The Bull  permalink

New pension system

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 50
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    The govt has decided everyone needs to pay into a pension, but what about all those pensions that people have been paying into through their national insurence.

    We in the UK already pay for a pension a basic state pension so why do we now need to pay for another pension forced onto us by the govt with a private company.

    And what safety systems have been put into place to protect the money we will be forced to pay even if we don't want it.

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    a) If you can live on the State Pension, good luck to you.

    b) No-one is being forced to take up the new pension, though they would be extremely stupid if they didn't.

    c) If you want a good pension without having to contribute much towards it
    and having it heavily subsidised by other people....get a job in the "public service". teaching is the best bet as you'll never get sacked however incompetent you are and you get 14 weeks holiday a year.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Vicky S (U2258400) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    14 weeks holiday a year. 

    13. And unpaid actually. Did you realise that? Teachers are technically paid for each teaching day, not holidays. Salary is divided up into 12 for administrative convenience.

    If you want a really good pension try being an MP, you don't have to work for 40 years either.

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    14 weeks holiday a year. 

    13. And unpaid actually. Did you realise that? Teachers are technically paid for each teaching day, not holidays. Salary is divided up into 12 for administrative convenience.

    If you want a really good pension try being an MP, you don't have to work for 40 years either. 
    So teachers actually get paid far more than we all think?

    It's just a technicality isn't it. They get an annual salary...and an awful lot of holidays.
    Wouldn't mind if they produced school leavers who could string two sentences together and could read and write and add up reasonably well.

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by starlilolill (U11601004) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    14 weeks holiday a year. 

    13. And unpaid actually. Did you realise that? Teachers are technically paid for each teaching day, not holidays. Salary is divided up into 12 for administrative convenience.

    If you want a really good pension try being an MP, you don't have to work for 40 years either. 
    So teachers actually get paid far more than we all think?

    It's just a technicality isn't it. They get an annual salary...and an awful lot of holidays.
    Wouldn't mind if they produced school leavers who could string two sentences together and could read and write and add up reasonably well. 
    The pension isn't bad either!

    Now, if you feel so strongly about the great life teachers have why don't you try it?

    wiseraphael, let us know how you get on please.


    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Constance (U14594138) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    The state pension is paid by those earning to those who have retired. It isn't a personal pot. So when you retire and get your state pension it isn't the money you've been paying all along as that has paid for the pensioners then. Your state pension will be paid by those working.

    But I see no reason why there couldn't be a government run personal pension plan where you pay in and draw it out when retired.

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Vicky S (U2258400) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    an awful lot of holidays. 

    Well if you are prepared to pay additional taxes to cover the extra salary for teaching and support staff, not to mention admin staff, catering staff, caretaking staff, cleaning staff, plus additional costs for heating, lighting, additional wear and tear on buildings and furniture, extra resources etc etc then say the word, I'm sure shorter holidays could be arranged.

    Wouldn't mind if they produced school leavers who could string two sentences together and could read and write and add up reasonably well. 

    Do you have a sticker on your screen that says "My Other Messageboard is the Daily Mail"?

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    "Do you have a sticker on your screen that says "My Other Messageboard is the Daily Mail"?"

    Actually I don't think I've ever read the DM in my life....it's just the experience I had in business that prompted me to make those comments.

    I'll go into details if you like.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 4.

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Lynetta Pavlova (U14864661) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    Am I right in thinking that companies are obliged to contribute towards these pensions, though at present only large companies must do so? What happens if it's extended to smaller companies which can't afford it?

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    "Now, if you feel so strongly about the great life teachers have why don't you try it?"

    Nah...too easy!!

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 7.

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by starlilolill (U11601004) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    I'm not a teacher so I've no axe to grind but I think your blistering attack on people in this stressful profession is unwarranted. Their pay is at best reasonable, perhaps about as much as we can afford? I do think their pension is reasonable and merited, and possibly with recent government initiatives stemming from the Hutton report into public pensions may be due for some diminshment in real terms, despite the terms teachers signed up to.

    The cuts are real in their effects on many even if you don't feel them personally o wise one. So don't then turn round and highlight teachers as being somehow exceptional and having in an easy time of it.
     
    Well said!
    I am a retired headteacher so have an axe to grind.

    There are certain posters who turn on the teaching profession on a regular basis. I wish they would give it a go themselves!

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    I'm not a teacher so I've no axe to grind but I think your blistering attack on people in this stressful profession is unwarranted. Their pay is at best reasonable, perhaps about as much as we can afford? I do think their pension is reasonable and merited, and possibly with recent government initiatives stemming from the Hutton report into public pensions may be due for some diminshment in real terms, despite the terms teachers signed up to.

    The cuts are real in their effects on many even if you don't feel them personally o wise one. So don't then turn round and highlight teachers as being somehow exceptional and having in an easy time of it.
     
    I would agree with absolutely everything you say about the teaching profession......except they are not producing the results.

    In any other walk of life if you draw a salary and have a reasonably good pension to look forward to.....but don't produce the results expected....well, you know what happens.

    I've been told (please check, I hope it's not true) that only a handful of teachers have been sacked on the grounds of incompetence in the last twenty years. If it is true...that about sums up everything.

    Again, if you want me to go into details of my experience I'll do so.....but believe me I'm talking about long practical knowledge.

    As far as I'm concerned we can pay teachers far more, give them even better pensions and all the advantages any employee would want......as long as they give us the standard of education and knowledge in our youngsters that we need and the kids deserve.
    At the moment they do not.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 16.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    Fair enough...but I was replying to the original post and trying to point out that workers in the private sector usually only have their State pension and rarely have a private pension to supplement it.....and if they do it will be nothing like the pensions those in the public sector get, which includes teachers.
    Hence I believe that this scheme is a good idea, thus recommending that if the poster didn't want to join it and his/her state pension would be inadequate, to get a job in the public sector which has very generous pensions....largely paid for by people like him...who have no personal pensions at all!!

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Go away historians of the future (U1484964) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    From the new pensions to having a pop at teachers in one post?

    That's quite some going.

    Well done, you must be very pleased with yourself.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by Somali_Bus_Conductor (U14006101) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    I'd have thought that for the very best in pensions you're best advised to bring a major international bank to its knees.

    No question of being sacked without a pension there apparently!

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Norma (U2334558) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    www.youtube.com/watc...

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    From the new pensions to having a pop at teachers in one post?

    That's quite some going.

    Well done, you must be very pleased with yourself. 
    Please read #17.

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Ell Kaye (U2222944) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    We in the UK already pay for a pension a basic state pension so why do we now need to pay for another pension forced onto us by the govt with a private company. 

    Because you cannot live on a state pension.....>>The most you can currently get is £107.45 per week. <<

    The Living wage is around £7.45 per hour x 40 = £298.00.

    Work it out....

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 22.

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    We in the UK already pay for a pension a basic state pension so why do we now need to pay for another pension forced onto us by the govt with a private company. 

    Because you cannot live on a state pension.....>>The most you can currently get is £107.45 per week. <<

    The Living wage is around £7.45 per hour x 40 = £298.00.

    Work it out....  
    Actually not quite true....if you never opted out of Serps, or the equivalent over the years, the State pension can be over double that.

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by Ell Kaye (U2222944) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    I doubt that I would be expected to pay the rent on my home out of the £100+ a week. Housing benefit would kick in. Conceivably, one could be better off on a State pension than on a private pension. 


    I really do not think it will be that simple for those embarking on a working life now at say 21, & expected to save for the next 55+ years....

    The benefits 'culture' may be well & truly over by then, who knows ?

    I'd be 118 by then, & any way some may prefer to be self sufficient, stranger things have happened in a generation or two....

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 25.

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by Ell Kaye (U2222944) on Wednesday, 7th November 2012

    You may still be around to see those 21 year olds reach 55. Life expectancy is increasing every year. 


    I sincerely hope not...

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    Am I right in thinking that companies are obliged to contribute towards these pensions, though at present only large companies must do so? What happens if it's extended to smaller companies which can't afford it?

     
    Yes and I don't know, was hoping someone here would expand on this whole new concept of forcing people to hand over their hard earned cash to private companies whether they want to or not.

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    Anyway to come back to the subject (I think Ralph's comments on teachers were an irrelevant diversion) I would encourage all to get a pension under their belts. As has been stated, the State pension is not your personal pot it is funded by the taxpayer of the day. Who is to say the State pension will even be there in a few years' time?

    I retire in 7 years but my State pension isn't due until I am 67 about another seven years on top of that. My occupational pension will be at best adequate (£12,000 a year). How does one manage for 7 years on a thousand a month? If the State pension kicks in after that it should give me another £140 a week (I believe this is what the govt wants all to receive, whether they are married or not). We are talking today's prices. *

    And don't forget public pensions are now only increasing at the Consumer Price Index rate annually instead of the higher Retail Price Index rate they increased by until a couple of years ago. This is a further dent.

