Eddie_George Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 So what? They have to get funding from somewhere. I like Farage, he has my vote and those of most of my extended family. Mark my words, if he ever gets into a position of power, he'll be pushing through any policies that benefit his rentier friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Mark my words, if he ever gets into a position of power, he'll be pushing through any policies that benefit his rentier friends. He can't be any worse than the current crop of self serving career politicians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie_George Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 He can't be any worse than the current crop of self serving career politicians. My vote will be tactical (to force Tories out - but will probably make no difference in the FPTP system we have). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarahBell Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Is your sarcasm filter set to MAX. Yes. Apparently so. <sarcasm> </sarcasm> tags are needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 He can't be any worse than the current crop of self serving career politicians. Not only that, just where else do people make money to freely give to parties politique?. Money talks. Mrs Loo met a very minor celeb yesterday, a Dragon....scrape bow some people did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) What is disgusting is the way governments roll out all these schemes, funded with taxpayers money, to buy votes pre election. Direct democracy, as supported by Nigel Farage, would put a stop to it. It may encourage the young to vote too, if they were voting on specific issues they may see the point. +1 Indeed - nobody voted for these vote buying schemes including the Help to Buy (Sell) scheme and all the rest. It remains to be seen whether the policies will garner votes for them at the 2015 general election. At the last general election they voted for far more responsible policies than has actually transpired. Of course Mr Osborne is now making similar responsible "promises" to then and he's even saying the UK will be richer than the US by the 2030s if you vote Conservative. Pretending that the current fiddled figures and debt recovery is a real recovery only with the Conservatives. All the latest "promises" will be reneged on yet again if the Conservatives win. The other lots are no different. Direct democracy on single issues like Switzerland for example would make a massive difference. Edited January 16, 2015 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quicken Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I just received a response to my complaint about ageism: The government has introduced these Bonds with the aim to provide certainty and a good return to those who have saved all their lives. For this reason, they are limited to people aged 65 or over. I am sorry I am unable to give amore favourable reply. I have saved all my working life, at a far greater rate than my parents ever did. Can't afford a decent house, but I keep saving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie_George Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I reckon, given enough money and momentum, you could rule these bonds illegal via the European Parliament. Unfortunately not enough people give a shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) Which interest rate would you rather borrow at - 4% or 0.6%? It sounds like a moronic question. Not if you're the Chancellor, it's not. In launching pensioner bonds yesterday which pay 4% pa over three years, he is choosing to borrow at a much higher rate than the 0.6% charged by the gilt market. This is costing the tax-payer money. If, as is likely, all of the £10bn bonds on offer are bought, the government will be paying almost £300m a year more in interest than it would if it borrowed in the gilt market*. To put this in context, it is three times as much as the government is saving from the cap on benefits. And it is almost as much as it is saving from the bedroom tax. In this sense, Osborne is redistrbuting wealth from the poor to the rich. According to the ONS (pdf), the typical household has only around £12,000 of financial assets. Only a wealthy minority, therefore, can afford to take full advantage of the £20,000 pensioner bond offer. What's going on here is simple. Osborne is channelling tax-payers' money to a favoured client group. There's a word for this - corruption. This is the sort of thing we expect in Uzbekistan or Nigeria, not a western democracy. In saying this, I don't deny that pensioners are discomforted by low savings rates. But there's a simple solution to this that would benefit almost everyone - a looser fiscal policy. http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2015/01/against-pensioner-bonds.html Edited January 16, 2015 by R K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 What is disgusting is the way governments roll out all these schemes, funded with taxpayers money, to buy votes pre election. Direct democracy, as supported by Nigel Farage, would put a stop to it. It may encourage the young to vote too, if they were voting on specific issues they may see the point. Nah...just a little incentive to discourage wasteful spending...will need to have a little left to help pay towards old age medical costs, care home and funeral costs....the young fit workers can always make up their spending and borrowing by earning more, don't want them hoarding unnecessarily just yet ..... there is no such thing as a free lunch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I reckon, given enough money and momentum, you could rule these bonds illegal via the European Parliament. Unfortunately not enough people give a shit. If I had enough money and time to fight the government all the way to Strasbourg I would have enough money to buy a house and enough time for my business, and I would no longer care about 4% bonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silver surfer Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Chris Dillow makes the point that with this scheme the chancellor has chosen to borrow at 4% (pensioner bonds) rather than 0.6% (gilts). So he's used taxpayer money to reward one particular group of voters, namely the well off pensioners who have £20k to invest (when the average household has only £12k of financial assets), http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormymonday_2011 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Chris Dillow makes the point that with this scheme the chancellor has chosen to borrow at 4% (pensioner bonds) rather than 0.6% (gilts). So he's used taxpayer money to reward one particular group of voters, namely the well off pensioners who have £20k to invest (when the average household has only £12k of financial assets), http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/ That is rather the point. It is really only usable by pensioners with substantial savings which is only a minority of them It is clearly aimed at a distinct group of elderly Tory voters who have shown signs that they might defect to UKIP at the next election. As such it is a simple electoral bribe. Of course, the technical f*ckups at NS&I website may cause Osbornes plans to crumble into dust as it appear some people will have spent hours trying to put in a bid for the bonds only to end up with nothing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliegog Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 That is rather the point. It is really only usable by pensioners with substantial savings which is only a minority of them It is clearly aimed at a distinct group of elderly Tory voters who have shown signs that they might