public sector pensions

12 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
The statement is a meaningless soundbite. Yet you and other contributors seem to think its justification for this outrageous attack on the pensions of ordinary working folk. SO I wondered what you inferred from it.

I think nothing of the sort, you really should not presume.
I think the average salary scheme as suggested by Lord Hutton is a fair and equitable scheme and will not impact greatly upon the ordinary folk to which you refer. (and I have read more on this subject than the article to which I referred in my earlier post)
It will, however, impact upon the higher paid, those who finish their careers on higher salaries but why should the taxpayer pay for the generous, very generous in some cases, pensions of the higher paid public sector workers? They don't for those in the private sector, a great many of whom do not have any pension provisions in place and whose employers can not afford to fund a pension scheme.

12 Mar 2011

All I asked for in the first place was clarification of your argument.
Thank you for providing it eventually.
You are of course quite wrong.
I suggest that this proposal is both unfair and wrong and will have a devastating effect on the retirement plans of millions of ordinary people.
There are many other ways to prevent excessive pensions for the wealthy. I would suggest the simplest is to impose a cap on the amount of pension public service employers are prepared to fund regardless of income.
Dean also makes a good point about the retrospective aspect of this change.
I have no axe to grind here, I just see public servants being held up as an example of greedy profiteers when in reality this is very far from being the truth.

12 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
All I asked for in the first place was clarification of your argument.
Thank you for providing it eventually.
You are of course quite wrong.
I suggest that this proposal is both unfair and wrong and will have a devastating effect on the retirement plans of millions of ordinary people.
There are many other ways to prevent excessive pensions for the wealthy. I would suggest the simplest is to impose a cap on the amount of pension public service employers are prepared to fund regardless of income.
Dean also makes a good point about the retrospective aspect of this change.
I have no axe to grind here, I just see public servants being held up as an example of greedy profiteers when in reality this is very far from being the truth.

You are entitled to your opinion Ben and I wouldn't be so arrogant to say that it's wrong......
With regards to the retrospective aspect to the proposed change, try doing some research into the differences an average salary scheme will make to those on modest salaries as opposed to a final salary scheme.

12 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
The statement is a meaningless soundbite. Yet you and other contributors seem to think its justification for this outrageous attack on the pensions of ordinary working folk. SO I wondered what you inferred from it.

i hate to point out the obvious be but should it be allowed to continue it would become unaffordable
call it an outrageous attack on what you like . but it is very simple house keeping(economics)
in this day and age with food prices petrol prices ect ect the tax payer isn`t going to be happy knowing a tax rise he/she cannot afford is helping some fat council officer have a fuck off comfy retirement bolt

I'm sure if a few more got off there arses and contributed these people could keep their pensions ........... just one simple solution

12 Mar 2011

If you want summat to get really cross about check out the normal retirement date that the Revenue are happy to accept is reasonable for a dealer in securities or foreign exchange.

12 Mar 2011

Quote by neilinleeds
Woah! GTFOOH! :shock: Blue, I have just read back through 30 odd pages of your posts. Nowhere can I find anything that says you're a farmer? Dunno where I got it from? I may have been misled by a pic of a Massey Ferguson, a preference for cows over badgers, and a general willingness to speak on farmers' behalves? You telling me you're not actually a farmer at all, when all this time you've been letting me call you a farmer, and never once pulled me up on it before now? My bad! :doh:
Any road up, my previous post re: taxpayer subsidies to those you're in favour of receiving subsidies versus those you're not still stands. :?
N x x x ;)
p.s. I would like to have met your grandfather. I work in what's left of the steel industry in this country, distributing stuff that's mostly made abroad. The other 'alf rolls her eyes at me cooing over proper black-smithing, but I would like to have that sort of craftmanship available at my fingertips. ;)

I do not mind being called a farmer, I have been called much worse wink

If the Government said to me, we can pay either pensions or subsidies to the farming industry, I would actually choose to save pensions as this has a bigger effect on more lives. I do not like either really, I would much rather see farmers paid a sensible price for there produce, there for not requiring any subsidies.
However, I do not like these pension schemes. I dislike them very much. I would not like to see anyone who is already expecting one to have it removed but I would stop all future employees ever getting on at all.
On your PS note, my Grandfather is still with us, at the age of 98, good country living, and copious amounts of Guinness!!!!
I had a wonderful childhood, spending many happy hours around him. Most mornings I would be woken by the rhythmical sound of hammer on anvil, I could even tell which anvil he was using at the time just by the sound. Don't get me started I will be going on for hours lol

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
If you want summat to get really cross about check out the normal retirement date that the Revenue are happy to accept is reasonable for a dealer in securities or foreign exchange.

i think you`ll find the lions share of these peoples pensions are self contributed ben dunno

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
If you want summat to get really cross about check out the normal retirement date that the Revenue are happy to accept is reasonable for a dealer in securities or foreign exchange.

