|
08 Dec 13 - 02:28 AM (#3582495) Subject: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Kampervan So the retirement age in the UK is to be raised to 70 on the basis that we should spend approximately 2/3 of our adult lives working and 1/3 in retirement. Assuming that adult life starts at 18 years old, then we will have to work for 52 years, then we can, on average look forward to 26 years of retirement. So adding together 18 years growing up, 52 years working and 26 years enjoying the fruits of our labour, the government seems to think that, on average, we are going to be living to the age of 93. Can this be true? |
|
08 Dec 13 - 03:06 AM (#3582497) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: JohnInKansas Mortality, or life expectancy, is a sort of fuzzy concept, partly because people who talk about it never tell you whether they're taliking averages or medians - or something else. The US Social Security System estimates as of 2011 showed that a child born in 2011 had an "expectancy" of living to 75.4 for men and 80.4 for women. A person who was 65 years old in 2011 would have an "expectancy" of living until 82.2 for men or 84.9 for women. A person who whas 70 years old in 2011 would have an "expectancy" of living until 83.7 for men or 86.1 for women. It may be noted that life expectancy is somewhat lower in the US than in several other places. Somewhat more detailed information is available from the Social Security websites, but a "quick reference" can be found at: Life Expectancy Tables - Actuarial Life Tables The longer you live, the older you're likely to be when you die. (Not quite as trivial a conclusion as it appears to be.) The point most important to those who tout changing the retirement age is that those who die before they're old enough to receive benefits "don't matter." John |
|
08 Dec 13 - 04:42 AM (#3582514) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,musket Life expectancy varies. Public health indicators are used for healthcare planning and in The UK we have average life expectancy down to council ward level, or approx 2000 people. The snag is, it varies a lot. A hell of a lot. In some cities you can get variations of 10 years less than a mile from each other. Also, life expectancy has increased over the last couple of hundred years yet the generation at school today is not expected to live longer than their parents. Although smoking is down overall, it is becoming popular again with younger people, and that isn't the issue anyway. The issue is fast food, processed food and seditary lifestyle. Although most people will say money is tight, convenience and junk food can always be bought. Television can always be watched. People can always find protection reasons for not kicking their kids outside to play. A bit of a time bomb? No. Its here. 8 year old girls getting periods through being overweight. School uniforms in sizes considered big for adults even. 30 year olds presenting with ailments associated with pensioners. I heard Osborne say the third of your life and I sat there open mouthed. Then the phone rang. ... A colleague had seen it too. Looks like The NHS not politicians are to deliver on this promise. Nothing new there then. ..... |
|
08 Dec 13 - 05:07 AM (#3582519) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Acorn4 Most teachers in a modern classroom do not get to 60, let alone 70, the notable exception being heads! You lose the ability to multi-task essential in a modern classroom. We will end up with a multitude of people on long term sick leave. If you retire early you lose a huge slice of your pension, so it's just an idirect way of slashing pensions. On the other hand to be fair to the government, the pensions situation was being talked about well before the crash. |
|
08 Dec 13 - 06:47 AM (#3582538) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: akenaton In the building trade, you're lucky still to be working at sixty, its still hard dirty and COLD for the guys on the scaffold. I'm fortunate to still be working, but many of the guys who served their time with me are crippled or have no quality of life in retirement. Hard manual labour leaves little scope to develop other interests, and many turn to drink and smoking as a means of relaxation. In the world of bricks and mortar, or 60ft roofs, the idea of many working till they are 70 is ridiculous. There are two worlds, the world of white collars and water coolers, and the world of icy wet cloths, 40ft up on an exposed gable, looking forward to getting some feeling back into your hands over the old gas ring! |
|
08 Dec 13 - 07:14 AM (#3582547) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Anne Lister The retirement age has already moved so this is, essentially, non-news. I'm not quite sure what the "new news" is, as all of us under retirement age at the moment are facing longer in work before the payment of state pension benefits, and some for sure will have to work until they're 70. |