defect to UKIP at the next election. As such it is a simple electoral bribe. Of course, the technical f*ckups at NS&I website may cause Osbornes plans to crumble into dust as it appear some people will have spent hours trying to put in a bid for the bonds only to end up with nothing of course it is only the well off pensioners who can lock away 40K per couple without denting their standard of living - and they will pay tax on the interest. I can see the under 65s persuading the over 65s to invest on their behalf (using of course the NI number of the pensioner - who may not be a tax payer ) - I hope the pensioner keeps the money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkins Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) of course it is only the well off pensioners who can lock away 40K per couple without denting their standard of living - and they will pay tax on the interest. I can see the under 65s persuading the over 65s to invest on their behalf (using of course the NI number of the pensioner - who may not be a tax payer ) - I hope the pensioner keeps the money Would you lend your relatives 40k in order to (dishonestly) secure a few hundred quid in interest? Edited January 17, 2015 by Dorkins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveinHope Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Skipton has just told its savers it will be cutting its interest rates. My ISA is falling from 2.2 to 1.8% and my savings account from 2.0 to 1.5% (gross) from 2nd Feb and 18th Mar, respectively. It made me wonder if another Government bung is coming the way of the building societies to protect mortgages before the election and if the pensioner bond is timed to protect this 'interest' group from its effects. Apparently 1.23bn invested already with another 9bn available. Fastest take-up ever apparently. All for just a very few extra quid. Edited January 17, 2015 by LiveinHope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I started a thread on mumsnet saying I thought these were unfair and ageist. I got banned and my thread deleted You mean youthist shurely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliegog Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Would you lend your relatives 40k in order to (dishonestly) secure a few hundred quid in interest? read this thread post no 162 ! http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5153388&page=9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) That is rather the point. It is really only usable by pensioners with substantial savings which is only a minority of them It is clearly aimed at a distinct group of elderly Tory voters who have shown signs that they might defect to UKIP at the next election. As such it is a simple electoral bribe. Of course, the technical f*ckups at NS&I website may cause Osbornes plans to crumble into dust as it appear some people will have spent hours trying to put in a bid for the bonds only to end up with nothing Is that why they also get special winter fuel allowance... Why is that? Talking about others using pensioners and children's special perks.....am sure this goes on. Why all this favouritism to some people only? Edited January 17, 2015 by winkie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkins Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Why all this favouritism to some people only? Because senior politicians have bought into this market segmentation philosophy that says the best way to win votes is to target your policies towards tiny groups of swing voters. In this worldview there is no point in applying broad policies that benefit large numbers of people because many of those people are never going to vote for you so you are wasting your firepower. It's cynical picking-winners-and-losers micropolitics instead of actually leading from the top by identifying the big problems, setting the general direction and having faith that people will follow you if they see you are running the country well. Whenever I hear Cameron/Clegg/Miliband announcing some kind of price cap or voucher scheme or whatever which will be worth £50-£100 per year for the people it affects it makes me roll my eyes in disgust. The people at the top should be focusing on bigger things but they seem to have given up on the concept of leadership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longgone Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 are these worth investing in? is 10k really going to make much difference , if there was a limit of a few 100k it might be worth while Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 are these worth investing in? is 10k really going to make much difference , if there was a limit of a few 100k it might be worth while Exactly, I really can't see what all the fuss is about. If I was old enough I'd buy the full allowance of £40K, but the extra few quid a year wouldn't be life changing. Whether or not it will secure votes for the government is debatable. When the last Labour government brought out the car scrappage scheme, I disagreed with it but none the less lent the kids enough money to take advantage and chop in their old bangers for new cars. I also benefited from the unlimited government guarantee on a Northern Rock savings account at about 7%, did I vote Labour at the next election? No way. Will I vote Conservative at the next election? For the first time in my life, no way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashmonitor Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Exactly, I really can't see what all the fuss is about. If I was old enough I'd buy the full allowance of £40K, but the extra few quid a year wouldn't be life changing. Whether or not it will secure votes for the government is debatable. When the last Labour government brought out the car scrappage scheme, I disagreed with it but none the less lent the kids enough money to take advantage and chop in their old bangers for new cars. I also benefited from the unlimited government guarantee on a Northern Rock savings account at about 7%, did I vote Labour at the next election? No way. Will I vote Conservative at the next election? For the first time in my life, no way. I would imagine £680 pa on 20k as opposed to say £300 in the building society might make a bit of difference to those with just a basic pension and may be meagre savings of less than 50k. Granted it doesn't give monthly interest, but one would presume that they would take capital from whatever is left until these mature. And the early maturity option is available for those that tie too much up. Edited January 17, 2015 by crashmonitor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 are these worth investing in? is 10k really going to make much difference , if there was a limit of a few 100k it might be worth while It is not the amount it is the principle......everyone or nobody, let everybody get a better rate on £5k.....what this policy is telling all people is some are valued more than others....their hard earned money is worth more....sorry it stinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) It's about £180 extra a year after basic rate tax for a qualifying person for as long as the schemes last. Likely it's a pre-election one off for 2015. If you withdraw money early you lose 90 days interest. You can't arrange it in a branch which will put off a lot of people (not all) above the qualifying age just to start with. It might garner a few votes but it seems far from a clincher. Probably the government is desperate for some extra money itself - maybe for some more pre-election "promises"? The 2.8% and 4% rates are being presented as the tops in generosity which is really laughable. Edited January 17, 2015 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.