Korat-Farang.com

Re: Inequality

Roger · 26 · 2231

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Roger

  • .
  • Wisdom in Forum
  • *********
    • Posts: 5344
Not really shooting anyone at all Dam. I thought the article was an interesting look at a problem that needs more airing.

To the extent that Public Service Pensions are paid for by the State, (rather than employee contributions), this is an increasing burden on the Young who we also expect to fund massive and increasing healthcare costs of the aged like me - the same Young who may already be excluded from a very expensive housing market. I'd agree that the excessive level of PS pay packets at Executive level, including Pensions, needs to be looked at.

I'm not sure socialism is to blame, but the cost of PSP's will needs to be addressed in the coming years, although the topic is sensitive. Understandably!
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein


Online caller

  • KFers beyond Korat
  • Forum Wizard
  • *****
    • Posts: 2336
You can't retrospectively means test a state pension after so many have paid into for most of their working lives.

You can say that from x date, perhaps with 10/15 years of their working lives left, that changes will be made, to allow those affected to make the necessary provisions. But that would have to be phased in based on their projected pension shortfall.

As for public employees not contributing to their pensions, this was only ever partly true. I knew when I joined local Govt. from Central Govt back in 1993 that I would ever thus be contributing to my pension and the higher I went the larger that contribution was. But when I left Central Govt (which I never wanted to do and only did so as my Dept. was being subsumed into another and I was never prepared to work for the other lot), my salary went up by 4k per annum, but nearly 50% went to my new pension conts.

And although I was moving on to effectively, a lesser job, but one with great potential, the 4k increase really demonstrated how, as civil servants, you knew there was a trade off between your lower salary and pension, irrespective if that is formally correct, it's why most were prepared to make do with that - and a sense of pride and responsibility, which certainly applied in my line of work. I could have easily done a desk job, rather than working as and when required anywhere the job took me, as I did for many years.

And for what it's worth, all civil servants now make some contribution to their pensions. As far as I am aware, no one gets a free ride anymore and other changes have been made as well - final salary pay out replaced by average salary pay out, working longer and so on.

And as an edited addendum, has anyone actually checked what the average public sector pension now is? A few years ago it was 8k per annum.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2019, 12:18:01 AM by caller »


Online Roger

  • .
  • Wisdom in Forum
  • *********
    • Posts: 5344
OMG  ;)  IMO this is such a good direction and could be so good for the UK. Inequality is a great scourge throughout our history and is deeply embedded in our culture. One small move forward ? I doubt it will happen but I wish it would  ???

"Boris Johnson has been weighing up shock plans to impose a “mansion tax” on owners of expensive homes, in a move which will infuriate the ­Conservative Party’s grassroots and stun MPs. Severe cuts to pension tax relief enjoyed by millions of voters are also being considered by the Prime Minister and his Chancellor, Sajid Javid, for the Budget next month in an effort to pay for a huge increase in public spending" . . . . . . . and . . . . . ."One of the ideas being considered ­includes cutting pension tax relief for those earning £50,000 a year or above from 40 per cent to 20 per cent to raise an extra £10 billion a year, as the Financial Times reported yesterday. More than four million people, including many traditional Tory voters, would stand to lose out from such a policy".

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/02/08/tories-eye-mansion-tax-raid-pensions2/
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein


Offline Alfie

  • Forum Guru
  • **********
    • Posts: 8698
"Boris Johnson has been weighing up shock plans to impose a “mansion tax” on owners of expensive homes"

The difficulty will be in deciding how to deem a property as expensive. What price? What size? A million pound mansion in one part of the country will just about buy you a small flat in some parts of London.


Online Roger

  • .
  • Wisdom in Forum
  • *********
    • Posts: 5344
I'm no economics wizard but I do understand a little. Whilst wanting to give PM Truss a chance, instinctively, her mooted plans to revive the UK economy make me shudder   ::)

Selected paras from George Monbiot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot

Trussonomics is a fanatical, fantastical creed, and the last thing Britain needs

'Look at Truss’s proposal for addressing the energy bills crisis. Instead of taxing the record profits of oil and gas companies, she’s using the taxes the rest of us pay to allow them to keep raking in monstrous sums. Even this policy, presented as a means of helping poor people with their bills, will, when combined with the new cuts in national insurance, ensure that the richest households receive twice as much help with their living costs as the poorest households.'

'The “plan for growth” on which Truss campaigned was pure neoliberal gospel: “cut taxes now, unshackle business from burdensome regulation, implement supply side reform ... create new, low-tax, low-regulation ‘investment zones’”. Her key advisers are drawn from covertly funded neoliberal thinktanks. She will go as far as electoral politics allow in transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, attacking trade unions and protesters, opening the floodgates for pollution and greenhouse gases and dismembering the NHS. Already, her government has floated proposals to scrap England’s anti-obesity measures and to remove the cap on bankers’ bonuses, the purpose of which is to discourage the reckless gambles that caused the last financial crash.'

'After 40 years of this experiment, we can state with confidence that the economic success it proclaimed is illusory. Its buy-now-pay-later economics works by inflating asset values and household debt and burning through human relationships, conditions of employment and the living world. Now that there is little more to burn, Margaret Thatcher’s fire is reduced to embers, as is much of the world we knew. Yet Truss seeks only to breathe life into the coals. And this is when it gets really dangerous.

As neoliberalism wages war on social security and the public sector, impoverishes millions and destroys conditions of employment, its political consequences could be as disastrous as its economic consequences
.'

Serious stuff and for this I apologise - I want it to work, but for me, the Tories are on the road to 'economic hell'.

I humbly suggest it's worth the whole read - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/17/trussonomics-britain-prime-minister-liz-truss-neoliberalism



''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein


Online Roger

  • .
  • Wisdom in Forum
  • *********
    • Posts: 5344
It's 'The Guardian' again, but the DT is carrying the same vibes . . .

Tory MPs fear Liz Truss’s policies will create a ‘complete open goal’ for Labour

'Tory MPs are already listing the campaigns they will face from opponents come the autumn.

“The removal of the green levies on fuel and the opening up of fracking – the whole environmental movement will start campaigning against Conservatives, even though we’ve been quite green,” said one MP, adding: “The lines of political attack for Labour are incredibly clear. Bigger bonuses for bankers. The cut in national insurance will primarily help people on higher incomes.

“The freezing of energy bills primarily helps people on higher incomes because energy bills are bigger. None of this is targeted. Honestly, it’s creating a complete open goal for Labour politically
.'

'Another warns that the spending splurge on tax cuts – which Truss and chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng will frame as part of a dedication to growing the economy – will hit the Conservatives’ key calling card. “Fiscal prudence, or sound money, is one of the defining characteristics of conservatism,” they said. “We are a party of sound money or nothing.”

While some wonder privately if Kwarteng is secretly working for the Labour party, one former minister dismisses the idea. “I totally disagree,” they said. “There is nothing secret about it.
” '

'A source close to the Treasury described the plans as “very naive”. Meanwhile, Truss is unlikely to have much of a honeymoon. Several MPs pointed out that, in the first round of leadership voting among MPs, she managed to claim just 50 votes.'

'Meanwhile, the dismissal of the Treasury’s top civil servant, Tom Scholar, continues to cause alarm in Whitehall and sets up an immediate tension with the new administration.'

Once again - serious stuff. But there's many Brits on here so  ???

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/18/liz-truss-policies-tory-mps-open-goal-labour
« Last Edit: September 18, 2022, 02:26:08 PM by Roger »
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein