UK Government theft.

There Is a real problem for those people who have swallowed the hook, the line and the sinker of the Thatcherist doctrine. It was purpose designed as an appeal to those who’d suffered under the excesses of the trade unions which had been corrupted by the likes of Scargill and Roberts. If you worked in one of the industries where only a left handed cogwheel fitter could install a left handed cogwheel you were easy meat for the (later proven empty) promises of Thatcherism.

As we can see not everyone has realised just how unpleasant these doctrines are nor exactly how they relate to the broken promises of the social contract. What frightens me is that I remember when there was a genuine spirit of cooperation between the political parties and a desire to do the best for us all. Now all I see is spitefullness and bile. The pension changes are just one example of that.
 
to pay the people who are the biggest drain on the Country.
By that I guess you mean current OAP's, a good percentage of whom will have fought in WW2, I am sure they would be very happy to be called a drain. Or perhaps they worked in the public sector, teachers, fireman, nurses, same comment - terrible undeserving drain. Or those that are soon to retire, the ones accused of having it easy, earning a fortune and having cheap hoses to buy, so they will have paid a considerable amount during their working lives in tax, ni, etc - more of a drain on society.
I feel very sorry for you, such a miopic vision of the previous generations of workers. Unless of coure you mean the current work shy generation, odd that as we have record numbers of people in employment, somehow that doesnt add up to your view of the Country.
There are some that are work shy and they will get the minimum State Pension, although more likely with their current lifestyle they wont get any pension. Remember less than 10 yrs contributions and you get nothing or of course they wont reach retirement age, problem solved.
 
We must not lose sight that people receiving state benefits & the state pension generally spend the money they receive; people on limited means generally don't save much, they pay VAT on goods they purchase, fuel duty etc; they pay for services & the service deliverers in turn pay their own taxes & NI.
 
That is just income tax. There is value added tax, council tax, fuel duty, road tax and whole host of other taxes which apply at the same rate to everyone and cannot be avoided however little you earn.
True but those earning more are likely to be spending more and as a result paying more tax in each of those cases.
 
I should have explained better - no money from the state should be given to the unemployed or poor.

If someone earns lots of money then they can spend/pass it on to who they like.

No one needs to starve - give them tokens to buy healthy food and not McDonalds etc.

State pension should be a thing of the past - this Country looks after the poor far to much!

I see the forum has a new troll!
Former member, maybe?
 
True but those earning more are likely to be spending more and as a result paying more tax in each of those cases.
And those that earn more & can afford it employ accountants to avoid paying more tax. Especially true of small businesses & self employed.
 
Sat in Costa - outside two unemployed drinking coffee an smoking. They are also talking about how much they spend in arcades trying to win an Xbox!
And you know they're unemployed how?
Frankly if you posted that the Sun will definitely rise in the morning I'd check for myself - you appear to be as dishonest as you are ignorant.
 
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.
 
And you know they're unemployed how?
Frankly if you posted that the Sun will definitely rise in the morning I'd check for myself - you appear to be as dishonest as you are ignorant.

Fairly obvious - I can hear what they are saying!

How do you know I'm dishonest then?
 
True but those earning more are likely to be spending more and as a result paying more tax in each of those cases.
Not true at all.
There's a realistic limit to when people stop spending and start squirrelling.
If you earn 20,000 a year you're likely to spend it all. By the time it gets to £60,000, you're almost certainly saving a wedge - and by the time you're earning 6 figures if you're not investing heavily you'd be the exception rather than the rule.
 
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.
The rich have always exploited the poor. If they weren't happy with their lot they would go somewhere else...... Oh! Sorry they already have moved their money offshore :)
 
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.

Seeing as they are often most culpable seems fair enough to me

Those chaps in Costa may have just been the idle wealthy frittering away cash they earned from exploiting the poor
 
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.
Everyone else has already told you that's not true.
We can't change your belief system but we can point out consistently when you're factually incorrect.

The rich aren't being blamed for anything (the only 'blame' I'm reading here is from you)
 
I read this thread and nobody else has come up with a solution!

It was stated earlier that in the past the average male drew a state pension for 5-10yrs. It is clear that there are a lot more of us living for longer - is the answer really 'make the rich pay for it'?
 
Everyone else has already told you that's not true.
We can't change your belief system but we can point out consistently when you're factually incorrect.

The rich aren't being blamed for anything (the only 'blame' I'm reading here is from you)


Seeing as they are often most culpable seems fair enough to me

Those chaps in Costa may have just been the idle wealthy frittering away cash they earned from exploiting the poor
 
I read this thread and nobody else has come up with a solution!

It was stated earlier that in the past the average male drew a state pension for 5-10yrs. It is clear that there are a lot more of us living for longer - is the answer really 'make the rich pay for it'?
I don't know what you're reading - from where I'm sat the consensus appears to be that a rise in pension age is inevitable as we're living longer.
 
I don't know what you're reading - from where I'm sat the consensus appears to be that a rise in pension age is inevitable as we're living longer.

Phil - that doesn't help the young unemployed though.

Would it not be better at some point just to get rid of the state pension - I understand there has to be a 'cut off point' for those already in work but would it not be sensible to say 'Those reaching employment age at 2025? will no longer be entitled to a state pension?
 
cross posted - too tricky a concept for you?

Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
 
Phil - that doesn't help the young unemployed though.

Would it not be better at some point just to get rid of the state pension - I understand there has to be a 'cut off point' for those already in work but would it not be sensible to say 'Those reaching employment age at 2025? will no longer be entitled to a state pension?

The state pension system is working fine - it gets tweaked based on an ageing population and a government unwilling to subsidise it.

Why do you think such a radical change is required - other than the fact you personally don't like the idea that a single penny of your money goes to someone you feel is undeserving.
 
Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
Many of us went without luxuries and still can't afford to retire.

It is absolute nonsense that you deserve all you have and that people with less deserve what they have, and people with more are more deserving than you. We don't live in a meritocracy. We all have different start points, different abilities and different opportunities.
 
The state pension system is working fine - it gets tweaked based on an ageing population and a government unwilling to subsidise it.

Why do you think such a radical change is required - other than the fact you personally don't like the idea that a single penny of your money goes to someone you feel is undeserving.

OK.
 
Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
Bet people say look at that bloke, sits in coffee shops, doesn't go to work and wastes his time posting rubbish on message boards.
Lazy git, don't want my money supporting him especially in old age when he hasn't made enough contributions
 
Bet people say look at that bloke, sits in coffee shops, doesn't go to work and wastes his time posting rubbish on message boards.
Lazy git, don't want my money supporting him especially in old age when he hasn't made enough contributions

Maybe?
 
And those that earn more & can afford it employ accountants to avoid paying more tax. Especially true of small businesses & self employed.
You can be poorly paid and self employed and still avoid paying more tax.
 
Talking of taxes, what about the single disabled widow living in a 2 bedroom council house being charged 'bedroom' tax in an area where there are no single bed roomed properties available for her to move to?

What about the couple or family living in a 1 bedroom flat that are unable to find a 2 bed flat
 
You can be poorly paid and self employed and still avoid paying more tax.
Very true. Tax avoidance is legal, evasion isn't.

I knew of a Quantity Surveyor (now dead, sadly) who 'employed' his wife as housekeeper, gave her a company car & company fuel card all of which were set against the business cost. His two children both had 'company' computers at home using a 'company' phone line to gain access to the Internet.
 
What about the couple or family living in a 1 bedroom flat that are unable to find a 2 bed flat
A not uncommon situation I imagine. There's not much profit for builders building small social housing units, they would rather build estates of closely packed detached houses for sale.
 
one thing I found out when researching my early retirement 5 years ago is you only 35 qualifying years to get a full state pension if you pay any more NI you don't get any more.
I qualify for my full state pension at 53 and will be retiring at 55 on my private pension, luck and good fortune and I will start collecting my bonus state pension at 67.
 
There's some pretty personal stuff being thrown about in here. Please remember that that's not acceptable.

@Phil V , @viv1969 , I'm speaking to you.
 
There's some pretty personal stuff being thrown about in here. Please remember that that's not acceptable.

@Phil V , @viv1969 , I'm speaking to you.
Yes ma'am...
just like to point out the familiarity in at least one of the responses - are we sure this is a 'new' member? ;)
 
Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
thats an error on your retirement age surely, if it isn't then you managed to accumulate your pension to last the rest of your life in around 18-19 years :rolleyes: you must have been one of those rich folks I keep hearing about that pay too much tax :eek:
 
I knew of a Quantity Surveyor (now dead, sadly) who 'employed' his wife as housekeeper, gave her a company car & company fuel card all of which were set against the business cost. His two children both had 'company' computers at home using a 'company' phone line to gain access to the Internet.
I'm pretty sure that would have gone down as evasion and attracted a stiff penalty.

People claim to do some outrageous things, especially with a couple of pints in them. The reality is often quite different when they're sober, especially if sat in front of an investigating officer. :sulk:
 
I'm pretty sure that would have gone down as evasion and attracted a stiff penalty.

People claim to do some outrageous things, especially with a couple of pints in them. The reality is often quite different when they're sober, especially if sat in front of an investigating officer. :sulk:
Maybe he exaggerated ......... & it was a long time ago.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure that would have gone down as evasion and attracted a stiff penalty.

People claim to do some outrageous things, especially with a couple of pints in them. The reality is often quite different when they're sober, especially if sat in front of an investigating officer. :sulk:
Unless you're an MP
 
Back
Top