Reply to: New pension raid

[d000hg]

And what about the unsuitable ones that employers won't want even if the state does pays their wages?

Well in the USA they even get actual criminals to pick up litter from the side of the street...

[xoggoth]

This is probably balls even by the Balls's standard of balls. The BBC news pointed out a couple of flaws tonight:

1) Banks will just avoid bonus tax by paying more in salary and perks.
2) Unlikely the bonus tax and welfare cuts can fund these jobs. All costs to employers, including mentoring and supervision, do not appear to have been taken into account.

And what about the unsuitable ones that employers won't want even if the state does pays their wages?

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Instead of the usual emotional rhetoric, can you show me why my post was inaccurate? That is:

When have the Labour party left office without a large and growing deficit?

Have the Labour party got alternative viable plans for reducing the current deficit, remembering that they have opposed most of what the Coalition is doing about it?

Are the Coalition not in fact reducing the deficit?

I can't be bothered frankly - if you are just going to dismiss my opinion as "usual emotional rhetoric" I will treat your response with the same casual contempt. On the narrow points made, you may be correct - but (just as one small example), to hear some people talk, you'd have thought Labour inherited a massive surplus in 1997 - clue - they didn't, even after 18 years of Conservative economic miracles. To be clear - I am not saying Labour are/were any good, but believing the Tories are any better, whilst touching, is misguided.

[AtW]

So raiding pensions is just to gain popularity with the poor, they don't plan to do it?

He will probably do it because from socialists point of view it's a winner anyway - if people continue to use pensions then he'll get the money, and if they choose to keep in the pocket then he'd get 45% tax (or 50% as they've promised to increase it), looks like a winner either way ... in their world!

In reality what will definately happen is reduction of pension payments, but he might find that amount of extra tax collected won't go up as he privately expects

[b0redom]

Your pension??!?!

Your money you put into pension (which may or may not be yours in the future) is used to pay up previous investors into Ponzi scheme. Even if you use your money to buy shares that helps them because pension funds are heavily influenced by stock market levels - if they fall then extra payments will need to be paid and they are so huge that could bankrupt companies behind many of those funds.

So, essentially the Govt's primary motivation in giving a "tax relief" is to maintain payments into the ponzi scheme because otherwise it can collapse now rather than in the future (which will be somebody elses problem).

Eh? Surely the Ponzi scheme only impacts the public sector pension pot. If you have a private pension it's invested into private companies (and maybe gilts and bonds) and used to buy an annuity when you retire (from a private insurance company who gamble you'll die before you've taken all the money).

With the exception of investment into gilts + bonds which will be repayed with interest anyway, I don't see how the government gets anything?

[d000hg]

So raiding pensions is just to gain popularity with the poor, they don't plan to do it?

[AtW]

Mandatory work and no "benefits life" sounds both far more left-wing than we're used to, AND a great idea. Which is worrying when I don't really agree with left-wing philosophy.

Politicians will say what people want to hear in order to get elected.

[d000hg]

Mandatory work and no "benefits life" sounds both far more left-wing than we're used to, AND a great idea. Which is worrying when I don't really agree with left-wing philosophy.

[Doggy Styles]

As other people on here have alluded to, anyone who thinks one or other of the two main parties has a monopoly on anything is deluded.

They regularly swap policies whilst pretending to have some "core values" they stand for which are nothing of the sort.

People seem to fall for it.

There are myriad examples of Conservative (and Labour) economic imcompetance.

Instead of the usual emotional rhetoric, can you show me why my post was inaccurate? That is:

When have the Labour party left office without a large and growing deficit?

Have the Labour party got alternative viable plans for reducing the current deficit, remembering that they have opposed most of what the Coalition is doing about it?

Are the Coalition not in fact reducing the deficit?

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Tell us why you think this.

As other people on here have alluded to, anyone who thinks one or other of the two main parties has a monopoly on anything is deluded.

They regularly swap policies whilst pretending to have some "core values" they stand for which are nothing of the sort.

People seem to fall for it.

There are myriad examples of Conservative (and Labour) economic imcompetance.

[Flashman]

People earning more than £150,000 would get only 20 per cent tax relief on pension contributions, instead of the 45 per cent they receive now

In other words almost no one will be affected by this. And anyone who is will likely avoid it.

Its the same way as the Tories kick up a fuss about immigration and do nothing really about it. The Labour Party screams soak the rich but won't actually change anything.

The Labour Party had almost identical tax and spend plans for 2010 - 2015.

The Labour Party will have almost identical tax and spend plans as the Coalition for 2015 - 2020.


My turn. Your turn. My turn. Your turn.

It doesn't matter who you vote for. The same old faces with the same old policies and the same old shambles rolls along.

[Doggy Styles]

Your view seems coloured by a party loyalty rather than a detached view.

Tell us why you think this.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

That might be true, but who should I have more confidence in?

In my lifetime the Labour party have never shown they can manage the budget without increasing the deficit, or that they are even have a viable plan to reduce today's deficit.

The Coalition are at least trying to reduce today's deficit and, even though it is slower than they thought, with some success.

As things stand, to me it is a simple choice. I don't want the Labour party back in control of the country's finances.

Your view seems coloured by a party loyalty rather than a detached view.

They are both identically crap. I would love to see a 3rd party challenge their duopoly. Shame there is no viable alternative(queue [sic] KentPhilip...)

Agreed they are identically crap, albeit in slightly different ways.

[Doggy Styles]

Me?

[AtW]

Could you explain to me how the money I choose to put into my pension goes to the government now?

Your pension??!?!

Your money you put into pension (which may or may not be yours in the future) is used to pay up previous investors into Ponzi scheme. Even if you use your money to buy shares that helps them because pension funds are heavily influenced by stock market levels - if they fall then extra payments will need to be paid and they are so huge that could bankrupt companies behind many of those funds.

So, essentially the Govt's primary motivation in giving a "tax relief" is to maintain payments into the ponzi scheme because otherwise it can collapse now rather than in the future (which will be somebody elses problem).