Watch now | Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Helen Whately says many seriously disabled and needy people are being "crowded out" of the welfare state "by those who could and should be paying their own way".
Not sure why Liam, you advocate that retired folk, who have had to pay into the system for 40years are not entitled to an annual rise on their state pension, to keep up with either, inflation, medium wage increase or 2 percent.. and by the way, only those who retired in or after 2016 get the new state pension, the rest are some way short of that.
They didn't pay into the system. They paid a pittance, and all that money went to people who were already retired. There is no money saved for them, and the money they paid was never enough to cover the liabilities.
If your pension increases with all three of inflation, medium wage increase or 2 percent, then the net result will be that it will rise at a rate faster than all 3. I.e. the state pension will rise faster than wages, faster than inflation, and faster than 2%. That means it is guaranteed to grow faster than the economy will be able to cope, and is guaranteed to bankrupt the state.
Finally, I detect that you are trying to make this an argument about fairness and what people 'should' get. Typical lefty positions that are unforunately not relevant. This is about what is *possible*. It is not possible to provide the pensioin you want, the money simply does not exist.
People my age are never getting a state pension as generouos as the current one, I have no interest in accelerating the state towards bankrupcy, when only people my age will suffer the consequences.
Firstly, the ‘pittance’ was relevant to 9% of their salary/wage which at the time was like today, a substantial part of income add to that income tax
As with most ill advised people, you are assuming that pension increases by ALL three options. It does not. It is only one, of the three which is most beneficial to the current fiscal scenario.
The argument that it never went towards a pension is also irrelevant, the contract when I started work at 15 years old, was that of the NI reductions 2% were to be invested for a retirement pension, that subsequent governments are guilty of malfeasance of workers funds is not an excuse for now turning those same people, who incidently lifted this country from the ashes of WW11 should now beg for funds to survive.
You have the opportunity to make sure you have a pension pot, in the knowledge that you have not been sold a lie by governments, that they will look after you from the cradle to the grave.. I suggest you start now!
I don't know what you are suggesting that I belive. The triple lock is quite simple, the HIGHEST of the following three: Inflation. Average Income Growth. 2.5%. That means that over time it will grow by more than any one of those metrics. This is to say nothing of the growing bill from other old-age benefits which don't get mentioned.
You signed no contract at 15. That there was never any investment was all public record. You got the policies you voted for. There is also basically no link to working and getting support in old age, see: https://x.com/maxtempers/status/1954949935897465012
I am currently pouring almost 20% of my income into pension, on the assumption that the government won't give me shit. I am doing so whilst also trying to save for a house - something which the older generation is monopolising. Net result is that much of my life is on hold. Whatever happened to the old making sacrifices for the next generation?
The Commons Library has all the details and the audit end March 2025 ( 2026 still in progress? ). The forecast for 2026 maintains the target of just over 16% with a treasury provision of 5% if that target falls short.
The NI funds are by law put in a seperate Fund and are only suppossed to be used for welfare...surplus funds can form a loan to the government so actually there is a pot of money but as a collective rather than individual.
With respect I understand exactly how it works. Notice the phrase in the HoC library document ‘it operates on a 'pay-as-you-go' basis, current contributions pay for current claims, rather than being saved in a personal account for you.’
If you believe there is. Collective fund then I am afraid you are misunderstanding how government finances itself.
NI is part of general taxation and is merely collected into an account called the NIF and that account is used to fund welfare and NHS (those are not pensions) and they state pension.
The state pension is accounted under welfare benefits in government spending and the NIF is in fact a sub-account of the current account welfare budget
If the Tories hadn't of helped the illegals in first place the benefits would not be in the state it is and add their families who get benefits too?!
Why is it this is not talked about in depth when benefits are under the spotlight?
The people already know what is going on so seems this is premeditated - otherwise stop benefits for a illegals and their families, that will cut a huge chunk. In addition the rising expenses of Labour and the rest, that will be another chunk, then the retarded ideology of DEI, that will make a humongous saving of tax payers money, just for starters.
