Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
Surely the shareholders of the company should get wiped out first? After all, they benefited from unsustainable promises to hire employees more cheaply.
Universities don't have shareholders. It's why they're not in the analysis.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
That would depend surely on how such a situation was managed? There's no issued of this kind that can't be solved by new legislation.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Yes, the last part is what we want to figure out. How many people are there who have massive DB pension "assets" that are currently unfunded and what would it take to fully fund them - how big is the cash call going to be and when will it be made, broken down by sector and company.
I dont think the USS scheme is state backed - It is of course collectively backed by all its university members.Interestingly though the Mineworkers pension scheme and British coal superanuation scheme (for pit bosses) are both state backed (even when it is clear they are very well funded )
Being widely reported that KT will be holding charm offensive meetings at Nos 10 & 11 all week. Also that the rebels will simply force all of the u-turns needed to try and make the government look less sociopathic.
The problem remains that the Truss brand is destroyed. That she is to be held hostage by her own MPs is not a positive thing to sell to the electorate. It now seems clear that they will raise UC in line with inflation but they *wanted* to cut it. They aren't abolishing 45p but they *wanted* to. And once this is inevitably thrown out they won't be fracking or housebuilding in your local park but they *wanted* to.
It is a matter of time before Tory backbenchers accept this. U-turns are not enough. Their government wanted to fuck over the voters. Said voters will not say "ah well, at least they failed, and that Starmer bloke took the knee so I'll vote Tory".
She will go. Lets see how well the charmless offensive works - still time for her to go this year if she fucks up again in that clueless "you are all fools" manner of hers.
It is not just MPs holding LizT hostage, but also the guardians of Financial Orthodoxy, castigated for decades of low growth by Team Truss — the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury was sacked; the Bank of England ignored; the OBR sidelined by rebranding Kwasi's budget a financial statement. A week later, the Bank of England has intervened to rescue the gilts market and bail out the pensions industry; the OBR is pictured with LizT and Kwasi; the Treasury is fully engaged in drawing up the next budget, which has been brought forward.
The problem of low growth is the one thing she's been right about. Unfortunately she never had the first clue about what a solution might look like.
Yes, that is the irony. Liz Truss is right that we need growth, rather than trying either to cut or to tax our way to prosperity. Trouble is that if she has a plan for growth, she's not divulged it to anyone, which is what discombobulated the City. Rishi did have a plan, which LizT has abandoned. Labour might have a plan but I'm not holding my breath.
My impression is that she understands little about economics and has relied on Kwasi to tell her what to do and say.
Kwasi does understand, but is wedded to ideas that are suspect in theory and have never been seen to work in the past.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
That would depend surely on how such a situation was managed? There's no issued of this kind that can't be solved by new legislation.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
Surely the shareholders of the company should get wiped out first? After all, they benefited from unsustainable promises to hire employees more cheaply.
Universities don't have shareholders. It's why they're not in the analysis.
They do however have trusts owning them - in many cases, very rich ones.
If we are talking defined benefit pensions I always thought the risk was that the scheme becomes orphaned (ie the parent company goes belly up) before you start to receive the benefits.
The pensioners receiving their pension keep on receiving the money but because that required most of the money in the fund those who weren’t claiming from the scheme are the ones to lose out and left with just what remains.
You have to ask though - where the hell are these promised anti-missile batteries? Kyiv, Odessa, Cherniv, Kharkiv, Lviv - they at a minimum should all have them. Stopping Russian terror attacks with missiles can hardly be described as giving Ukraine an offensive capability.
As I understand it there aren't many globally and most are already deployed with US allies under pre-existing arrangements.
iirc Israel refused to let America give Ukraine jointly-designed Iron Dome technology (it is not just the Saudis amongst America's erstwhile Middle East allies trying to keep Russia onside) and most of Nato has no spares.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
Surely the shareholders of the company should get wiped out first? After all, they benefited from unsustainable promises to hire employees more cheaply.
Universities don't have shareholders. It's why they're not in the analysis.
The USS scheme - IIRC - is one of the better managed DB schemes.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Yes, the last part is what we want to figure out. How many people are there who have massive DB pension "assets" that are currently unfunded and what would it take to fully fund them - how big is the cash call going to be and when will it be made, broken down by sector and company.
I dont think the USS scheme is state backed - It is of course collectively backed by all its university members.Interestingly though the Mineworkers pension scheme and British coal superanuation scheme (for pit bosses) are both state backed (even when it is clear they are very well funded )
Come on, everything seems to be state backed these days in extremis.
So we’re now into the V2 rocket stage of the war then. Well over a thousand were lobbed at London after September 1944, as Hitler was in the process of losing.
Good morning
As a baby in Manchester my mother, father, sister and I hid under a steel table as one of Hitler's flying bombs engine stopped above our house and fell nearby killing 6 of our neighbours
I would just comment that I want Truss gone but expect she may survive to next spring but who knows with this utterly divided conservative
If we are talking defined benefit pensions I always thought the risk was that the scheme becomes orphaned (ie the parent company goes belly up) before you start to receive the benefits.