    Mind you it is more than public sector wages have gone up by in the last 2 years which is 0% and represents a real terms decrease.

    * I can't believe I will see a State pension in 14 yrs' time: I think a govt will come along and say "you've managed on £12,000" a year, why should the State give you £500+ extra a month now you're turning old." State provided pension is on its way out. 
    But using this argument you could say that about all pensions, they rely on the amount of money they generate throughout the existence of the pension scheme and you know what they say about schemes don't you, where there is a scheme there is a schemer.

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 29.

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 29.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    You see the thing is not everyone wants to trust pension plans, let's look at their track record.

    You put your money in and then the company goes bust, you lose your money.

    Or you put your money in then the govt changes the rules because they now have to pay out, so now you have to work an extra 5 years to get your money, and by then the banks have run off with your money via bankruptcy or some other get out of jail free card they play.

    Surely if they want people to support themselves into their old age first of all they should honour what people have been paying into all their working life, not out of choice I might add.

    Then they should give savers the same rights as those with pensions or atleast instead of refusing people who save the same rights as those whom have assets.

    For example; say you have a bundle of dosh under the carpet, if the govt find out you get nothing at all no help with anything, however if you own a house but have a small stash they bend over backwards to help you fund your status quo.

    I have heard of people that have saved all their life for their retirement, but have no pensions or assets, they get screwed, on the other hand people with pensions and assets get all the assistence tax breaks and so on to give their money away to private company which may never pay out.

    Surely people who save should be afforded the same as those that don't but put their money into other things.

    Anyone that manages to make money out of saving now should be given tax relief the same as a house owner, or a pension plan, that way everyone wins.

    Also banks that go bust anyone owing a mortgage to that bank should only have to pay back up to the same amount as the savers are protected to.

    Why should you owe money on a mortgage if the bank goes bust but you lose your savings, it should be on par.

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 31.

    Posted by Morty Vicar (U2247272) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    l_l, I found the answers to your #1 questions in about five minutes of googling.

    Wouldn't that have been easier than writing those 49 lines of ignorance and irrelevance?

    It's just a thought.

    I suppose it depends on what you like doing.

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    But it's wrong to refuse people what they have been paying in for, if they have no intension of paying out on what we have all been paying for then they should at the very least give us our money back.

    Be it state pension or any type of pension, if you have a contract then surely they should be honour bound to up hold that contract, and everyone person who pays national insurence stamps have such a contract do they not, perhaps i'm mistaken.

    How can it be right just because people managed to live long enough to get their money, that the govt turns around and says, No you lived too long so we are now going to make you wait longer in the hope you die before we have to pay out.

    What is to say that when it comes to it these private companies won't just turn and around and say, they have no money to pay out so they are not going to, or make you wait in the hope you die before they have to pay out.

    Or if it is your own company scheme that they simply don't use your money unwisely and waste it and then claim poverty bankruptcy, just to avoid paying out on pensions.

    Just look what banks do with the ISA now rather than paying out on the lot as they should they chop it every so many years so you don't get the full intereste rate even at low rates, what is the govt doing about that? nothing.

    That's money going into the banks that should be going to the savers, so perhaps no tax but the banks take the money instead.

    Where ever there is a scheme there is a schemer, and this will be no different I suspect.

    I will look rosey to start with and after a few years they will realise it costs them more than they can afford so cut cut cut, and all the money you put in will vanish, so the govt will bring in special laws to protect the schemers and the public will lose as usual.

    So yes it's a great scheme for the companies to scheme on.

    You don't have to look far to see it is a con, no company would be jumping with joy at having to pay out for their employees retirement unless they expected something in return, so what are they getting or expecting to get in order for them to see this as such a great deal for them.

    Companies don't have a soft heart, especially in the UK, you can see this if you don't believe me when they do that program, bosses under cover, the bosses in the USA reward their employees well for doing a good job, but the UK, well it is a joke to say the least, tight wad is flattering from what I have seen so far, where does the story of scruge come from? was it made in the UK, seems about right, if it weren't it should have been.

    The govt is quick to give money away to other countries but slow to look after its own.

    Let's all go for a reduction of the EU pay out woopeeee but how many billions of pounds is it still going to cost us?



