Keir Starmer

[Vic]

I suppose it depends on how much more they have put in. The concept of paying and receiving the state pension is simple.
But again answer the question, do annuities get worked out on how rich someone is beyond the amount in their pension, yes or no? If you are unwilling to answer because you were wrong fine it just shows me you cant admit it. Just dont reply.
Your view is unworkable for so many reasons.

I don't understand. I never said it was based on someone's wealth but on how long they'd be likely to live because of their wealth, compared to someone with no wealth. Like annuities. A rich person with poor health might be entitled to more.

The difference is that the state pension isn't from a pot, it's from the current taxes of younger working people, most without a hope of the same level of retirement income.

I could ask why you have it in for the next generation of pensioners...

 

[We've got Guardiola]

People generally don't start off in the 'average' price house though. They start lower and build up....

Seriously, try a mortgage 15% and above for a few years when you have four children, and an average wage.

An average is an average and a rising tide raises all ships. Housing prices are rising faster than any measure of wage growth so it's just irrefutable that it is a problem.

The entire country aged 30 or below cannot all live in a £100k terrace in Burnley. If you live anywhere south of Birmingham then you can't buy a parking space or a shed for less than £200k but that's where most people live.

I don't think that it should be controversial or unreasonable for somebody on an average salary to live in an average priced house. Today that means somebody on £32k should be able to buy a £270k house.... Just looking at the difference in those figures and the ratio shows how wrong it is.

On your point of four children, I simply wouldn't be able to work or afford anything at all because the childcare alone would cost me about £2-3k per month. That's before I think about paying for a mortgage or anything else. I hope you can see the point there, was it difficult in the 80's yes but today your case is impossible, full stop.

 

[MouldensChippy]

An average is an average and a rising tide raises all ships. Housing is rising faster than any measure of wage growth so it's just irrefutable that it is a problem.

The entire country aged 30 or below cannot all live in a £100k terrace in Burnley. If you live anywhere south of Birmingham then you can't buy a parking space or a shed for less than £200k but that's where most people live.

I'm just wondering how that is so different to how it used to be, there was, and will always be the differentials, and not just between North and South.

 

[Vic]

Did people stop affording houses in 1980's? No, they still afforded houses because housing costs were on a level that was sustainable against their salaries.

Interest rates are less relevant when the amount of borrowing versus your salary is less so it doesn't matter if interest rates change because it's affordable. The average house price then was £21k but the average salary was £7,000 so around 2-3x income. Would people in the 80's have felt a 0.5% rise? Of course not, it would barely register.

Contrast this to today, if interest rates rise by even 1% then the entire country will collapse because nobody would be able to afford their mortgage. My mortgage went from £850pm to £1100pm last year just on the basis of a 0.5% rise in interest rates. If I didn't remortgage or if interest rates go up more then that's me living on the street.

The simple fact is that 1% of a £21k average house is FAR less than 1% of a £250k average house and this what people don't understand when they make these arguments. You need to understand that if salaries had kept pace with housing then by the same logic the average salary should be around £80k but guess what it's not even half that.

Some people really don't get the maths

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Getting back on topic, must feel odd for him at the moment. Running the country but waiting for the King of the North to bump him off.

 

[MouldensChippy]

Some people really don't get the maths

Is that the math of calling a loss to the taxpayer of 20 million pounds, a 20 million pounds profit then ?

But only if it's a red rosette council... Oh you and your magic maths, you'd be a business genius... ;-)

 

[We've got Guardiola]

I'm just wondering how that is so different to how it used to be, there was, and will always be the differentials, and not just between North and South.

It only takes a quick google search to prove how salary vs housing costs has really broken the economics of working, not just for young people either. It basically negatively impacts anybody who is on the wrong side of the fence of the property ladder, ie they didn't buy and now can't.

It's also the dominant reason why people aren't having kids anymore. They're taking the older generations advice and simply not having kids because they can't afford them. The long term problem is that in 20 years time there won't be any young people anymore.

Anyway sorry to hijack this thread but it's a frustration. This should be classic Labour territory and well they've just done very little and there's now nothing to do except wait for the inevitable property crash.