It would appear to be the same age as circus animal trainers, croupiers, martial arts instructors, newscasters, offshore riggers, rugby league referees, royal navy reservists and territorial army members.............and I don't feel cross in the slightest.

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Max777
If you want summat to get really cross about check out the normal retirement date that the Revenue are happy to accept is reasonable for a dealer in securities or foreign exchange.

It would appear to be the same age as circus animal trainers, croupiers, martial arts instructors, newscasters, offshore riggers, rugby league referees, royal navy reservists and territorial army members.............and I don't feel cross in the slightest.
nicely balanced there max :thumbup:
nope not cross here either :bounce:

13 Mar 2011

What if we nationalised all the pensions made people pay what they could afford and then gave everyone an equal share....I know utter madness....how would it ever work...all those people on an equal footing....there'd be riots ...forget I ever said anything ...economics and accounts not my strong point....I'll give way to the experts....so Ben what was it you were saying ??

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
What if we nationalised all the pensions made people pay what they could afford and then gave everyone an equal share....I know utter madness....how would it ever work...all those people on an equal footing....there'd be riots ...forget I ever said anything ...economics and accounts not my strong point....I'll give way to the experts....so Ben what was it you were saying ??

Isn't that how the state pension works? dunno

13 Mar 2011

It's how the state pension used to work....then we had opting out and all manner of other bollocks that crippled it....the state pension should be the ONLY pension

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
It's how the state pension used to work....then we had opting out and all manner of other bollocks that crippled it....the state pension should be the ONLY pension

For many in the private sector it is their only pension.

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
It's how the state pension used to work....then we had opting out and all manner of other bollocks that crippled it....the state pension should be the ONLY pension

so were agreed there should be a standard state pension and not a special one for public workers as ben states innocent

and whats wrong with wanting a more secure retirement at one`s own cost ???
after all if i have earned the money then i can choose where i spend it is my right i do believe

13 Mar 2011

The pension provided to people who are employed by councils and governement are NOT state pensions.
They are part of the wages paid to those individuals for doing a job.
I do not understand why they cause so much bitterness anger resentment and jealousy.

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
The pension provided to people who are employed by councils and governement are NOT state pensions.
They are part of the wages paid to those individuals for doing a job.
I do not understand why they cause so much bitterness anger resentment and jealousy.

these are public sector pensions ben and in many cases over generous
sorry ben but do you don't see many Aston martins parked outside dole offices ....why ??
because people on the dole cant afford the petrol for one let alone the insurance and car tax
apply this principle to public sector pensions and hey presto its all clear
there is no bitterness anger resentment or jealousy ben
are you saying then that a 10 million pound pension... for a banker... is justified.. because its in his contract and part of his wage structure dunno

13 Mar 2011

Quote by john469
Certainly a few commies in this thread that are jealous of the bankers and their pals in government!!
Guys, it's a free world, start your own banks and network accordingly.
If you can do it better, do it; that's capitalism in action!

yep did that i retire at 50 :bounce:

13 Mar 2011

Quote by john469
The pension provided to people who are employed by councils and governement are NOT state pensions.
They are part of the wages paid to those individuals for doing a job.
I do not understand why they cause so much bitterness anger resentment and jealousy.

these are public sector pensions ben and in many cases over generous
sorry ben but do you don't see many Aston martins parked outside dole offices ....why ??
because people on the dole cant afford the petrol for one let alone the insurance and car tax
apply this principle to public sector pensions and hey presto its all clear
there is no bitterness anger resentment or jealousy ben
are you saying then that a 10 million pound pension... for a banker... is justified.. because its in his contract and part of his wage structure dunno

It's absolutely justified, you are just jealous!
If you argue otherwise, feel free to flesh out your point by telling us just 'where' you draw the line, vis a vis, just 'what' you would allow someone to earn? LOL
Filthy communist thinking, jealous as the day is long!
We won't wait for your rebuttle ;)
sorry jonny you need to learn to read mate
i asked a question,
i didnt make a statement :dunno:

13 Mar 2011

Quote by john469
Certainly a few commies in this thread that are jealous of the bankers and their pals in government!!
Guys, it's a free world, start your own banks and network accordingly.
If you can do it better, do it; that's capitalism in action!

yep did that i retire at 50 :bounce:
and now you want to stifle the chances for anyone else to do likewise, just because they have a chance to pull down some big money?
shocking, just shocking!
john I'm not denying anyone a decent pension
but if the country cannot afford it what do suggest we do.....
how do you think we should pay for it
I'm not one of the thousands of working family`s who are trying to make ends meet do you think its right to burden them with unaffordable tax rises to pay for these pensions
any well thought out answer would suffice