|
08 Dec 13 - 07:55 AM (#3582556) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Isn't it strange how humans have been so indoctrinated into thinking their lives upon this planet must, for the most part, be all about work, work, work.... Do the elephants think this? Do the tigers? The lions? The dogs? The ants? Their lives are about *survival*, but a natural survival, feeding themselves, shelters built where necessary... Of course, the Indigenous Peoples live their lives very differently, working for around 2 hours a day to ensure they have food provided, shelter all in working order.... The rest of their day is spent in socializing, teaching their children their survival skills... We have become slaves, working for a system that is anything but 'Civilized', filling our lives up with materialistic crap we have no need for, often so separated from each other,from our planet, from all other species... We are one WEIRD species, for sure... Imagine the Elephants, Tigers, Hippos, Zebras, living as we do.... What a Weird World.... :0) |
|
08 Dec 13 - 08:17 AM (#3582561) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: akenaton Capitalism. |
|
08 Dec 13 - 09:06 AM (#3582570) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Greg F. Interesting, Liz - except for the fact that animals and insects don't "think". |
|
08 Dec 13 - 09:26 AM (#3582576) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Will Fly Most teachers in a modern classroom do not get to 60, let alone 70, the notable exception being heads! Is this true as a general rule? I only ask because a good friend of mine was a deputy head for some years, and very happy on the whole. Loved being with the kids, ran all sorts of after-school activities. Then he thought that he'd go for a headship, and got it easily, being an experienced and committed chap. He hated it. After about a year in the job, he went into his office one morning, looked round and said to himself, "I can't take this any longer", cleared his desk and walked out to retirement of a sort. He's fine now - properly retired and enjoying life as a part-time musician. He commented to me that the Ofsted inspection days were absolute nightmares - drove everyone shitless. As others here have rightly commented - it's not just your age, it's what you do to earn a crust that has an impact on you. |
|
08 Dec 13 - 09:55 AM (#3582584) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Van Is it not a case of the people who have made the decision won't have to worry too much about a pension, let alone live on a state pension. "Put 'em in a harness and work 'em 'til they drop" |
|
08 Dec 13 - 10:56 AM (#3582596) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST Returning to the OP, when the 60/65 retirement age was set, people worked from 15 to 65, 45-50 years. Half the kids go on to higher education of some sort, so they don't start until 21 or 22, and so from a contribution basis alone they'll have to work those extra years. It used to be the deductions were roughly proportionate to a life expectancy of 70, 5 years after 50 at work, 10% deductions for pensions and more for health, but the NHS has pushed that to nearer 80, and so 15 years after 45 at work (this is Osborn's 1/3) means deductions should have shot up. They haven't and so it became unaffordable. Work longer and things come back closer into balance. |
|
08 Dec 13 - 02:36 PM (#3582660) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Penny S. What they expect to happen, though not to them, is that people are going to die before claiming their pension. Anyone in any job with any sort of stress, physical, mental or emotional, will not live long enough. |
|
08 Dec 13 - 05:08 PM (#3582692) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Greg F. Spot on, Penny. |
|
08 Dec 13 - 06:51 PM (#3582716) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Eric the Viking Live in certain areas of Glasgow and you won't see sixty. "They" expect us to die and for certain many of us will before we get to retirement and thereby will save a fortune that can be mismanaged because that is where the real problem lies. Mismanagement and corruption from central and local, government. It is impossible to imagine someone in the construction industry working on site at 70 or a fireman rushing in to a burning building at 60. OK so some company and public pension schemes are reasonably well funded but early retirement as a teacher for instance costs a huge amount of the final pension entitlement. I loved teaching special needs more than anything else I have ever done but I took early retirement so Mrs Viking and I could spend good years together. There are so many jobs that can be carried on until a great age without the need to retire if wanted but so many people would find it impossible to carry on working due to physical limitations, then what will they do? |
|
