debtlessmanc Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 20 hours ago, kzb said: https://www.lgcplus.com/finance/councils-consider-seeking-pension-contribution-rate-cuts-21-12-2023/ the Local Government Pension Scheme currently has up to £100bn more than it needs to fund its pension promises, and cutting contribution rates could allow a typical large council to “reasonably save at least £20m a year”. the overall funding level for the LGPS in England and Wales improved from 98% in 2019 to 107% in 2022, and “subsequent market movements have led to some funds experiencing further improvements”. So there you are @winkie, the local authority pension fund is £100bn in surplus, and councils could save money by cutting their contributions. Surely this is the solution? When the universities were short of money they cut the pension scheme. I was not a great fan but realised it was a way of saving money. The thing is that universities are financially independent and can and have go bust. The councils are (I get the impression could be wrong) in total denial that those in comfy chairs might be uncomforted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 22 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said: Surely this is the solution? When the universities were short of money they cut the pension scheme. I was not a great fan but realised it was a way of saving money. The thing is that universities are financially independent and can and have go bust. The councils are (I get the impression could be wrong) in total denial that those in comfy chairs might be uncomforted. Certainly you would think it would help. But I do have a worry this could be like the company pension holidays of the 1990's. The pension schemes were awash with money so they stopped paying in. Then Gordon Brown put a tax on them, and here we are with most DB schemes closed down as a result. Also, £100bn divided by 317 local authorities is actually £315 million each, and that is if it were divided equally. A "large" council would presumably get more than this, and of course it is lot more than £20 million. Divided by 20 million a year is nearly 16 years, and surely they could speed that up. I suppose another danger is the government cut their central funding pro-rata to the pension refund, so they end up no better off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheResponsibleHouseBuyer Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 4 hours ago, bomberbrown said: ^ This! plus dodging potholes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14stFlyer Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 22 hours ago, onlooker said: We could of course all buy electric bikes to help with the hills, but then most would end up stolen. Hardly surprising when the police do not generally attempt to recover stolen cars, let alone stolen bikes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14stFlyer Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 21 hours ago, kzb said: I don't know what they do in Amsterdam. I did read that over-75's in the Netherlands can now be euthanized, maybe if you do that, you don't need travelling carers Kzb fact checker required again. Issue one: “can be euthanised”. No. Euthanasia in Netherlands is not done to people, it is chosen. issue two: “over 75s”. No. Provision of Euthanasia in Netherlands is not age related. Euthanasia or assisted dying is only legal in cases of “hopeless and unbearable suffering” regardless of age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14stFlyer Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 20 hours ago, kzb said: There should be an honest appraisal of the CO2 emissions and pollution caused by cycle lanes and cycling. I actually suspect the net effect of cycling, especially when taking into account the loss of road space, is to increase both of those. Bunkum. Cars produce pollution. Not cyclists. The fewer local car journeys, the less polluted the streets and the healthier and happier the people who live in the town are. 20 hours ago, kzb said: It's also a class issue, with the well-off holier-than-thou cycle commute Drivel. There are some wealthy cyclists in my town, but the vast majority are kids, students, local workers (not the rich ones!) and even some little old retired folks. Sorry if you see this as rude kzb, but you are so way off target on this issue here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 Not everyone thankfully lives in towns, but they do have to drive to visit towns.......drive,park and ride.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 12 hours ago, asd said: It's not just through traffic forced to use the main roads rather than drive through the ltn, it's also those who live inside the ltn who have to exit their sector and drive around the perimeter. The first part has a people friendly rationale, streets for walking, kids can play less pollution. The second part is a deliberate attempt to make driving anywhere less attractive. Social engineering usually by labour councils. Evil. When they had the consultations only the first aim was discussed, the second aim has been divulged later as the real agenda. So much money is wasted by not consulting, listening .......just doing something at great expense to pay to undo it again because the majority of people do not benefit from it, the decision makes must have done, that is why they did it.....council put road humps in a long wide residential road, hardly anyone would cross as no reason to......months later took them all out again, what a waste......easy to spend/waste other people's money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtlessmanc Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) 5 hours ago, 14stFlyer said: Bunkum. Cars produce pollution. Not cyclists. The fewer local car journeys, the less polluted the streets and the healthier and happier the people who live in the town are. Drivel. There are some wealthy cyclists in my town, but the vast majority are kids, students, local workers (not the rich ones!) and even some little old retired folks. Sorry if you see this as rude kzb, but you are so way off target on this issue here. I have to say that they opened the airport relief road in manchester 5 years ago, magnficient cycle lane from south of pf pointon to the airport. I commute along the road every day by car. https://ilovemanchester.com/manchester-airports-290m-road-link-is-finally-completed hardly ever seen a bicycle, the odd jogger and dog walker and that is it. Edited March 21 by debtlessmanc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) 4 hours ago, 14stFlyer said: Kzb fact checker required again. Issue one: “can be euthanised”. No. Euthanasia in Netherlands is not done to people, it is chosen. issue two: “over 75s”. No. Provision of Euthanasia in Netherlands is not age related. Euthanasia or assisted dying is only legal in cases of “hopeless and unbearable suffering” regardless of age. If you want to check some facts, the original question was "how do they pay for social care in Amsterdam?". I said I didn't know. Then I said that I had read that over-75's can be euthanised, but it was just an illustration of how they might get round the problem somewhat. If you want to do something useful re facts, why don't you tell us how they afford social care in the Netherlands? That would be the real fact check, and it would be on topic. https://www.dutchnews.nl/2020/07/euthanasia-law-proposed-for-healthy-over-75s-who-feel-their-lives-are-complete/ Her proposed law would mean healthy over-75s with a strong death wish for at least two