13 Mar 2011

Quote by john469
Certainly a few commies in this thread that are jealous of the bankers and their pals in government!!
Guys, it's a free world, start your own banks and network accordingly.
If you can do it better, do it; that's capitalism in action!

yep did that i retire at 50 :bounce:
and now you want to stifle the chances for anyone else to do likewise, just because they have a chance to pull down some big money?
shocking, just shocking!
john I'm not denying anyone a decent pension
but if the country cannot afford it what do suggest we do.....
how do you think we should pay for it
I'm not one of the thousands of working family`s who are trying to make ends meet do you think its right to burden them with unaffordable tax rises to pay for these pensions
any well thought out answer would suffice
So, you have an issue with bonuses for bankers, but have - it appears - no problem with pouring billions into those that have done nothing to earn it?
Can we expect you to start a thread moaning about the ten billion per annum that immigration costs the UK?
What about the ten billion per year that is pissed up the wall on aid to other countries?
Would they not be a good place to start?
OR... is it, as I suspect, only the bankers/big business that you have issues with?
nope i was only talking public sector pensions
one issue at a time

13 Mar 2011

Quote by Lizaleanrob
It's how the state pension used to work....then we had opting out and all manner of other bollocks that crippled it....the state pension should be the ONLY pension

so were agreed there should be a standard state pension and not a special one for public workers as ben states innocent

and whats wrong with wanting a more secure retirement at one`s own cost ???
after all if i have earned the money then i can choose where i spend it is my right i do believe
As I've said I believe there should be one pension and that it should be the same for everyone.
There's nothing wrong with wanting a more secure retirement...I'd like everyone to have one
I have no problem with you saving for whatever you like rob I do however think that those savings should be treated the same as any other savings

13 Mar 2011

Quote by john469
I'm off to count the profits from my hobby penny stocks.
On a final note, I can't be held liable for the folks that do not possess the required IQ to create wealth for them selves in the manner of the bankers.
Rothschild, scumbag that he was, pulled himself from the ghetto to global domination!
Of course, thats the core issue here that many won't begin to comprehend, that being, IQ and wealth are intimately related.
Those that lack intellect, are usually the type of person that will pull down big business, yet singularly fail to realise they lack the IQ to ever create a big business in the first place.
Unsurprisingly, we find many such types outside the dole office once a fortnight smoking drugs and mugging old ladies!

What's your I.Q. John ???

13 Mar 2011

Quote by john469
I'm off to count the profits from my hobby penny stocks.
On a final note, I can't be held liable for the folks that do not possess the required IQ to create wealth for them selves in the manner of the bankers.
Rothschild, scumbag that he was, pulled himself from the ghetto to global domination!
Of course, thats the core issue here that many won't begin to comprehend, that being, IQ and wealth are intimately related.
Those that lack intellect, are usually the type of person that will pull down big business, yet singularly fail to realise they lack the IQ to ever create a big business in the first place.
Unsurprisingly, we find many such types outside the dole office once a fortnight smoking drugs and mugging old ladies!

What's your I.Q. John ???
In excess of one standard deviation above the average.
You?
Me John I'm not the one with the obsession but seeing as you asked if I remember correctly (I only took the test once and I was about 13) it was somewhere round 120....enough for me to know it is a meaningless measure .....See I and many of the less intelligent know how to DO things ...you know like make stuff and all...so when they build the motherships and all the bankers, accountants and telephone hygienists fly off we'll be the one's going somewhere else and building the world anew... which ship you going to be on??.....you've got to love Douglas Adams a wise and witty man

13 Mar 2011

Quote by john469
What type of IQ test?
No idea John ....don't know don't care
Either way, IQ testing is not a meaningless measure at all. An absurd assertion.
I work and have worked with people of lower I.Q. than me,many have skills I could never equal...as I said I.Q. scores meaningless
Intelligence is demonstrably linked to financial and academic achievement; it is - according to current consensus - perhaps 80% heritable, and IQ testing is a valid measure of it.
Studies show that the academic high flyers i.e. those who achieve 1st degrees or supposedly those with the highest I.Q. have a tendency to fail in life (there are certain notable exceptions) they have no social skills you see
As time goes on, genetics will reveal the gene sequences involved.
Ah eugenics ....the perfect fascist answer to everything
As for your above post; all the psychometric data available, graphically demonstrates that you (if indeed you claim of an IQ in excess of one standard deviation above average is true) possess far greater potential for achievement, and the subsequent wealth accumulation thereafter, than a person of lower intellect.
What if John I've used my intelligence to work out that wealth accumulation is a pointless life destroying pursuit
This is absolutely true at the group level, which is why we see certain groups singularly outperforming others ie: Far East Asians will always leave Sub Saharan Africans in their tracks.
Could I be so bold as to suggest that sub-saharan africans have a few more obstacles to overcome than far east asians....genetics doesn't answer everything circumstance and nurture play a large part in realising potential
Oh and, I am familiar with the HHGTG, and no, the elites have amongst their high IQ group, engineers, scientists and other 160 IQ geniuses.
Knowing how to design something and being able to build it are I promise you a long way from being the same thing

13 Mar 2011

What does psychometric mean in this instance?

14 Mar 2011

Quote by john469

No idea John ....don't know don't care

Probably Raven Matrices, or more likely you fabricated the whole thing?

That's it I must be lying can't possibly be any other answer can there John can there ??

Quote by john469
I work and have worked with people of lower I.Q. than me,many have skills I could never equal...as I said I.Q. scores meaningless

Give us some examples.
To what end John? they would mean nothing to you....like the bloke I worked with who struggled with Suns crossword everyday but could make anything you wanted on a milling machine ...in half the time anyone else on the firm could.....you mean that sort of example or would you like me to arrange interviews??

Quote by john469
Studies show that the academic high flyers i.e. those who achieve 1st degrees or supposedly those with the highest I.Q. have a tendency to fail in life (there are certain notable exceptions) they have no social skills you see

No; IQ is directly correlated with wealth. If you want to delve into the psychometric data itself (ie: what the data from THE ACTUAL academics involved with psychometric testing says) rather the vague data you may wish to peddle (no doubt from irrelevant sources such as sociologists and similar cretins) we can.
I wonder if Paris Hilton would agree.....I know sociologists what cretins doing awful things like analysing data and idiotic stuff like that....how on earth can they expect an intelligent man to believe their outlandish claims.

Quote by john469
Ah eugenics ....the perfect fascist answer to everything

Oh please, tell me you didn't just say that?
Eugenics isn't fascist, genius. For those with a brain, they might like to know that Darwin and Galton were 'eugenicists' oh, scary, eh?
So Lee, you have no truck with population genetics then?
You have no truck with drug design along racial lines? Because hey, according to the dimwit that you are, population groups/races do not exist?
You really should tell big pharma that they are evil eugenicists LOL
No I said it John …..thought I'd get it in before you did...and no of course it isn't fascist per se but I've never met a fascist who didn't at some stage expound it's virtues
So Dalton and Darwin were ALWAYS right then ?? (which Dalton by the way? I shall assume the
the physicist) who after all are we mere mortals to question them
You assume a lot....the only one near the mark is that the big pharmaceutical companies are evil I doubt however that even they dare move towards eugenics.

Quote by john469
Could I be so bold as to suggest that sub-saharan africans have a few more obstacles to overcome than far east asians....genetics doesn't answer everything circumstance and nurture play a large part in realising potential

You could, but you would be wrong... again.
Blacks are outperformed by not only Far East Asians, they are also beaten out by Sub continental Indians, Jews and other races, of which have faced 'obstacles'.
Not only that, but Sub Saharan blacks are out performed by African Americans.
I mention this, on account that said African Americans possess approx 20% white genes in their racial make up. The same holding true for upper caste Indians, vis a vis, the way they outperform lower caste groups.
Oh and, to nail your absurd contention, twin studies along with bi racial adoption studies, show culture plays either no part or a minority part when compared with racial/genetic background.

What studies John ?? point me in the right direction.....they couldn't possibly be the awful old culturally biased ones by any chance could they? Absolutely no chance that the factor in one group outperforming another could have anything to do with trivialities like diet or even access to education you know those silly little things that get in the way of I.Q. Tests.....what utter bollocks you know it and I know it
And as I recall from my psychology classes twin studies are very rarely conclusive about anything.....difficult to set up any sort of control group don't you know

14 Mar 2011

where is my cup of tee? :lol

14 Mar 2011

Quote by john469

Knowing how to design something and being able to build it are I promise you a long way from being the same thing

I'll leave you to your tribesman bulding airplanes from twigs and leaves.
Sorry forgot one......I think if our far less intelligent forbears could figure out how to smelt I could probably come up with a reasonable furnace old boy....or would you rather I went for crucible steel?? Bessemer converter .....I'm from Sheffield FFS steel is in my fucking blood

14 Mar 2011

I think there are many contributing factors to ones position on the social ladder besides IQ.
Upbringing, social standing of parents, quality of school, location , to name a few.
I have an above average IQ and though I have a job which requires some degree of intelligence its certainly not the best paid of jobs. Though at one point in my life I had high earnings potential it came at the expense of a family life and a social life so I chose the latter.

14 Mar 2011

Does having a high IQ require that we have to be rude to others? :sad:
In my experience of life, I have found, that many people with high IQ's have very poor social skills and could not make a mess. IQ test,s may measure one form of intellect but only there academic capability's. In my view there are many other forms of intelligence.
This is very rare, but I mostly agree with Stag,s on this occasion
Of coarse this is only the view of a country ficco lol