08 Dec 13 - 09:47 PM (#3582748) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Richard Bridge Hmm, I am sure I posted here. Was I modded off? |
|
09 Dec 13 - 01:25 AM (#3582770) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Sandra in Sydney the same talk is happening here - & we get similar replies. So far no-one has mentioned the major objection here - old people can't get jobs! Young people won't employ them (broad but often true generalisation) Who are the long term unemployed? (Aust. Bureau of Statistics report) age discrimination in the workforce see the comments on this article for personal & prejudicial observations 10 years ago a 48 year old friend was trying to get back into his field. He was a respected professional, one of the experts the media contacted when they wanted info on his field who had left it for a few years & couldn't get back in. He spoke of his experiences looking for work - of one interviewer staring at the (distinguished) grey hair in his temples & saying he was too old, while saying his application was so good that he (the interviewer) would copy it! Another had worked for him in the past & kept saying that my friend would want to be boss, even tho my friend just wanted a job in his field. Eventually he went back into academia where he could work in his field & pass on his knowledge. In the past 10 years I've heard may similar stories: some folks are told to their faces they are too old, even tho Age Discrimination in illegal, others "just" apply for zillions of jobs & never even get interviews. Long term unemployment is demoralising. I'm lucky - I spent my working life (36 years) in the Public (Civil) Service & acquired a good Public Service pension as unlike most of my contemporaries I didn't leave to have children. Most of my women friends raised children & only resumed paid work after their children had grown so rely on the smaller government pension. sandra (retired almost 7 years) |
|
09 Dec 13 - 05:22 AM (#3582805) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Richard Bridge Penny makes a good point - one doubly important in the UK with its present unemployment. People over 60 are simply ignored when they apply for jobs (unless of course the right school and handshake get them in). And since it is an established fact that the poor die (on average) younger than the rich, this is yet another policy from this loathsome government that bites hard on the poor - but not the rich. |
|
09 Dec 13 - 02:51 PM (#3582987) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Dave the Gnome I don't know what to think really. On the face of it, if people are living on average 10 years longer then an extra 5 years working may not be too bad. But that is a big if! Anyone have the facts of the situation? I don't think the answer is for everyone to go back to being hunter gatherers though. Does anyone have the facts on how long primitive tribesmen live, how long they really work, infant mortality rates and so on? Cheers DtG |
|
09 Dec 13 - 03:11 PM (#3582991) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Eric the Viking I'm not so sure about the blanket old people don't get jobs. If you look around supermarkets, DIY shops etc there are plenty of much older staff working for a pittance (in some cases) on zero hours or part time. I remember when you would not see an older person working in a supermarket etc. I think B&Q actively take on older staff who have experience of the work place because many have the right work ethic and the language and numeracy skills from previous employment. |
|
09 Dec 13 - 03:44 PM (#3583003) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: gnu "... so it's just an idirect way of slashing pensions." Yup. |
|
09 Dec 13 - 04:55 PM (#3583021) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Richard Bridge "working for a pittance (in some cases) on zero hours or part time" Your think that that is OK? WHERE ARE THE PROPER JOBS? RESERVED FOR THE POSH AND RICH. |
|
09 Dec 13 - 05:20 PM (#3583026) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Eric the Viking Actually before you jump on your high horse....I don't think it is OK. I actually think it is demeaning that someone of senior years with a level of skill much above a school leaver (I know for definite in at least two cases, highly qualified having had senior management positions in the past) is working pushing a supermarket trolly about. It was a statement of fact. Mrs Viking has a zero hours contract. And as you would know, being in the high echelons of the legal profession, with a high income, proper jobs are generally reserved for the posh and rich.(At least they think they are). By the way I think the minimum wage is a disgrace and if so many hadn't been so greedy in the past and present then we might have all shared a decent wage across the country. |
|
