• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Lettuce Liz then Tetchy Rish! and the battle to replace him

Pfft. All having the same slice of a bigger pie seems like a recipe for inflation to mean the pie is really the same as before really. But maybe I’m a cynic.
 
People still expect to retire? Expect the state pension to be removed personally. It's essentially a ponzi scheme.
 
All pensions are really. You are always hoping that the the contributions from the newbies cover the old investors for long enough until they cough it. Almost the dictionary definition of a ponzi.
 
Pensions will be means tested in the not too distant future now that workplace schemes are obligatory (although the employees can opt out).
I’m not sure how it works now but higher rate tax paying pensioners should have their state pensions tapered off of them.
 
If you plan on living long enough that would be one hell of a disincentive to accepting a payrise to put you into the higher tax rate.
 
I don't expect to ever get a state pension or ever officially retire. I'm 41.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
If you plan on living long enough that would be one hell of a disincentive to accepting a payrise to put you into the higher tax rate.
Click to expand...
I mean that as a pensioner if your income puts you into the 40% tax band you should lose your state pension on a tapered basis.
I can’t see it applying to many pensioners but for the ones that have such an income they can’t really need the state pension too.
 
Simply put. If you are earning £49,900, a £1,000 pay rise not only means you get only 60 per cent of a chunk of the pay rise but also lose a bit of your state pension for every month you live after retirement? Pension for which you have paid national insurance contributions? You would turn the pay rise down.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
Simply put. If you are earning £49,900, a £1,000 pay rise not only means you get only 60 per cent of a chunk of the pay rise but also lose a bit of your state pension for every month you live after retirement? Pension for which you have paid national insurance contributions? You would turn the pay rise down.
Click to expand...
I think he means a pension big enough that you’re paying 40% tax on it.
 
Ah. Fair enough.

Just an aside before the glorious leader speaks at 11 this morning. Remember when the papers pilloried Milliband for looking a bit awkward eating a bacon sandwich?

I await with interest what they do with the photo of Truss from the construction site yesterday. Her expression is exactly the same as that ofToht before his face melts at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.
 
A few thoughts on the pension headache from experience.

Firstly, pushing back the retirement age to 70 - Yes we’ve got a population living longer, but we are working like slaves and knackered. We‘re living longer but with managed conditions thanks to the NHS. To think we can work 50 and 60 hours a week in offices and factories at almost 70 years of age like we did at 30 and then waltz off into happy retirement is frankly ridiculous. Some will be able to have a phased slow-down if their financial circumstances allow it but for many it’s a painful descent into misery. Not going to be much fun relying on the state for a pension at 70, or relying on the state for support at say, 60 when your body and/or mind is wearing out and you’re unable to work yourself to the bone to survive.

For those fortunate enough to have pension plans the bloody things are moving about at such a rate it’s impossible to know what to do for the best. I think it was Tredman who mentioned the return of interest rates for savers. One of the unintended by-product of the very cheap borrowing and low-return saving was older people piling into additional property as pension-plan ‘Grandlords’. That ship has now sailed and there will be a few people getting burned without much sympathy as they return their funds to savings, but it’s an example of what happens when you don’t have balance and people seek alternatives - whether that’s necessity, greed or prudence is always going to depend on your point of view of course.

Younger people won’t have the luxury of using their property and equity as an asset. The cost of living means it’s almost impossible for the young (and not so young) to secure their futures through pension contributions alone. The government has a pension problem going forward and knows it. They don’t want people dependent upon the state but so many are heading there through no fault of their own.

Not saying it’s an easy one for any government but I’m damn sure there’s a better solution than pushing the retirement age back and effectively working people until they die.
 
EpsomWolf said:
A few thoughts on the pension headache from experience.

Firstly, pushing back the retirement age to 70 - Yes we’ve got a population living longer, but we are working like slaves and knackered. We‘re living longer but with managed conditions thanks to the NHS. To think we can work 50 and 60 hours a week in offices and factories at almost 70 years of age like we did at 30 and then waltz off into happy retirement is frankly ridiculous. Some will be able to have a phased slow-down if their financial circumstances allow it but for many it’s a painful descent into misery. Not going to be much fun relying on the state for a pension at 70, or relying on the state for support at say, 60 when your body and/or mind is wearing out and you’re unable to work yourself to the bone to survive.

For those fortunate enough to have pension plans the bloody things are moving about at such a rate it’s impossible to know what to do for the best. I think it was Tredman who mentioned the return of interest rates for savers. One of the unintended by-product of the very cheap borrowing and low-return saving was older people piling into additional property as pension-plan ‘Grandlords’. That ship has now sailed and there will be a few people getting burned without much sympathy as they return their funds to savings, but it’s an example of what happens when you don’t have balance and people seek alternatives - whether that’s necessity, greed or prudence is always going to depend on your point of view of course.

Younger people won’t have the luxury of using their property and equity as an asset. The cost of living means it’s almost impossible for the young (and not so young) to secure their futures through pension contributions alone. The government has a pension problem going forward and knows it. They don’t want people dependent upon the state but so many are heading there through no fault of their own.

Not saying it’s an easy one for any government but I’m damn sure there’s a better solution than pushing the retirement age back and effectively working people until they die.
Click to expand...
Agree with all you've said here.
I'm 'lucky' enough to have taken out a personal pension in my late 30s, it did well and I took early retirement 2 years ago (2 years to go to state pension) It was a risk though, I doubt my pension will last till I croak, if the pension age goes up it will have an effect on my carefully laid finances, might have to go back to work.
 
Looks like we are getting a hilarious speech at 11am

Just look at her face, anticipating the laughter after a killer line

FeQe-Y5WYAIhK-K
 
moneys too tight to mention,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hereford Wolf
Broken Bones in foot
Replies
6
Views
330
Deutsch Wolf
Deutsch Wolf
S
Missing Kilman hugely
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
3K
Langers
Langers
G
Chelsea Tickets
Replies
8
Views
669
pagey
pagey
S
Wolves Prospectus: A Stat and Chart Heavy Look at the Season
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Johnny75
Johnny75
S
% of local fans
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
Deutsch Wolf
Deutsch Wolf
Back
Top