 

[BlueRockape]

Yes but 1 pensioners are living longer than previous generation and costing more. My generation is now probably split into a group of people with mental and physical health issues obesity who won’t live long and a group who are probably wealthy who will live even longer than ever wellbeing is in vogue going to the gym is a hobbie. Is it fair for the first group to pay for pensioners when they might not see pension age ?

And all those in this current generation are suffering more than previous generations with cost of living etc

Sorry I am living so long I will try and kick the bucket as soon as possible hope that will help

 

[hilts]

And that's democracy but blimey it's not like I'm calling for us to execute pensioners. It'd just be nice if they thought of somebody else for a change, like maybe what benefits their own children?

They say that people turn more and more conservative as they get older because they want to protect what they have and that's true. This is happening less and less for young people because they haven't got anything to protect.

You have to wonder how on earth are the bloody Greens polling so highly? Desperation is the answer.

Yeah give it up ive heard the lot now

Pensioners dont care about anyone else in the ballot box, yeah no one else votes out of self interest.
Take money off pensioners because they have a Cheshire postcode and or had a works pension.
The best though, which is an absolute classic, some of the young are fat fuckers so they will die young.

I say Chancellor, Chancellor what gives? Where's me state pension? paid my NI and tax, quite a lot of both, pay tax now on my pension.

You're wealthy you may live a long time.

Err quite a few dont though.You taking money off me on the basis of chance?

Tough shit look at the guy over there eating a kebab with a Clayton accent. Takeouts aren't cheap anymore, whose gonna pay for his chippy tea when he's older

Top stuff.

 

[hilts]

I don't understand. I never said it was based on someone's wealth but on how long they'd be likely to live because of their wealth, compared to someone with no wealth. Like annuities. A rich person with poor health might be entitled to more.

The difference is that the state pension isn't from a pot, it's from the current taxes of younger working people, most without a hope of the same level of retirement income.

I could ask why you have it in for the next generation of pensioners...

Another sane post, I never said it was based on wealth but how long they are likely to live because of their....... wait for it ......... wait...... because of their wealth.

Keep off the drugs kids.

 

[hilts]

Sorry I am living so long I will try and kick the bucket as soon as possible hope that will help

Fat 30 year olds everywhere appreciate your sacrifice.

 

[Vic]

Yeah give it up ive heard the lot now

Pensioners dont care about anyone else in the ballot box, yeah no one else votes out of self interest.
Take money off pensioners because they have a Cheshire postcode and or had a works pension.
The best though, which is an absolute classic, some of the young are fat fuckers so they will die young.

I say Chancellor, Chancellor what gives? Where's me state pension? paid my NI and tax, quite a lot of both, pay tax now on my pension.

You're wealthy you may live a long time.

Err quite a few dont though.You taking money off me on the basis of chance?

Tough shit look at the guy over there eating a kebab with a Clayton accent. Takeouts aren't cheap anymore, whose gonna pay for his chippy tea when he's older

Top stuff.

Whether it's to me or someone else, just repeating this stuff doesn't actually solve the demographic problem, does it?

 

[hilts]

Whether it's to me or someone else, just repeating this stuff doesn't actually solve the demographic problem, does it?

Neither does ignoring it, yet to hear anything beyond getting thru the immediate future.

None of this explains why you wont answer a direct question. Its not my fault you randomly blurted out a utterly nonsensical idea that falls apart with absolutely no effort whatsoever. Have a break from pensioner bashing, it's affecting your reasoning.

We can move on.

 

[Kompany Car]

I honestly don’t know, but my post was more aimed at the capital assets that many elderly people hold, principally in their property. To find a workable and humane solution to this will not be easy but the reality is that the present grotesque imbalance in asset ownership between the generations will require radical and uncomfortable thinking if we are going to find a solution to this chasm, which will inevitably be incredibly controversial.

There is a fundamental truth at the heart of this. The prodigious growth in residential housing prices has benefitted one generation at the expense of those who followed it. They like to take personal credit for this capital appreciation (I know my dad does, for example) but the reality is that it was something over which they had no real influence or control, and even if they had I don’t think my view would be materially different. This is because whatever the cause, the effect is devastating upon under 35s, to the extent that it is unquestionably making our society materially worse in a number of ways.

So something radical needs to happen, and whilst I don’t have the time, resources or wherewithal to devise a particular scheme, at its heart it will mean the seizing of capital assets from elderly people while they are alive in some form or other (as much as taxing people is a form of seizing money) in order to distribute that capital to younger generations.

