Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
MooseBreath

Predict other posters reactions to the autumn statement

By MooseBreath, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

MooseBreath

MooseBreath

Posted
Posted

Ken - pension age going up, just another blow to the working man

Captain Pancake - fastest growing economy in the developing world means nothing, if we'd have followed labours plan to accelerate debt we'd all be millionaires by now

Nick

Nick

Posted
Posted

Moosebreath - will create rubbish edit actually quite funny thread designed only to troll a bit and take stereotypical pot-shot's at the usual suspects.

Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted

Ken - pension age going up, just another blow to the working man

Captain Pancake - fastest growing economy in the developing world means nothing, if we'd have followed labours plan to accelerate debt we'd all be millionaires by now

 

MooseBreath - Good to see that the Tories are cutting the deficit to clear up Labour's mess. The economy's looking good. Just need to cut public spending more, give free rein to the wealth-making entrepreneurs, keep wages down, crack down on benefit fiddlers, get out of the EU and control immigration, then everything will be coming up roses.

 

Alf Bentley - We need some sort of well-directed Keynesian demand stimulus, preferably involving job creation (e.g. stimulus to house-building, investment in early years childcare, targeted investment in infrastructure & public services), otherwise, given falling real incomes, we're too dependent on credit and a housing bubble, risking another collapse. We could eliminate some of the deficit if we made a serious effort to tackle tax avoidance by the wealthy and large corporations, but that's not in the interests of the people that Osborne represents. Given the demographic imbalances, if we want to compete as a low-wage economy without mass immigration, then people will indeed need to work until at least 70 to fund state pensions.

 

We're all fairly (but not entirely) predictable, I suppose...

Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted

The People's Hero - Plenty of salt and vinegar on those. No, I don't need a bag, I'll carry them on my shoulder. I'd advise you to work a bit harder, then you might be a success like me.

Dan

Dan

Posted
Posted

MattP - I need a piss. Thankfully the number of homeless people are increasing.

 

Excellent lol

Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted

Webbo / MattP / Me:

 

Sensible changes to Pensions reflecting the longer working life we will all enjoy if we are young enough to be impacted.  Shame the older generation didn't see fit to fund their own retirement properly and we will be paying for their pensions as well as our own. While paying through the nose to buy their houses from them.

Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted

Nice one Ken

CPF - very disappointed he hasn't introduced a tax to help non working European migrants don't live here, would deliver a more prosperous future for all within the next 750 years.

Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted

Webbo / MattP / Me:

 

Sensible changes to Pensions reflecting the longer working life we will all enjoy if we are young enough to be impacted.  Shame the older generation didn't see fit to fund their own retirement properly and we will be paying for their pensions as well as our own. While paying through the nose to buy their houses from them.

 

Should previous governments have intervened more in the pensions market and the housing market, then, Jon? Presumably, high house prices are the result of supply & demand in a free market, while the pension contributions paid by previous generations were determined by government requirements and decisions freely made by individuals and companies? I agree that the pension age has to rise, unfortunately (67 for me, if I make it that far, doubtless 68-70 for some on here)

Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted

Should previous governments have intervened more in the pensions market and the housing market, then, Jon? Presumably, high house prices are the result of supply & demand in a free market, while the pension contributions paid by previous generations were determined by government requirements and decisions freely made by individuals and companies? I agree that the pension age has to rise, unfortunately (67 for me, if I make it that far, doubtless 68-70 for some on here)

 

Less & more.  Gordon should not have raided pension funds, nor given public sectors workers the underfunded pension schemes they have.  in the prviate sectore we should have taken the australian model of compulsory pension payments by employers at least a decade ago. 

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I miss Craigadams22 :(

Don't worry he's doing alright he just sold a picture of an XBox One on eBay to some Forest plank for £450. The Milkybars are on him!

Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted

Less & more.  Gordon should not have raided pension funds, nor given public sectors workers the underfunded pension schemes they have.  in the prviate sectore we should have taken the australian model of compulsory pension payments by employers at least a decade ago. 

 

A bit unfair to pin it all one Chancellor/PM, isn't it? By definition, pension contributions are made over decades. I think my Dad would have started paying into his generous public sector pension in the early 50s, when Churchill was PM - and he retired in 1985, when Thatcher was PM!

 

Quite a number of private companies have employed "creative accounting" with pensions funds, too, not just government.

 

How about the housing market? Should the public sector (central or local govt) have intervened more to increase supply, so as to reduce house prices to the benefit of our generation(s)?

Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted

A bit unfair to pin it all one Chancellor/PM, isn't it? By definition, pension contributions are made over decades. I think my Dad would have started paying into his generous public sector pension in the early 50s, when Churchill was PM - and he retired in 1985, when Thatcher was PM!

 

Quite a number of private companies have employed "creative accounting" with pensions funds, too, not just government.

 

How about the housing market? Should the public sector (central or local govt) have intervened more to increase supply, so as to reduce house prices to the benefit of our generation(s)?

 

Gordon employed an additional 1million people in the public sector did he not?  And oversaw massive inflation in public sector pay to the point where what used to be a case of lower salary but better pension turner into better salary and better pension.  Stupid.  You cant blame him for everything, and indeed to your other point, Thatcher's government should not have pocketed 75% of the proceeds of council house sales, they should have left a lot more with councils to fund house building.  Then again, councils could have funded more of their own had they not been busy expanding their remit to all kinds of services they never did before, and wasting cash on Green projects left right and centre.

 

Gordon is annoying and therefore draws the eye in terms of criticism.  He has was also Chancellor or PM for move of my adult life so far.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...