The Tories couldn't run a bath, they've proven it over and over again. Rein in spending? Are you drunk? Boris said he'd stop HS2 but once elected did a perfect U turn. Cameron, May, Sunak, all lied, most seriously about immigration. The Tories are finished, not worth a substack essay.
In Australia, access to healthcare is means tested and the private sector pays about 30% of costs of the system. A second source of savings would be to shift to a universal (ie both public and private sectors pay the same) defined contribution portable pension system. Every citizen pays 15% of their income into a personal pension fund. Huge savings are possible for the government which in some cases pays up to 28% of salary into pension liabilities.
Founded by the Centre for Policy Studies, Cap X yesterday featured this item. I found that a challenging title, not because I disagreed, I didn’t understand it. In fact turned out to be an economic discussion largely focussed on Free Markets vs. Protectionism.........the author is an academic, American and an economist; it seems that can be quite a narrow World. Anyway I have a different perspective.
My perspective originates from the rather bleak position that the U.K. no longer makes anything or sells anything, energy costs put us out of range of our competitors. We don't grow or process our food. Our Governmental purchasing skills have been dismal throughout my life, for example there is no procurement practice comparing the whole cost of an overseas purchase with the cost of a U.K. purchase net of taxes & employment recoveries.
Even more bleak is my reaction to the oft' repeated promise to "Increase Defence Spending". Given the above apparent situation, what are we going to buy with this increased spending, who will we get to supply it? Doesn't this suggest a direction of Industrial thinking, industrial strategy, employment & training needs?
Not sure why Liam, you advocate that retired folk, who have had to pay into the system for 40years are not entitled to an annual rise on their state pension, to keep up with either, inflation, medium wage increase or 2 percent.. and by the way, only those who retired in or after 2016 get the new state pension, the rest are some way short of that.
They didn't pay into the system. They paid a pittance, and all that money went to people who were already retired. There is no money saved for them, and the money they paid was never enough to cover the liabilities.
If your pension increases with all three of inflation, medium wage increase or 2 percent, then the net result will be that it will rise at a rate faster than all 3. I.e. the state pension will rise faster than wages, faster than inflation, and faster than 2%. That means it is guaranteed to grow faster than the economy will be able to cope, and is guaranteed to bankrupt the state.
Finally, I detect that you are trying to make this an argument about fairness and what people 'should' get. Typical lefty positions that are unforunately not relevant. This is about what is *possible*. It is not possible to provide the pensioin you want, the money simply does not exist.
People my age are never getting a state pension as generouos as the current one, I have no interest in accelerating the state towards bankrupcy, when only people my age will suffer the consequences.
Firstly, the ‘pittance’ was relevant to 9% of their salary/wage which at the time was like today, a substantial part of income add to that income tax
As with most ill advised people, you are assuming that pension increases by ALL three options. It does not. It is only one, of the three which is most beneficial to the current fiscal scenario.
The argument that it never went towards a pension is also irrelevant, the contract when I started work at 15 years old, was that of the NI reductions 2% were to be invested for a retirement pension, that subsequent governments are guilty of malfeasance of workers funds is not an excuse for now turning those same people, who incidently lifted this country from the ashes of WW11 should now beg for funds to survive.
You have the opportunity to make sure you have a pension pot, in the knowledge that you have not been sold a lie by governments, that they will look after you from the cradle to the grave.. I suggest you start now!
I don't know what you are suggesting that I belive. The triple lock is quite simple, the HIGHEST of the following three: Inflation. Average Income Growth. 2.5%. That means that over time it will grow by more than any one of those metrics. This is to say nothing of the growing bill from other old-age benefits which don't get mentioned.
You signed no contract at 15. That there was never any investment was all public record. You got the policies you voted for. There is also basically no link to working and getting support in old age, see: https://x.com/maxtempers/status/1954949935897465012
I am currently pouring almost 20% of my income into pension, on the assumption that the government won't give me shit. I am doing so whilst also trying to save for a house - something which the older generation is monopolising. Net result is that much of my life is on hold. Whatever happened to the old making sacrifices for the next generation?