10 Dec 13 - 05:11 PM (#3583083) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Kampervan It's also to do with the quality of life which you can enjoy as a retired person. The older you are when you retire the less likely you are to be able to have an active, enjoyable retirement. |
|
10 Dec 13 - 05:54 PM (#3583090) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: ripov Richard... just scrolling through quickly, I misread you as saying you thought you had nodded off. I thought, if that happens often, best consider retirement now, before it gets worse. Then I reread it and realised you simply thought you'd posted something completely out of keeping with your equable personality, and it had been removed tout de suite. Seriously, though, a skilled tradesman imparting his knowledge to punters at B&Q, and earning a pittance, is probably better off than, and gets as much job satisfaction as, say, a retired person trying to make a few coppers as a musician. But either way the few coppers go a lot further once the mortgage is paid off. Not that I would want to justify the low wages "enjoyed" in either situation. But for those of us with only a state pension, a part-time job not only helps financially, but provides a social life and helps to keep us fit, so there are non monetary gains as well; so it actually enhances the quality of (semi-) retirement tremendously. Although the thought of disappearing into the sunset with the fiddle and the kids inheritance is very tempting! |
|
10 Dec 13 - 10:19 PM (#3583149) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,Iain I am sure that tables of life exspectancy exist for all occupations. As already stated, life labouring on a building site in your 60's is hard, as no doubt are many other physical jobs. We do not expect to see old firemen, policemen, or soldiers. This expectation should become a reality for all hard physical trades. For white collar workers, stressful jobs should likewise qualify for early retirement. For the rest it is entirely reasonable to work for longer as a result of increasing life exspectancy. However this idealistic approach is totally invalidated by the extremely high levels of unemployment amongst young people. There is a strong argument that workers in the twilight years of their employment should make way to give younger people a chance. To put my arguments in perspective I would add that I am still working past retirement age, but am in a field where much of my time is spent mentoring young graduates. |
|
10 Dec 13 - 11:43 PM (#3583160) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,.gargoyle Retirement in the USA has a "sweet zone" of age 55 to 60. It warms the cockles of my heart to see the serfs of socialism hunkering down in their harness........to support the plight of the recently arrived immigrant. Sincerely, Gargoyle you are such giving people. |
|
11 Dec 13 - 05:53 AM (#3583228) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: banjoman As someone who reaches 70 in 2 days time, I can only say that I am glad that I am well out of the rat race of unemployment and job seeking. If this latest move was a real consideration of peoples ability to be healthier and work longer, I would broadly welcome it. However, its just another ploy by this despicable lot in power to demonize any one who claims money from the "Taxpayer" of which I was one for over 50 years and earned my state pension. They are now turning their attention on the elderly and disabled, having done as much as they can for the moment to the young and unemployed. Roll on the revolution. |
|
11 Dec 13 - 06:22 AM (#3583234) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,Musket Raising the pension age is all about the pensions we can afford to give out. Osborne was waffling on about more people in work etc etc, but that includes part time non pensionable, or a pittance paid for a pittance back. In the meantime, the pension pots are emptying. The NHS pension pot doesn't actually exist, as it is no more than a promise between the workers and government that you give the money to the government and they will pay you a pension based on the figures. If it were funded, it would look more healthy than the chiselling away at it the government seems to be doing. I spent a day as a healthcare assistant on a ward recently in order to understand how a ward works better. I certainly wouldn't wish to be doing that work when I was seventy, and grateful I don't do it now. Conversely, Mrs Musket is a consultant surgeon. Would you want a 70 year old surgeon taking responsibility? She comes home knackered after a theatre list as it is, and she is only just turned 40! I sail desks and meetings for a living, spouting my big mouth off, and whilst much older than my responsible adult, I reckon I could still be doing this when I am 90. But who would wish to listen to me? About as many as do now, before Bridge gets it in. |
|