months could have the assistance of an ‘end-of-life supervisor’ to die. Edited March 21 by kzb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 1 hour ago, debtlessmanc said: I have to say that they opened the airport relief road in manchester 5 years ago, magnficient cycle lane from south of pf pointon to the airport. I commute along it every day. https://ilovemanchester.com/manchester-airports-290m-road-link-is-finally-completed hardly ever seen a bicycle, the odd jogger and dog walker and that is it. Despite all the money and nuisance, commuting by bicycle has not increased. It's all been a waste of money. BTW, when there is a new road or new development opened, I am all for cycle lanes being built as part of the plan. It's when they take road space from other users that it becomes daft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 3 hours ago, 14stFlyer said: Bunkum. Cars produce pollution. Not cyclists. The fewer local car journeys, the less polluted the streets It isn't necessarily the case in the present situation. If a handful of cyclists cause congestion involving hundreds of motor vehicles, the net change in emissions could easily be an increase. You have not addressed this by your answer. There has been no increase in the per cent of people going to work and back by bicycle over the past many years. But there has been a big increase in congestion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotblack42 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 44 minutes ago, kzb said: healthy over-75s with a strong death wish Sound of body <> healthy. A strong death wish is not healthy, ergo they would qualify for assisted dying under the proposal. Sometimes its nothing to do with family, social or financial pressure, they just want out. There's an element on HPC with a paranoid fear that those around them will be 'after their munny' when they are old and need support. They don't seem to consider all the other scenarios🤔 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 3 hours ago, hotblack42 said: Sound of body <> healthy. A strong death wish is not healthy, ergo they would qualify for assisted dying under the proposal. Sometimes its nothing to do with family, social or financial pressure, they just want out. There's an element on HPC with a paranoid fear that those around them will be 'after their munny' when they are old and need support. They don't seem to consider all the other scenarios🤔 I'd think this lot on here will be salivating to get a similar scheme here. NL had 7,666 assisted deaths last year, it's increasing year on year. Pro-rata for population, that would translate to 28,500 assisted deaths per year in the UK. Just think of the property released for more immigrants and the savings in social/health care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtlessmanc Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 2 hours ago, kzb said: I'd think this lot on here will be salivating to get a similar scheme here. NL had 7,666 assisted deaths last year, it's increasing year on year. Pro-rata for population, that would translate to 28,500 assisted deaths per year in the UK. Just think of the property released for more immigrants and the savings in social/health care. My wife (who was a widow obv. When I met her) watched her first husband die of cancer - very slowly and painfully. She has already told me (in writing) she wants to go to dignitas immediately with a similar diagnosis you conflate what is convenient with what people themselves want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 1 hour ago, debtlessmanc said: My wife (who was a widow obv. When I met her) watched her first husband die of cancer - very slowly and painfully. She has already told me (in writing) she wants to go to dignitas immediately with a similar diagnosis you conflate what is convenient with what people themselves want. I'm illustrating what a slippery slope we are on with this forum. Obviously I realise this is a complex question and in certain limited cases it may be fairest to put people to sleep. They've been doing that for generations anyhow. We could easily pass a "my life is complete" law for over 75's. It was being seriously put forward in one of our closest neighbours, and for all I know may well be in law there. We've had people on here saying free healthcare should be withdrawn at a certain age, and there was no pile on of scorn like I get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtlessmanc Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) 14 minutes ago, kzb said: I'm illustrating what a slippery slope we are on with this forum. Obviously I realise this is a complex question and in certain limited cases it may be fairest to put people to sleep. They've been doing that for generations anyhow. We could easily pass a "my life is complete" law for over 75's. It was being seriously put forward in one of our closest neighbours, and for all I know may well be in law there. We've had people on here saying free healthcare should be withdrawn at a certain age, and there was no pile on of scorn like I get. Yes it is a complex problem- but at one end of it is truly horrible suffering. It’s about those that accept life has an end and those that have a problem with that concept. I have a brother who has not written a will- he seems to think he is immortal. All previous attempts at immortality have failed… Edited March 21 by debtlessmanc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 31 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said: Yes it is a complex problem- but at one end of it is truly horrible suffering. It’s about those that accept life has an end and those that have a problem with that concept. I have a brother who has not written a will- he seems to think he is immortal. All previous attempts at immortality have failed… It's the opposite end of the scale that I am concerned with on this forum. There are those that want the older generation out of the way, because they want their houses and they don't want to pay the taxes to give them a pension. It's nothing to do with mercy killing, it's greed. With these views taking hold, it can only be a matter of time before people come under pressure to end it at a certain age, when they are perceived to have become a burden. What's the point of living over 75? Sign here and get it over with. You can hear the questions now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtlessmanc Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) 22 minutes ago, kzb said: It's the opposite end of the scale that I am concerned with on this forum. There are those that want the older generation out of the way, because they want their houses and they don't want to pay the taxes to give them a pension. It's nothing to do with mercy killing, it's greed. With these views taking hold, it can only be a matter of time before people come under pressure to end it at a certain age, when they are perceived to have become a burden. What's the point of living over 75? Sign here and get it over with. You can hear the questions now. There is a mid point between those views. Compare Eg dementia at 95 and terminal cancer in your 30’s my wife’s husband was in total denial about his mortality- many are.they should have the fee choice to suffer to the end. That is their free choice of a horrible death. I don't want that take that path when it is my turn. There is no easy solution to this with dementia, they cannot agree to anything, they have no choice. Edited March 21 by debtlessmanc 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.