Pension boon

[teamsaint]

Nowt? I bought my TV licence - that covers radio too

did you remember to pick up your dog licence and some VED stamps?

anyway, the "nowt" refers to the Naxos Library which Wiltshire council generously provide, FOC to bona fide moonrakers.

[Beef Oven!]

did you remember to pick up your dog licence?

No, but I have lee-saunce for ma minky

[ahinton]

Of course they are pensions.

No. A pension is an investment made by the contributor on his/her own behalf; the state-sponsored Ponzi scheme sucks up taxes from "contributors" and shells them out very soon after receiveing them to those currently entitled to receive state benefits including state retirement benefit - no investment for growth is or cold possibly be involved in this. Some might even describe it as a form of money laundering.

Just because the state nicks the money to do whatever they want with it, it doesn't alter the fact that it was paid by the employee(s) for a purpose. All public sector pensions work in this way, and when it has been spent on something else, there is deemed to be a "pensions black hole".

It wasn't just spent by employees; it was spent by employers, the self employed and those who choose to pay so-called "voluntary" NIC3 taxes.

When you take something that isn't yours, there used to be a specific term for it.

Oh, believe me, there still is; goverments of all hues should take due note thereof - but of course they won't.

[ahinton]

I fail to see what your point is at all.

Until the people of this country stand up for what we /they want, and stop accepting what some career driven bureaucrats/ accountants tell the government what they should do, we will continue to have our incomes stolen by them.

This is a rich country that CAN afford state pensions, and much else. time to fight and not endlessly cave in , to powers that find money for war, arms, bailing out banks and all the other utter waste.

Just look at the recent history of the fund from which state retirement benefit has been and still is paid - and bear in mind that no one saves into a scheme in order to secure such benefits becuse that's not the way it works or ever has worked. I totally agree that taxpayers' monies diverted to the fighting of wars legal and otherwise is an issue of great importance, but whatever monies there might be for the time being to fund state retirement benefits, they'll not be incresed greatly if government stops allocating monies for all that defence spending because it will be reallocated into quite few other things besides just state retirement benefit provision and, in any case, many people of state retirement age and above will continue to have to work well beyond that age and/or have ample private pension provision in order to live, because no one can live on state retirement benefit alone, as is demonstrated, for example, by the numbers of people who continue to receive housing benefit, council tax reduction and working tax credits beyond that age while receiving state retirement benefit such as it is.

[ahinton]

I'm not sure I trust the figures on demographics that endlessly get thrown around , particularly by the government.

see, this kind of stuff is just lies.

put out by the DWP.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/apr/19/statistics-100-years-old

very very few people, ( about 15000 currently) live to be 100.

Sure, but hopefully that will increase massively; wouldn't you want it to? Whatever the flaws and faults of NHS, parts of it are doing their bit to ensure increases in life expectancy and, with the eventual practical outcomes of genetic engineering as part of medical practice, the likelihood of massive increases in longevity over the next few generations is far from remote.

[ahinton]

And the tax-payers who pay the NI contributions for those on benefits.

Yes - including state retirement benefit. I don't see a problem in principle with this as long as there's to be a system wherein some of taxpayers' monies go towards state benefits including state retirement benefit, but the overall affordability question as time goes by cannot be ignored.

[Serial_Apologist]

Yes - including state retirement benefit. I don't see a problem in principle with this as long as there's to be a system wherein some of taxpayers' monies go towarads state benefits including state retirement benefit, but the overall affordability question as time goes by cannot be ignored.

It'll probably sort itself out as the obese generation... comes of age.

towarads

I thought you said you'd lost that Scottish accent?

[Beef Oven!]

Yes - including state retirement benefit. I don't see a problem in principle with this as long as there's to be a system wherein some of taxpayers' monies go towarads state benefits including state retirement benefit, but the overall affordability question as time goes by cannot be ignored.

I think the point is that there is a lot of people who are under 'retirement age', on a very modest income, who pay tax, but are not employees and do not have their NI contributions paid for them like people on benefits, who do not pay tax. It seems unfair to me.

[P. G. Tipps]

trouble is, the government won't tax business in a way that actually generates revenue, and is discovering that folks would rather earn £12k tax free as check out assistants that have " career" jobs paying £20/£25k where they pay bloody stupid marginal rates, and have career type stress thrown in as a bonus.
And who can blame them, when you can spend the free time listening to world class Sibelius performances for nowt?

Oh dunno about that ...

There can be quite a bit of stress working on a till in a fast-moving retail environment and unbearable boredom in a slow-moving one. Typically "career managers" make sure they avoid both situations in any emergency and are often found sitting with cups of tea at countless meetings well away from the shop floor, prattling on about 'blue sky thinking', 'going forward' and all that sort of valuable and exciting corporate stuff.

To be fair, the 'careerists' have little choice as they receive their instructions from senior management. In reality, the interests of the customer (who is supposed to be 'king') come a poor second to management "games" and culture and it's those on the till, many on just above minimum wage rates who might consider even £12k a dream salary, who also have to cope with frequent boorishness and rudeness from the Great British Public and are expected to be ever-pleasant in return.

I think I might plump for double the wages, taxable or not, and settle for the 'career stress' ...

[Krystal]

How many years would it take to save up enough to sit in the expensive seats? (only to have your evening totally ruined by some oik slipping into the empty one next to you after the interval)

You're not bitter about it, or anything!! LOL

[MrGongGong]

You're not bitter about it, or anything!! LOL

No i'm not bitter in any way at all.

[teamsaint]

No i'm not bitter in any way at all.

I imagine crunch point fo Mr GG would be the resentment he would feel if he couldnt afford " best" tickets to his own gigs....but then I suppose he could slip himself a fiver and let himself in the side door.

[ahinton]

It'll probably sort itself out as the obese generation... comes of age.

That might depend on the nature and etent of the obeisance...

I thought you said you'd lost that Scottish accent?

I did, but it would appear that, although my voice has indeed done so, my careless digits have not...

[ahinton]

I think the point is that there is a lot of people who are under 'retirement age', on a very modest income, who pay tax, but are not employees and do not have their NI contributions paid for them like people on benefits, who do not pay tax. It seems unfair to me.

People in the latter position (if I understand what you mean correctly) who are not liable for NIC by virtue of being entitled to and in receipt of state benefits will in most cases find themselves with fewer "qualifying years" for state retirement benefit when they reach state retirement age, so it's not all roses for them either - and, it has to be said, those in receipt of state benefits other than state retirement benefit are entitled to them only because their circumstances merit it and someone has to fund them, just as they have to fund state retirement benefit. That said, by those people whom you mention whoare "not employees", I take you to refer specifically to the self-employed on modest incomes but not so modest that they have no tax liability; I don't understand why you single them out in not having their NIC liabilities met for them - surely no employee or self-employed person has his/her NIC liability met for them, irrespective of the level of income received by them? But I suspect that, for some reason, I'm not getting what you're writing here, so perhaps you could explain what it is that I'm missing!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I think the point is that there is a lot of people who are under 'retirement age', on a very modest income, who pay tax, but are not employees and do not have their NI contributions paid for them like people on benefits, who do not pay tax. It seems unfair to me.

I don't follow your point, BeefO. If the "very modest income" is below £10000, then they don't pay Income Tax - whereas anyone receiving the State Pension, Jobseeker’s Allowance, Carer’s Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, Incapacity Benefit, Bereavement Allowance, pensions paid by the Industrial Death Benefit scheme, Widowed Parent’s Allowance, or the Widow’s pension, does.