11 Dec 13 - 08:14 AM (#3583270) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Kampervan So, basically they're not particularly bothered whether you work to 70 or not, they just don't want to start paying your pension until you get to that age. They're hoping that you'll get your own pension sorted out and finish work before, for example, 69 year old brain surgeons with shaky hands start making mistakes! Which is fine if you're in the sort of job that pays enough to let you do that, but most people aren't. |
|
11 Dec 13 - 11:38 AM (#3583318) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,Musket True. But hitherto, the NHS pension scheme was good and doctors tended to not have a private scheme alongside it. Hence, you can't retire till you can draw, regardless of your income. Nobody is asking people to feel sorry for those who won't exactly starve in old age, but whoever you are, you pay in against a promise and when the goalposts move, it ain't nice. Who wants to still be doing heavy manual work at 70? High pressure management? Surgery? In fact any role? Don't we have a huge number of young people who cannot get opportunity? A bit of a bugger that we can invent iPads but can't look after our older people. |
|
11 Dec 13 - 01:25 PM (#3583335) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,Don Wise We shouldn't forget that Thatcher, in her privatisation mania, allowed the shameless plundering of public sector pension schemes by the new owners. I'll hit 65 next year and I am going to claim that little bit of pension due to me from the UK. It may not be much but every little bit helps! |
|
12 Dec 13 - 04:37 AM (#3583481) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: SPB-Cooperator it all comes across to me as an exercise in eugenics. |
|
12 Dec 13 - 08:35 AM (#3583533) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST "We shouldn't forget that Thatcher, in her privatisation mania, allowed the shameless plundering of public sector pension schemes by the new owners." Don't forget the five billion pound robbery from pensions by prudent Gordon. I don't think he has much to worry about in retirement but we, his victims, do! Partisan response, from whichever side, lets half the criminals go free! |
|
12 Dec 13 - 09:32 AM (#3583546) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Nigel Parsons Of course, todays news that Life expectancy for two thirds of newborns (UK) is now 100 should 'inform the debate'. Child/sccolar to approx age 20 leave 80 years at working age. One third of that = 27 retirenemt = 100-27 = 73 years |
|
12 Dec 13 - 09:43 AM (#3583549) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Nigel Parsons Sorry for the poor typing! |
|
13 Dec 13 - 05:55 AM (#3583789) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,the troll formally known as concerened What a load of smug crap!!! we all know what is the cause CAPITALISM!!!!!!!! don't any of you get it? Big question is: What are you/we all gonna do about it? You see it is so easy to sit on your fat arses at the computer/iPhone/tablet, in your nice warm houses moaning and groaning about your lot/s. many of you with gold plated pensions... But ask you to demonstrate or take any collective action and it is always someone else s job. So come on!!!!! let us get on the big game revolution and go forward together... |
|
13 Dec 13 - 11:14 AM (#3583823) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Richard Bridge Nice to see some revolutionary shit going down here. Maybe I'll re-read my IWW constitution rather than go out to play music tonight. I'm lucky still to be working a bit after the official retirement age, but I do find the stress from other lawyers actively trying to sabotage me, and the staring at computer screens harder than I used to, and as for those all-night completion meetings, forget it. Those who cannot get jobs because they are "too old" - and in the private sector that starts in professional jobs at about 50 - face a very bleak outlook. Many in the age-range 65-70 will have neither job nor pension. |
|
14 Dec 13 - 03:00 AM (#3583969) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST Animals do think Greg. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/dec/18/hunting.animalwelfare |
|
14 Dec 13 - 01:27 PM (#3584104) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,LynnH How long until workhouses are reintroduced? |
|
14 Dec 13 - 02:22 PM (#3584114) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Leadfingers My 'work load' rocketed , the pressure rocketed and my pay stagnated , and my manager was a prat ! I enquired about early retirement , and worked out that the pension would just cover my basics . As I was getting a LOT of well paid music work (WHEN the boss let me take holiday if travelling was involved) I took a chance and left . By the time the recession virtually wiped out all our Corporate work I was getting the full state pension as well , so was still able to maintain a decent standard of living . I DO feel sorry for the poor sods who have had their Company Pension screwed , and have to carry on living on the pittance from the state . As for continuing in 'paid toil' till over seventy , Thank God I missed that one . |
|
14 Dec 13 - 03:07 PM (#3584122) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,the troll formally known as concerened So in a nutshell leadfingers its.." feck you Jack I'm inboard"?Very comradely I don't think |
|
14 Dec 13 - 04:15 PM (#3584140) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: SPB-Cooperator We wouldn't get enough universal credit to vbe able t afford workhouse rent |
|
14 Dec 13 - 06:48 PM (#3584168) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Richard Bridge So, Terry, you are still in paid music work. One of the lucky ones. Most people over 60 cannot get a job. |
|
15 Dec 13 - 03:57 AM (#3584230) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Thompson a) What age do British politicians retire at? b) The raising of the pension age means that the social insurance you've paid, which was intended to fund a pension from age 60 or 65 (whichever it was in Britain until this decision), will no longer do so; you're having five… ten… years of pension, at £??,000 per year taken from you. |
|
15 Dec 13 - 05:07 AM (#3584241) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Kampervan Ahh, there's the rub. Our national insurance (pension) contributions don't get put away to pay for OUR pension, they get used to pay the pensions of those who have already retired. Our pensions will have to be paid for using the payments from the (shrinking) number of people who are working and paying when we are retired. Which is why the government want us all to provide our own pensions, (except that every now and then they decide that we've saved up too much money and they raid the pension funds!!!) |
|
15 Dec 13 - 06:32 AM (#3584248) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,the troll formally known as concerened Yes, but yes, but no, the question still is: what are we all gonna do about it? |
|
15 Dec 13 - 11:57 AM (#3584300) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Eric the Viking March on parliament. Burn the bastards, hang em from trees. Steal their wives and shag their sheep !!! |
|
15 Dec 13 - 12:02 PM (#3584303) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Richard Bridge Or vice versa. |
|
15 Dec 13 - 12:37 PM (#3584320) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: akenaton What do you think we're going to do GTFKC....we're going to kick up a helluva noise about inequality, in reference to the lack of marriage rights for homosexuals! That'll fix the bastards good!! :0) |
|
16 Dec 13 - 08:00 AM (#3584518) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Mr Red NI contributions have never paid for YOUR pension. The money collected as part of NI/Tax is paid to "pensioners now" and there is no pension pot, communal or personal. In effect government(s) is mortgaging the future. Thus there is a misconception in the public's mind and governments of all times and hue are careful not to mention this even obliquely. NI paid is morally yours, but ........... ever thought why it is called insurance? Personal pension plans are "investment" and you own them while you are alive. Various UK governments have tried to convince people to take out personal pensions in the hope that they can reduce the government stake in collecting and handling it all and make wages look better. Smoke and mirrors applies. |
|
16 Dec 13 - 09:21 AM (#3584546) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: GUEST,Musket I'd be happier to hear of government plans to get younger people into work rather than block up the system with people who need ironing. The projected life expectancy is either increasing or decreasing depending on which official statistics you look at. The regional variations are also rather marked. The chancellor said in his Autumn statement that there are more people in work than just before the election. What he failed to say was that despite that, the national insurance take has dropped. Mainly due to lower pay jobs and zero hour contracts. They are right in asking where the money is coming from to look after the old in years to come, but wrong in proposing the answer. A healthy economy with well paid jobs, a swing in the manufacturing to service ratio towards the former and an emphasis on getting younger people into work. For me, one of the saddest acronyms going is NEET. The number of young people not in employment, education or training is shocking. Get more people feeding national insurance now and you have less to worry about later. Basics such as this should be above partisan debate. It is a key tenet of any party who wishes to form a UK government, or should be..... Still, nice to see Bridge feeling down the side of his armchair for his copy of Das Capital.... |
|
16 Dec 13 - 05:12 PM (#3584723) Subject: RE: BS: Retirement age to move to 70 in the UK From: Richard Bridge Spell it right, Mither. |