Obviously this would not apply to elderly people who have little or no capital assets and could, in fact, theoretically fund a higher state pension. People should be able to live in dignity and comfort in their twilight years, however the right to those things is not necessarily in accordance with living in a million pound house.

I expect it is a view that will appal some, especially those who will be affected, but I don’t see any other workable solution to this huge national and generational issue.

The fundamental premise though is that the wealthy should pay more tax regardless of if thats assets in bricks and mortar or financial. So why not just address it as a taxation problem. A 30yr old who became a member of the ultra high net worth by being lucky trading crypto is just as much of an issue for inequality as the 75yr old who bought a house in London in the 80s and is now sitting in a £2m property.

Its overall wealth inequality that the problem.

As regards the state pension, trying to set a level of wealth which means you no longer qualify would be very difficult. Firstly its nigh on impossible to buy an annuity which would have the guarantees around inflation that the state pension gives you as they are capped. Secondly just to cover the state pension amount you would need around £300000 in a DC fund to buy an inflation protected pension of £12000 for life at the age of 67. This is before you start looking at the additional benefits that would be payable to someone who just has state pension.

You're never going to please everyone, but I've said it before and I'll say it again rolling NI and Income tax together would be a sensible move, making NI payable without the current exemption from state pension age. That way, those with more money effectively repay a percentage of their state pension making the system fairer to the current workers. Someone on 50k from a combination of state pension and pension income would pay back around £3k in NI which they currently don't.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Pensioners today certainly had to make choices in their younger days to get on in life, let’s not fall into the narrative that today’s pensioners had it easy.

Indeed. Much revisionism going on here. People seem to have forgotten about when couples had to live in their parents' spare room for years whilst they patiently saved to get enough together for a deposit on their first home, and every year the building society manager would say, "come back next year". They didn't have 65" TVs, not iPhones, nor evening most cases, a car.

When I got my first home - the tiniest of 2 bed semis - we could not afford to carpet it. In the lounge we had 1 old padded chair and a sun lounger. No dining table or chairs. We ate our dinner off a coffee table in front of the 20" portable TV - our only TV. Had Christmas dinner same. It was years before we managed to afford carpet and a shite awful sofa from MFI. And we had to endure our mortgage rate briefly peaking at 15%, with us very nearly losing our home. Rates of 8%, 9% were commonplace. And when we sold the house 8 years later, we sold it for £8k less than we had bought it for.

So not exactly "the gravy train".

 

[Chippy_boy]

I don't understand. I never said it was based on someone's wealth but on how long they'd be likely to live because of their wealth, compared to someone with no wealth. Like annuities. A rich person with poor health might be entitled to more.

The difference is that the state pension isn't from a pot, it's from the current taxes of younger working people, most without a hope of the same level of retirement income.

I could ask why you have it in for the next generation of pensioners...

You seem to neglect that current pensioners spent their whole working lives paying for other people's pensions as well. Is it fair that they should now get less, having done that for 40-odd years?

 

[Vic]

You seem to neglect that current pensioners spent their whole working lives paying for other people's pensions as well. Is it fair that they should now get less, having done that for 40-odd years?

Current pensioners (when working) weren't paying for as many pensioners as working people are now.

It's the maths again.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Current pensioners (when working) weren't paying for as many pensioners as working people are now.

Oh that's ok then????? Penalise current pensioners because there were not so many old people for them to have funded during their lifetimes?

Fact is pensions need reforming not tweaking. Government needs a 30/40/50 year plan to do so. You cannot change the rules on a demographic with zero capacity (since they have retired, or are imminently retiring) to do anything about it.

 

[SilverFox2]

Sorry I am living so long I will try and kick the bucket as soon as possible hope that will help

Once a pensioner dies their contribution to income tax ends like any worker.

 

[Vic]

Oh that's ok then????? Penalise current pensioners because there were not so many old people for them to have funded during their lifetimes?

Fact is pensions need reforming not tweaking. Government needs a 30/40/50 year plan to do so. You cannot change the rules on a demographic with zero capacity (since they have retired, or are imminently retiring) to do anything about it.

And your reform would not penalise current working people, or those about to join the workforce?