rather than set money aside.   

    Only unfunded pensions are deferred pay, for funded pensions there is no deferment from the perspective of the employer.

    Yes, it was the government's choice to operate unfunded pension plans for most of its employees. Perhaps a future government will make a different choice.

  13. 2 hours ago, shlomo said:

    I think it is unfunded and unplayable 

    Some UK public sector pensions are funded but admittedly it's a minority. Each bit of the UK public sector has its own arrangements, there's not one single 'public sector pension' structure.

    Other countries do it differently e.g. the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan is one of the largest institutional investors in Canada i.e. they actually have a pot that is invested in the economy, not just an IOU as the UK teachers have:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Teachers'_Pension_Plan

  14. 1 hour ago, crash-and-burn said:

    Come on folks, nobody wins the game of life by having lots of money or assets, I've never understood that competitive mentality, let alone boasting about it (not very classy). Peace of mind and good health are all anybody really needs or wants, just as long as you have some sort of roof over your head and food on your plate. 

    Okay, but the problem is that with houses and pension income so expensive relative to wages "some sort of roof over your head and food on your plate" in retirement is not a trivial achievement, particularly for younger generations on the wrong side of asset price inflation.

  15. 3 hours ago, dugsbody said:

    I think a lot of pensioners will have to move to cheaper locations such as Spain or Portugal to afford to live. Though, those places may not be so cheap by then.

    Not sure about Portugal but retiring to Spain on a low income is difficult as they have a minimum income requirement for residency for non-EU citizens. Can't see why they would change this in future, what would be the advantage for Spain in hosting a load of impoverished British GenY/Z pensioners crippled by decades of HPI stoked by the UK government? Leave it to the UK government to sort out.

  16. 7 hours ago, HomeAlone2 said:

    Goodness, I don't even earn that much each year, I just increased my contributions to 6% which my employer matches so I'm putting roughly £3500 per year in to my pension pot.

     

    Is destitution my future?

    Sounds like you may be in the typical defined contribution scenario of heading for a likely final pension pot at retirement age of £50-100k, perhaps a little more depending on your current age. At a 4% drawdown rate each £100k of pension pot would give you £4k pa of income in retirement.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.