Black Friday - financial crash thread

[ayrmad]

The Triple Lock, the UK's route to the poor house, how can so many supposedly well educated individuals not recognise this?

[Granny Danger]

8 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

The Triple Lock, the UK's route to the poor house, how can so many supposedly well educated individuals not recognise this?

Fair enough.  So what's your proposal for tackling pensioner poverty?

[strichener]

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Fair enough.  So what's your proposal for tackling pensioner poverty?

or

[Granny Danger]

2 minutes ago, strichener said:

or

Good post, will read again.

[ayrmad]

24 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Fair enough.  So what's your proposal for tackling pensioner poverty?

It certainly doesn't involve mad financial policies to protect them at all costs because they have a greater propensity to vote, each new generation of politicians just keeps them sweet for as long as it takes them to feather their own nest as luxuriously as possible.

[ayrmad]

27 minutes ago, strichener said:

or

70th birthday.

[Granny Danger]

1 minute ago, ayrmad said:

It certainly doesn't involve mad financial policies to protect them at all costs because they have a greater propensity to vote, each new generation of politicians just keeps them sweet for as long as it takes them to feather their own nest as luxuriously as possible.

Right so that's what you wouldn't do, I was wondering what you would do.

BTW I am not disagreeing that it is an issue but I often worry about having these debates under right-wing terms.

 

[ayrmad]

2 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Right so that's what you wouldn't do, I was wondering what you would do.

BTW I am not disagreeing that it is an issue but I often worry about having these debates under right-wing terms.

 

What right-wing terms are we debating under, must have missed them when Div flicked the big switch.

[strichener]

8 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Right so that's what you wouldn't do, I was wondering what you would do.

BTW I am not disagreeing that it is an issue but I often worry about having these debates under right-wing terms.

 

Pensioners have been over protected under right and left-wing governments.  Existing pensioner poverty needs to be addressed just the same as non-pensioner poverty,  I would say that anyone that is currently under 40 and is not contributing a substantial part of their income to retirement will have no excuse for being a pensioner in poverty.  It is as clear as day that the current system of pensions is not sustainable and is in effect a giant ponzi scheme.

[Granny Danger]

23 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

What right-wing terms are we debating under, must have missed them when Div flicked the big switch.

I am not saying you are introducing such terms but all too often the debate is centred on us being a poor country, even at a time we are wasting a fortune on Trident.  We are not a poor country, we are a country, like many others, where wealth is skewed.

15 minutes ago, strichener said:

Pensioners have been over protected under right and left-wing governments.  Existing pensioner poverty needs to be addressed just the same as non-pensioner poverty,  I would say that anyone that is currently under 40 and is not contributing a substantial part of their income to retirement will have no excuse for being a pensioner in poverty.  It is as clear as day that the current system of pensions is not sustainable and is in effect a giant ponzi scheme.

Do you include the millions on the minimum wage, zero hours contracts, the unemployed.....?

[strichener]

4 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I am not saying you are introducing such terms but all too often the debate is centred on us being a poor country, even at a time we are wasting a fortune on Trident.  We are not a poor country, we are a country, like many others, where wealth is skewed.

Do you include the millions on the minimum wage, zero hours contracts, the unemployed.....?

With the introduction of the workplace pension and the increase in the minimum hourly rate then yes I do include minimum wage and zero hours contracts in this. 

If you have went through your life being unemployed (other than through disability) then again you only have yourself to blame.  I think it foolhardy for anyone to rely on the state to provide anything other than subsistence.  There is no will within any government in the UK to address inequality in living standards for pensioners, to do so would require removing benefits from those that can, in the opinion of the government, afford it.  Even if there were a will, there are always going to be complaints from those that are close to the qualify/don't qualify line.

 

[Zetterlund]

The sad fact is that many people don't even think about retirement or pensions until they're at least well into their 30's, which is increasingly when the current working generations are likely to have achieved any kind of financial stability. In fact most people have very little clue about the economy as a whole - which is probably just as well because if they did it would probably collapse since it requires people to actually have confidence in it.

[Granny Danger]

6 minutes ago, strichener said:

With the introduction of the workplace pension and the increase in the minimum hourly rate then yes I do include minimum wage and zero hours contracts in this. 

If you have went through your life being unemployed (other than through disability) then again you only have yourself to blame.  I think it foolhardy for anyone to rely on the state to provide anything other than subsistence.  There is no will within any government in the UK to address inequality in living standards for pensioners, to do so would require removing benefits from those that can, in the opinion of the government, afford it.  Even if there were a will, there are always going to be complaints from those that are close to the qualify/don't qualify line.

 

The idea that someone on the minimum wage can afford to put aside a 'substantial part' of their income towards a pension is laughable.  Actually it's not laughable it's ludicrous.

[ayrmad]

1 hour ago, Granny Danger said:

I am not saying you are introducing such terms but all too often the debate is centred on us being a poor country, even at a time we are wasting a fortune on Trident.  We are not a poor country, we are a country, like many others, where wealth is skewed.

My arguments are more to do with the unfairness of pensioners being protected at the expense of every other demographic, why the fcuk should the youngsters of today pay like fcuk to keep pensioners of today while they themselves are very very very unlikely to be kept in the same manner in their own dotage?

[Arabdownunder]

Poond going down again today against the mighty AUD. Yaas.

[GTG_03]

43 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

My arguments are more to do with the unfairness of pensioners being protected at the expense of every other demographic, why the fcuk should the youngsters of today pay like fcuk to keep pensioners of today while they themselves are very very very unlikely to be kept in the same manner in their own dotage?

The reason that pensioners are kept well is because they tend to go out and vote. If young people can't be arsed going out to vote then they've no-one but themselves to blame when they are ignored by governments.

[strichener]

3 minutes ago, GTG_03 said:

The reason that pensioners are kept well is because they tend to go out and vote. If young people can't be arsed going out to vote then they've no-one but themselves to blame when they are ignored by governments.

And what about the young people that do get involved in the political process? 

The reality is that the reason that pensioners are able to go out and vote is because then have f**k all else to do.  Going to the polling station is only a minor inconvenience to their planned free day trip to Largs on the bus so that they can have a cup of coffee and an ice cream with other pensioners before heading back home again.

[Granny Danger]

1 hour ago, ayrmad said:

My arguments are more to do with the unfairness of pensioners being protected at the expense of every other demographic, why the fcuk should the youngsters of today pay like fcuk to keep pensioners of today while they themselves are very very very unlikely to be kept in the same manner in their own dotage?

Your first point is a fair point but I'm more interested in arguing for a better deal for others rather than a worse deal for pensioners.  

As for the next point that's down to the system that is utilised, you can't blame pensioners individually or collectively for that.

I think a frank and open debate about pensions is not only desirable but essential, but the basis for that debate must be positive and constructive.  As I said earlier the UK basic state pension is one of the lowest in Europe, that was why the triple-lock was introduced.  There will never be a reasoned and informed debate if people approach from the view that pensioners are a privileged group.

ETA:. And you will never have a sensible debate whilst people like strichener are part of it.

Edited August 5, 2016 by Granny Danger

[strichener]

1 hour ago, Granny Danger said:

Your first point is a fair point but I'm more interested in arguing for a better deal for others rather than a worse deal for pensioners.  

As for the next point that's down to the system that is utilised, you can't blame pensioners individually or collectively for that.

I think a frank and open debate about pensions is not only desirable but essential, but the basis for that debate must be positive and constructive.  As I said earlier the UK basic state pension is one of the lowest in Europe, that was why the triple-lock was introduced.  There will never be a reasoned and informed debate if people approach from the view that pensioners are a privileged group.

ETA:. And you will never have a sensible debate whilst people like strichener are part of it.

There is nothing eminently sensible about the current state pension, neither in the way it is funded nor the way it is distributed.  Anyone on minimum wage at the moment will make total NI contributions (remember this is supposed to pay for the NHS and your pension) that would, if invested 100% in a private sector pension result a fraction of the amount that the state provides.  How is this sustainable? 

In terms of a pension debate, I am quite happy to be shot down over my own position but not by someone who thinks that what we have can be kept and improved over the longer term.  The triple lock was introduced as a political SOP and there is absolutely no justification for this when living standards and real disposable income has been reduced for the working population.  This is exactly what AyrMad is alluding to.

Your words mean nothing without substance.  Let's hear how you would improve the position of pensioners without a detrimental affect on the people actually paying for them and without increasing the country's debt burden (which again will fall on future generations).

[jakedee]

The people actually paying the contribution may have been the pensioners who contributed to this all their working lives. Maybe if the government didn't squander thes contributions a decent pension would be achievable. This is also not taking into account contributors that don't reach pension age.