"the contract when I started work at 15 years old, was that of the NI reductions 2% were to be invested for a retirement pension"
Unfortunately you were misled.
Your NI payments are simply tax and taken alongside income tax.
They were never invested for a retirement pension.
The state pension is a welfare benefit paid from the 'current account' welfare budget i.e. paid from current income tax and NI payments, and borrowing
The Commons Library has all the details and the audit end March 2025 ( 2026 still in progress? ). The forecast for 2026 maintains the target of just over 16% with a treasury provision of 5% if that target falls short.
Please feel free to believe whatever you want about the accounts structure of the welfare pool of accounts.
The NI funds are by law put in a seperate Fund and are only suppossed to be used for welfare...surplus funds can form a loan to the government so actually there is a pot of money but as a collective rather than individual.
With respect I understand exactly how it works. Notice the phrase in the HoC library document ‘it operates on a 'pay-as-you-go' basis, current contributions pay for current claims, rather than being saved in a personal account for you.’
If you believe there is. Collective fund then I am afraid you are misunderstanding how government finances itself.
NI is part of general taxation and is merely collected into an account called the NIF and that account is used to fund welfare and NHS (those are not pensions) and they state pension.
The state pension is accounted under welfare benefits in government spending and the NIF is in fact a sub-account of the current account welfare budget
1,000 people arrive in 3 days, all to be fed , housed and given medical treatment.
Soon it will be another 1,000 to join the 100,000s already here.
This is what makes me angry.
Public services are shockingly bad, only a fraction as efficient as they used to be.
Children's minds are being poisoned in schools.
I know the economy is important, of course it is but even a thriving economy would compensate for state of the fabric of our society.
They are all a drain on the economy.
Doctors, Surgeons and the like do not come over on a DINGEY!
We all are being lied to.
If the Tories hadn't of helped the illegals in first place the benefits would not be in the state it is and add their families who get benefits too?!
Why is it this is not talked about in depth when benefits are under the spotlight?
The people already know what is going on so seems this is premeditated - otherwise stop benefits for a illegals and their families, that will cut a huge chunk. In addition the rising expenses of Labour and the rest, that will be another chunk, then the retarded ideology of DEI, that will make a humongous saving of tax payers money, just for starters.
The Tories couldn't run a bath, they've proven it over and over again. Rein in spending? Are you drunk? Boris said he'd stop HS2 but once elected did a perfect U turn. Cameron, May, Sunak, all lied, most seriously about immigration. The Tories are finished, not worth a substack essay.
100%, that goes for all of them no matter the name of the party.
We will see if "new" parties can stick to their promises. Just don't hold your breath!
No. Next question. 😂
In Australia, access to healthcare is means tested and the private sector pays about 30% of costs of the system. A second source of savings would be to shift to a universal (ie both public and private sectors pay the same) defined contribution portable pension system. Every citizen pays 15% of their income into a personal pension fund. Huge savings are possible for the government which in some cases pays up to 28% of salary into pension liabilities.
"Industrial policy is a dead end……"
Founded by the Centre for Policy Studies, Cap X yesterday featured this item. I found that a challenging title, not because I disagreed, I didn’t understand it. In fact turned out to be an economic discussion largely focussed on Free Markets vs. Protectionism.........the author is an academic, American and an economist; it seems that can be quite a narrow World. Anyway I have a different perspective.
My perspective originates from the rather bleak position that the U.K. no longer makes anything or sells anything, energy costs put us out of range of our competitors. We don't grow or process our food. Our Governmental purchasing skills have been dismal throughout my life, for example there is no procurement practice comparing the whole cost of an overseas purchase with the cost of a U.K. purchase net of taxes & employment recoveries.
Even more bleak is my reaction to the oft' repeated promise to "Increase Defence Spending". Given the above apparent situation, what are we going to buy with this increased spending, who will we get to supply it? Doesn't this suggest a direction of Industrial thinking, industrial strategy, employment & training needs?