    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    Oh boy you must be a company boss or something because someone has rumbled you.

    What you getting out of it?

    As for your googleing googlygooglinginging,

    This is a discussion, we are discussing so that must mean i'm discusing.

    Sorry about the slight referece to eminem but it just seemed right.

    You google if you want to the PM is not for googling.

    Sorry about the thatcher ref, I doubt even she would have done this.

    It's my google and I'll google if I want to google if I want to you would google to if it happened to you.

    Ah the songs of old.

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    l_l, I found the answers to your #1 questions in about five minutes of googling.

    Wouldn't that have been easier than writing those 49 lines of ignorance and irrelevance?

    It's just a thought.

    I suppose it depends on what you like doing. 
    What does #1 questions mean?

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by JennyDarling Long Gone (U250754) on Thursday, 8th November 2012

    a) If you can live on the State Pension, good luck to you.

    b) No-one is being forced to take up the new pension, though they would be extremely stupid if they didn't.

    c) If you want a good pension without having to contribute much towards it
    and having it heavily subsidised by other people....get a job in the "public service". teaching is the best bet as you'll never get sacked however incompetent you are and you get 14 weeks holiday a year. 
    A good pension without having to contribute much towards it? Rubbish.

    And some of us have been forced to leave by bullying head teachers.

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Thursday, 15th November 2012

    So it looks very much like the all new wonder pension scheme is just another way to force the avarage person on an avarage wage or lower to part with money they can ill afford.

    More greedy bosses scamming money out of us, more govt schemes to take take take from those that have so little to give.

    Many people already pay into a pension via their national insurence, if the govt can't afford to pay out on what it has been taking for the past x amount of years then they should pay this money back to the people they took it from.

    Or alternatively cut their own pensions in accordence with everyone elses.

    I learned something the other day about our politicians, when they retire they are on full pension, they tell everyone else that there is no money for their pensions but in the same breath make sure their own is well protected to the max, is this or is it not hypocracy?

    New pension scam more like, force people to pay more and get less, after a few years they will then turn around and say, "sorry there is no money to pay you out on your pension due to you living too long, so we will embark on a youthinasia scheme to ensure we get all your pension money."

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 37.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    On the tv they said the pensions are to be raided again, so why would this be any different than what is going on now?

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 38.

    Posted by stolenkisses (U6230663) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    You are allowed to opt out of the scheme you are enrolled in.

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 39.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    Let's hope so I sincerely hope so.

    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by londonplug (U13638089) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    an awful lot of holidays. 

    Well if you are prepared to pay additional taxes to cover the extra salary for teaching and support staff, not to mention admin staff, catering staff, caretaking staff, cleaning staff, plus additional costs for heating, lighting, additional wear and tear on buildings and furniture, extra resources etc etc then say the word, I'm sure shorter holidays could be arranged.

    Wouldn't mind if they produced school leavers who could string two sentences together and could read and write and add up reasonably well. 

    Do you have a sticker on your screen that says "My Other Messageboard is the Daily Mail"? 
    REPLY.............. Why on earth are teachers being paid so much anyway???Why are immigrants not being recruited as teachers on Minimum wage with no pensions sick pay nothing seemed to be perfectly aceptable for the government to do that with Britans manual workers and tradesmen especialy in construction, so whats so special about teachers?? in fact why not all public sector workers.

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by stolenkisses (U6230663) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    Let's hope so I sincerely hope so.  Here you go

    https://www.gov.uk/...?

    3rd para down.

    < desperately resisting the urge to type "Simples" >

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by Binky (U4657795) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    REPLY.............. Why on earth are teachers being paid so much anyway???Why are immigrants not being recruited as teachers on Minimum wage with no pensions sick pay nothing seemed to be perfectly aceptable for the government to do that with Britans manual workers and tradesmen especialy in construction, so whats so special about teachers?? in fact why not all public sector workers. 

    don't give the Government ideas plug!!!

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by NewEssexWoman (U9776561) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    Actually, LP, this is a great idea but let's start at the top. I'm sure we could find a suitable refugee family to replace the monarchy at a fraction of the cost. They'd probably be quite happy to live in a three-bed council house as well (as long as it was in a nice area!!)

    And why stick at the public sector? - there's far more scope in the private sector - Richard Branson, Alan Sugar, Philip Green and a whole host of other overpaid CEOs. Not to mention top bankers, stock exchange traders, top flight footballers, film stars and other so-called celebs.

    Let's replace the whole lot of those who turn their nose up at a six-figure salary with immigrants on the minimum wage and see how we fare. I doubt that we'd notice much difference other than in our pockets.

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by davser (U1195784) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    an awful lot of holidays. 

    Well if you are prepared to pay additional taxes to cover the extra salary for teaching and support staff, not to mention admin staff, catering staff, caretaking staff, cleaning staff, plus additional costs for heating, lighting, additional wear and tear on buildings and furniture, extra resources etc etc then say the word, I'm sure shorter holidays could be arranged.

    Wouldn't mind if they produced school leavers who could string two sentences together and could read and write and add up reasonably well. 

    Do you have a sticker on your screen that says "My Other Messageboard is the Daily Mail"? 
    REPLY.............. Why on earth are teachers being paid so much anyway???Why are immigrants not being recruited as teachers on Minimum wage with no pensions sick pay nothing seemed to be perfectly aceptable for the government to do that with Britans manual workers and tradesmen especialy in construction, so whats so special about teachers?? in fact why not all public sector workers.  
    Why not employ everyone on minimum wage, not just the public sector?

    Or are you just posting carp because you are a troll?

    What you can't comprehend is the requirement for 'qualifications' in many public sector jobs which, when evaluated to ensure equal pay in relation to job demands, means some people get paid more than private sector manual workers who need no qualifications.

    As for tradesmen - how many of them dodge tax with their cash in hand antics?

    At least public sector workers pay tax.

    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 45.

    Posted by londonplug (U13638089) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    "What you can't comprehend is the requirement for 'qualifications' in many public sector jobs which, when evaluated to ensure equal pay in relation to job demands, means some people get paid more than private sector manual workers who need no qualifications."

    REPLY................. Many private sector manual workers ALSO have qualifications but have had their pay reduced to poverty levels by mass immigration so why should the public sector be imune from this Many unqualified manual jobs are also very highly skilled
    IMO public sector jobs should be auctioned to the lowest bidder capable of doing the job basicly the same as the private sector and Non jobs should be axed

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Brief_felicity (U14259249) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    The govt has decided everyone needs to pay into a pension, but what about all those pensions that people have been paying into through their national insurence.

    We in the UK already pay for a pension a basic state pension so why do we now need to pay for another pension forced onto us by the govt with a private company.

    And what safety systems have been put into place to protect the money we will be forced to pay even if we don't want it. 
    It is so that you end up with enough money to take you over the limit for any means tested benefits thereby saving the govt money.

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by BigBummyPooPoo (U15513819) on Friday, 23rd November 2012

    Don't retire! Well, not unless you have to.

    Working past retirement age is highly attractive. You don't pay NI, so a big saving there, you have reduced income tax, so more lovely money, the bus to work is free, and the Government sends you £200 to buy your Christmas presents every year.

    It also gives you some purpose in life and something better to do than post provocative messages on this board!

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by look_listen (U2362432) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Let's hope so I sincerely hope so.  Here you go

    https://www.gov.uk/...?

    3rd para down.

    < desperately resisting the urge to type "Simples" > 
    Thanks, yes I know it says you can I heard that on the radio but, once it gets going it may end up as compulsory thing where you can't opt out if you are employed.

    As I said before, if the govt wanted people to save they would make savings have the same protection as buying a house, whereby if you become unemployed it is not taken into account for you unemployment funds.

    As it stands anyone with personal savings have to dip into it not only if they become unemployed but also for a whole host of other reasons surrounding the inability to work.

    However if you have a house they don't look at that and say "oh you can sell your house to live" but if you have savings they expect you to dip into them.

    So make these things equal and you might find more people save for their old age, pensions are a scam cojured up by scamers to rip people off and make you feel good about being ripped off.

    Here's an idea, why not have a bank account run by the govt along the lines of ISAs but where by if you leave the money in the old age ISA for lets say 25 years as a retirement account that you can add to throughout this period with no upper limit or not, but is not considered part of your working capital, but is considered along the same lines as a pension fund.

    and for every pound that goes the distance, obviously the years will get shorter, the govt provides zero tax on the interest, but for every pound removed obviously the years get shorter, then you pay tax based on the interest on the amount removed.

    A bit like an investment account, but it simply is a bank account or ISA.

    Oh and if you lose your job it is not counted as working capital but considered like owning a house or pension plan.



    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 46.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

Back to top

About this Board

Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

This messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.