C
Should pensioners have to work for their pension?
- Thread starter mark vincent
- Start date
Sponsored Links
D
Deleted member 174758
Errr, no. I wrote Herr.......Alois?
C
calorific
My German may be incorrect - isn;t "Herr" the equivalent to "Mr"?. If so, then since Alois was Adolf's father, then would he not be called Herr alsoErrr, no. I wrote Herr.......Alois?
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,282
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
Nothing. Bury the loser in a pauper's grave.
Sponsored Links
And therein lies the problem.
You don't care if people take out more than they put in.
So who the f*** is supposed to make up the difference?
The only answer is the young who are just starting out and who will be saddled with the debt of the older generation. The young will have nowhere near the same standard of living that we do, they will essentially be paying off our debt, and that means they will have less to spend on themselves.
D
Deleted member 174758
But what you seem to be saying is that at this late stage when the **** has finally hit the fan that people like me in their late 50s, who've been told all their lives that they are contributing to the system and that the system will support them in their old age are wrong, now, after more than 40 years of work, to expect this? There needs to be some middle ground. My wife, who is a couple of years younger than me has seen her retirement age rise from 60 to 62 to 66 over recent years and I for one won't be able to afford to retire at 65 on a state pension unless I intend to freeze to death in the winter. I have enough of a social conscience that I don't want to saddle anyone with the debt of my retirement, but, if I'm still fit enough and well enough (and I still am) to continue to work until I'm 70 I'll get accused of holding onto a job that should go to someone who's younger. And it is often done with what can only be described as ageist rhetoric! So what would you have me, and others of my generation, do?
Well, if you are working in the private sector, save money like it's going out of fashion until you have enough to retire.
Public sector. Just continue as you are.
We are stuffed, there is no middle ground, all solutions are bad.
Public sector. Just continue as you are.
We are stuffed, there is no middle ground, all solutions are bad.
D
Deleted member 174758
Yes. I'm in the building trade - which the politicians and bankers have globally ****ed over. Just keeping my head above water at times is difficult enough. Trying to save a load of mioney now is impossible. In that respect I'm not alone
Were I in the public sector I'd not be saying this - I'd be retiring next year with a nice inflation-proof pension paid for by the dumb so and sos who are in the private sector!
You miss the point.
This generation is much richer than the last generation, and so on and so on.
With richness comes greater costs (wages for healthcare being huge, living costs go up, so does pensions).
For the vast majority they would not have been able to put in what they are now taking out, as we are all simply so much richer.
As long as they paid a similar % of their wage, then it is fair (which they mostly have, but the baby boomer did get a slightly better deal, but not massively).
What I really resent is the older generation living in nice big homes (where they rattle about because the kids have left home), refusing to have other houses built in the area, and often drawing a range of benefits.
I don't mind paying a good portion of my wages to support them.
I mind paying a good portion of my wages to keep them in a lifestyle I won't be able to afford because of them.
I would almost be tempted to make it so pensions are only for those with properties values less than the average, meaning if they want to stay in the old 2-4 bedroom family home, they can find the means to do so themselves.
But that would never happen
1. Not wanting young people to have a family home, YOU are the undesirable.
2. A meaningless opinion that can be used to oppose everything, including half or more of the houses in these places that didn't exist 50 years ago. A lot of the time the locals want to protect their lovely view of fields from their windows, ignoring that half the time their house once didn't exist and now blocks someone else's view.
3. "Having looked at all the information, they calculated that "6.8% of the UK's land area is now classified as urban" (a definition that includes rural development and roads, by the way). " http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096
4. Do. ****. Off
I hate number 4 especially, "to much traffic, schools will be crammed, blablabla. People pay council tax etc = more tax = more services. It's a ****** excuse nimbys always fall back onto, all it really comes down to is them not wanting things to change.
"We like things as they are thank you very much, those townies wanting houses can go **** themselves"
Now, saying all this, I would not like to see much more housing built, I like having a largely green country. But as long as the older generation want to hang onto the big houses when they become old n grey, it's either build more houses, or force more and more youngens into flats.
I've yet to hear 1 person who lives in a flat come out with any of norcons excuses to go against new builds.
J
joinerjohn
And,, What about all the money they've had over the years of their retirement? Is this just written off (like so many other debts) ?? If they don't have any estate to begin with, do you deny them a pension (and therefore life) when they reach retirement age ??
Sponsored Links
