It's time for 'reformUK' to tell the truth...

You get NI credits for being on jobseekers allowance.

People can, and do, never work a day in their life and receive a pension at the end of it.
So only people earning over a certain amount are obligated to pay NI, correct?
 
Last edited:
The state pension was originally designed to be something you earned over a working lifetime of NI payments, but now it is being given away to huge numbers of people who have paid nothing. The rot started with NI credits, which came in with the introduction of JSA in 1996 under that evil tory John Major! These credits give the same entitlement to the state pension to a scrounger as to someone who has worked.

The next dilution of the state pension was the introduction, in 2001, of the 0% NI band, by which people earning less than X amount pay no NI - but are deemed to have paid it. This is especially pernicious, because unscrupulous workers and their employers can conspire to keep a wage low.

By far the worst degradation of the scheme was the introduction, in 2003, of pension credit, which does not apply to those who have worked for their pension, but entitles those who haven't to a sum equal to it, and qualifies them for housing and council tax benefit, free TV licence, travel costs for hospital appointments, cold weather payments, help with sight and dental treatment, help with heating bills and much more. All for doing f**k all.
Furthermore, any 'UK Resident' can get pension credit - yes, this includes foreigners who have only recently arrived.

When politicians complain of the unsustainability of the pension, they are talking, not about the original state pension, but about the communist free-money-for-all-the-world scheme. There is no need for workers to carry on to 68 or whatever. We have been conned for 30 years.
 
Last edited:
It seem totally nuts, that we have a system where you are deemed to have paid in, without having paid in.
 
It seem totally nuts, that we have a system where you are deemed to have paid in, without having paid in.

However, a new Fabian Society and Survation survey finds that 55% would support replacing the triple lock with a different mechanism, almost 65% support some restriction on pension freedoms, and 72% think higher earners should pay more tax on their pension savings. By a majority of two to one, Gen Z and millennials want to replace the triple lock, while baby boomers and the silent generation back keeping it by two to one. But a closer look reveals a more complicated picture...

A proposal to overhaul the care system on a national basis by Labour looks to offset this large gap between the generations, especially for people born after 1980 who will end up mortgaging their lives in case they need regular care in future. The situation is even worse for anyone born after 2000. They should've started saving when they started school. At this rate, under the current system, they'd have to sell everything just to buy daycare.

F.boy is correct to point out that the UK’s tax treatment of pensions is also very favourable by international standards. It is one of only a handful of OECD countries where someone with a pension pot of up to £1.07m may never pay tax on a quarter of their final pension – at contribution, accrual or withdrawal stage. But the growing wealth gap means social care in future will have to be state sponsored for those who cannot afford to go private.
 
Meanwhile, a closer look at the CFABB reveals it's a right-wing British political think tank founded last year as Resolute 1850, working out of the same building as 'reform UK'. The Financial Times and The Times have described the group's agenda as a "MAGA-style" initiative for the UK, drawing operational and structural comparisons to the US conservative blueprint Project 2025.

That's right: Project 2025. It's all there, hidden in plain sight. The Resolute 1850, referred to a British ship that searched for the lost Franklin Expedition, became trapped in the ice herself and was eventually broken up. Timber from her hulk was used to make the desk that now sits in the White House.

While y'all look at breaking away from Europe it appears the 'reformers' want to become nothing more than a subsidiary company of the United States: the 51st State, in fact.
 
Fabian Society support replacing the triple lock anism, almost 65% support some restriction on pension freedohigher earners ore.

VOTE. tax tax tax on their pension savings. By a majority of two to one, Gen Z and millennials want to replace the especially for people born after 198Lns. 0 who will end up mortgaging their lives in case they need.

LABOUR. regular care in future. The situation is fter 2000. tax tax tax when they r the current system, ything just nt out that rable

FOREVER
is one of only a s with a pension pot of up y tax er on, accrual tax tax tax thdrawal stage. But d to go private.
 
However, a new Fabian Society and Survation survey finds that 55% would support replacing the triple lock with a different mechanism, almost 65% support some restriction on pension freedoms, and 72% think higher earners should pay more tax on their pension savings. By a majority of two to one, Gen Z and millennials want to replace the triple lock, while baby boomers and the silent generation back keeping it by two to one. But a closer look reveals a more complicated picture...

A proposal to overhaul the care system on a national basis by Labour looks to offset this large gap between the generations, especially for people born after 1980 who will end up mortgaging their lives in case they need regular care in future. The situation is even worse for anyone born after 2000. They should've started saving when they started school. At this rate, under the current system, they'd have to sell everything just to buy daycare.
some people want others to pay more, for the things they want but don't want to pay for.
F.boy is correct to point out that the UK’s tax treatment of pensions is also very favourable by international standards. It is one of only a handful of OECD countries where someone with a pension pot of up to £1.07m may never pay tax on a quarter of their final pension – at contribution, accrual or withdrawal stage. But the growing wealth gap means social care in future will have to be state sponsored for those who cannot afford to go private.
An option available for everyone. The person with his or her £1M pot would have paid more than double the income tax that the next person, unless it was won as the proceeds of divorce.
 
Back
Top