Higher taxes and longer working lives

[Mich the Tester]

Plus you would have to take health factors into account. So like with the arguments with genetic testing - if you were someone a family genetic history of alzehmiers or early onset Parkinsons then your insurance premium would be higher.

You are right. I'm afraid that without very strict laws to prevent insurers even requesting DNA data or other medical data from people we will all become enslaved to the insurance industry. I actually think, although this might sound mad, that the insurance industry poses a greater threat to freedom than most governments right now.

Personally my income is insured against disability with an insurer that is still a mutual society and which doesn't do that kind of thing (yet). I simply don't trust the profit oriented insurers on this issue.

[SueEllen]

Many good points.

However, why just raise pension age? Wouldn't it be more efficient to get more people to start working earlier, e.g. at 18 years old, and completing their education part-time?

Lots of university students already work part-time but at the moment there is an issue of them finding jobs.

It seems to me that the candle is burning at both ends; people are studying full time for longer, and living for longer, while spending less years working.

Ideally you want to make your elderly population healthier so they can work longer part-time. Also as I know people in their 60s and 70s who do a lot of volunteering and work part-time people need to be convinced that complete retirement is not the thing to aim for if you are in good health.

[DimPrawn]

You are still forgetting that there's no money to pay for those retired and about to retire in the public sector on final salary index linked pensions.

All the tax we pay is for these people. Nothing is left for us.

[SueEllen]

You are still forgetting that there's no money to pay for those retired and about to retire in the public sector on final salary index linked pensions.

All the tax we pay is for these people. Nothing is left for us.

Which part of the public sector?

Local government?
NHS?
Central government "agencies"?

The problem with public sector pensions which loads of people rant about there are different ones plus the majority of people getting them are women who will only get about £4,000 a year. The people who get the big sums i.e. doctors, MPs are few.

[Ignis Fatuus]

So who's paying for the public sector parasites already retired?

The government. Same as is paying the state pensions for private sector parasites already retired.

As is often pointed out in the context of public sector pensions, this is a deal that has already been made. Another side of the deal was the years of public service that the public sector workers already put in. Of course the government could escape the cost of this deal, having already taken the benefit. Don't know about you, but I call that stealing. I don't want my government to do that.

It is a separate argument whether the deal that was made was more generous than you would like.

It is also a separate and fascinating argument whether the government and taxpayers of today should be bound by deals made by the governments of yesterday. Thomas Jefferson thought that they should not, because the governments of today would be bound to lay their bills at the doors of the taxpayers of tomorrow. But you would have to be aware of the consequences of that constitutional situation: nobody would ever take your IOU. Gilts would be worthless. Government would be cash only. There would be little or no investment in the future: why build for the future if the future won't contribute?

Personally I would prefer to see government more provident, not less. That means coughing up for decisions made by governments that ruled before I voted, or even was born. That is part of belonging to the nation, which is seen as being the same nation as in my parents' day.

[BlasterBates]

The government. Same as is paying the state pensions for private sector parasites already retired.

As is often pointed out in the context of public sector pensions, this is a deal that has already been made. Another side of the deal was the years of public service that the public sector workers already put in. Of course the government could escape the cost of this deal, having already taken the benefit. Don't know about you, but I call that stealing. I don't want my government to do that.

It is a separate argument whether the deal that was made was more generous than you would like.

It is also a separate and fascinating argument whether the government and taxpayers of today should be bound by deals made by the governments of yesterday. Thomas Jefferson thought that they should not, because the governments of today would be bound to lay their bills at the doors of the taxpayers of tomorrow. But you would have to be aware of the consequences of that constitutional situation: nobody would ever take your IOU. Gilts would be worthless. Government would be cash only. There would be little or no investment in the future: why build for the future if the future won't contribute?

That means unless you do have a generous public pension, to honour the pledge you will be quite poor.

Pensions and health care pledges put UK at 'extreme risk' of another economic crisis - Telegraph

[SueEllen]

That means unless you do have a generous public pension, to honour the pledge you will be quite poor.

Well you can get into the public sector before they make the changes to make the pension poorer.....

Though I don't want to be an MP the chief of some of my nearest local council's let alone work for them in any IT related role. I remember meeting a manage of one council's IT department socially luckily I didn't have the skills he needed in his department.

I think I will look into becoming an MEP though.

[amcdonald]

What they should do is privatise the public sector pension funds, and let nature take it's cause

If they can't survive without public funding tough the public sector droids will have to pay more in like everyone else

Simples!

[DimPrawn]

So who's paying for the public sector parasites already retired?

The government. Same as is paying the state pensions for private sector parasites already retired.

.

Classic!

Thankgod the government are paying and not the taxpayers.

We need brilliant thinkers like you in this country!

[SueEllen]

What they should do is privatise the public sector pension funds, and let nature take it's cause

If they can't survive without public funding tough the public sector droids will have to pay more in like everyone else

Simples!

The government is already looking at making local government public sector workers (i.e. council staff) pay more into their pensions. However some report on Monday indicated that it would mean people at the lower end of the payscale won't go into the scheme so as taxpayers we would end up paying for them when they retire anyway with pension credit etc, which could cost us more.