The pensioners receiving their pension keep on receiving the money but because that required most of the money in the fund those who weren’t claiming from the scheme are the ones to lose out and left with just what remains.
The pension protection scheme will pay out 90% of pension rights in this event to pensioners and deferred pensioners . My wife was in such a situation when her company collapsed .To be clear though the pension protection scheme is not state backed but a bit like the travel agents scheme if a travel agent goes bust and holidaymakers get reimbursed
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
Being widely reported that KT will be holding charm offensive meetings at Nos 10 & 11 all week. Also that the rebels will simply force all of the u-turns needed to try and make the government look less sociopathic.
The problem remains that the Truss brand is destroyed. That she is to be held hostage by her own MPs is not a positive thing to sell to the electorate. It now seems clear that they will raise UC in line with inflation but they *wanted* to cut it. They aren't abolishing 45p but they *wanted* to. And once this is inevitably thrown out they won't be fracking or housebuilding in your local park but they *wanted* to.
It is a matter of time before Tory backbenchers accept this. U-turns are not enough. Their government wanted to fuck over the voters. Said voters will not say "ah well, at least they failed, and that Starmer bloke took the knee so I'll vote Tory".
She will go. Lets see how well the charmless offensive works - still time for her to go this year if she fucks up again in that clueless "you are all fools" manner of hers.
It is not just MPs holding LizT hostage, but also the guardians of Financial Orthodoxy, castigated for decades of low growth by Team Truss — the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury was sacked; the Bank of England ignored; the OBR sidelined by rebranding Kwasi's budget a financial statement. A week later, the Bank of England has intervened to rescue the gilts market and bail out the pensions industry; the OBR is pictured with LizT and Kwasi; the Treasury is fully engaged in drawing up the next budget, which has been brought forward.
The problem of low growth is the one thing she's been right about. Unfortunately she never had the first clue about what a solution might look like.
Yes, that is the irony. Liz Truss is right that we need growth, rather than trying either to cut or to tax our way to prosperity. Trouble is that if she has a plan for growth, she's not divulged it to anyone, which is what discombobulated the City. Rishi did have a plan, which LizT has abandoned. Labour might have a plan but I'm not holding my breath.
My impression is that she understands little about economics and has relied on Kwasi to tell her what to do and say.
Kwasi does understand, but is wedded to ideas that are suspect in theory and have never been seen to work in the past.
Yes, and I think we saw that in the leadership campaign when Truss ditched regional pay and denied raised interest rates. To employ an elderly metaphor, Kwasi is Sir Keith Joseph to LizT's Margaret Thatcher.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Yes, the last part is what we want to figure out. How many people are there who have massive DB pension "assets" that are currently unfunded and what would it take to fully fund them - how big is the cash call going to be and when will it be made, broken down by sector and company.
I dont think the USS scheme is state backed - It is of course collectively backed by all its university members.Interestingly though the Mineworkers pension scheme and British coal superanuation scheme (for pit bosses) are both state backed (even when it is clear they are very well funded )
Come on, everything seems to be state backed these days in extremis.
well they are not legally state backed is all i can say(except the mineworkers one which had to pay a big fee to be ). So i would not rely on it - as the mineworkers scheme is a closed one and its members are starting to die off in large numbers , it will end up with billions in assets and no members ! - Is the last livign member then technically a billionaire?
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Yes, the last part is what we want to figure out. How many people are there who have massive DB pension "assets" that are currently unfunded and what would it take to fully fund them - how big is the cash call going to be and when will it be made, broken down by sector and company.
I dont think the USS scheme is state backed - It is of course collectively backed by all its university members.Interestingly though the Mineworkers pension scheme and British coal superanuation scheme (for pit bosses) are both state backed (even when it is clear they are very well funded )
Come on, everything seems to be state backed these days in extremis.
Doesn't the Pension Protection Fund kick in? 90% payout if the scheme fails, increases capped at 2.5%
Being widely reported that KT will be holding charm offensive meetings at Nos 10 & 11 all week. Also that the rebels will simply force all of the u-turns needed to try and make the government look less sociopathic.
The problem remains that the Truss brand is destroyed. That she is to be held hostage by her own MPs is not a positive thing to sell to the electorate. It now seems clear that they will raise UC in line with inflation but they *wanted* to cut it. They aren't abolishing 45p but they *wanted* to. And once this is inevitably thrown out they won't be fracking or housebuilding in your local park but they *wanted* to.
It is a matter of time before Tory backbenchers accept this. U-turns are not enough. Their government wanted to fuck over the voters. Said voters will not say "ah well, at least they failed, and that Starmer bloke took the knee so I'll vote Tory".
She will go. Lets see how well the charmless offensive works - still time for her to go this year if she fucks up again in that clueless "you are all fools" manner of hers.
It is not just MPs holding LizT hostage, but also the guardians of Financial Orthodoxy, castigated for decades of low growth by Team Truss — the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury was sacked; the Bank of England ignored; the OBR sidelined by rebranding Kwasi's budget a financial statement. A week later, the Bank of England has intervened to rescue the gilts market and bail out the pensions industry; the OBR is pictured with LizT and Kwasi; the Treasury is fully engaged in drawing up the next budget, which has been brought forward.
The problem of low growth is the one thing she's been right about. Unfortunately she never had the first clue about what a solution might look like.
Yes, that is the irony. Liz Truss is right that we need growth, rather than trying either to cut or to tax our way to prosperity. Trouble is that if she has a plan for growth, she's not divulged it to anyone, which is what discombobulated the City. Rishi did have a plan, which LizT has abandoned. Labour might have a plan but I'm not holding my breath.
My impression is that she understands little about economics and has relied on Kwasi to tell her what to do and say.
Kwasi does understand, but is wedded to ideas that are suspect in theory and have never been seen to work in the past.
Yes, and I think we saw that in the leadership campaign when Truss ditched regional pay and denied raised interest rates. To employ an elderly metaphor, Kwasi is Sir Keith Joseph to LizT's Margaret Thatcher.
Get what you're saying, John, though I felt the tremble there as two deceased politicians rotated in their graves.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Yes, the last part is what we want to figure out. How many people are there who have massive DB pension "assets" that are currently unfunded and what would it take to fully fund them - how big is the cash call going to be and when will it be made, broken down by sector and company.
I dont think the USS scheme is state backed - It is of course collectively backed by all its university members.Interestingly though the Mineworkers pension scheme and British coal superanuation scheme (for pit bosses) are both state backed (even when it is clear they are very well funded )
Come on, everything seems to be state backed these days in extremis.
well they are not legally state backed is all i can say(except the mineworkers one which had to pay a big fee to be ). So i would not rely on it -
IIRC (and my knowledge is twenty years out of date on this), but Cinvest/Cinven were actually terrific pension asset managers.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
Surely the shareholders of the company should get wiped out first? After all, they benefited from unsustainable promises to hire employees more cheaply.
Universities don't have shareholders. It's why they're not in the analysis.
The USS scheme - IIRC - is one of the better managed DB schemes.
Then that's a truly damning indictment of either the management of other schemes, or the management of universities, given the mess they're in right now.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Yes, the last part is what we want to figure out. How many people are there who have massive DB pension "assets" that are currently unfunded and what would it take to fully fund them - how big is the cash call going to be and when will it be made, broken down by sector and company.
I dont think the USS scheme is state backed - It is of course collectively backed by all its university members.Interestingly though the Mineworkers pension scheme and British coal superanuation scheme (for pit bosses) are both state backed (even when it is clear they are very well funded )
Come on, everything seems to be state backed these days in extremis.
Doesn't the Pension Protection Fund kick in? 90% payout if the scheme fails.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
Watched a very silly film the other day where someone runs a whole stable of professional assassins with a generous pension scheme. Guess what assignment the junior members are given when an older employee is approaching 50?
If we are talking defined benefit pensions I always thought the risk was that the scheme becomes orphaned (ie the parent company goes belly up) before you start to receive the benefits.
The pensioners receiving their pension keep on receiving the money but because that required most of the money in the fund those who weren’t claiming from the scheme are the ones to lose out and left with just what remains.
The pension protection scheme will pay out 90% of pension rights in this event to pensioners and deferred pensioners . My wife was in such a situation when her company collapsed .To be clear though the pension protection scheme is not state backed but a bit like the travel agents scheme if a travel agent goes bust and holidaymakers get reimbursed
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
we could compromise. People are only allowed to object to new solar farms if they agree to put the panels on their houses instead.
If we are talking defined benefit pensions I always thought the risk was that the scheme becomes orphaned (ie the parent company goes belly up) before you start to receive the benefits.
The pensioners receiving their pension keep on receiving the money but because that required most of the money in the fund those who weren’t claiming from the scheme are the ones to lose out and left with just what remains.
The pension protection scheme will pay out 90% of pension rights in this event to pensioners and deferred pensioners . My wife was in such a situation when her company collapsed .To be clear though the pension protection scheme is not state backed but a bit like the travel agents scheme if a travel agent goes bust and holidaymakers get reimbursed
Rather ironic given your PB ID ;-)
why? the pension protection scheme is not state run or backed it is a collective of DB schemes like ABTA for travel agents.Anyway should say ex-wife!
Good to see Labour launching a full on attack on Nicola Sturgeon this morning
Hopefully Starmer and labour will continue their progress in Scotland
The trouble is Scotland has been split in two by the referendum so Labour are fishing in only 50% of the voter base (as are the SNP, but they have a near monopoly on their half).
Just like Brexit did to Labour after 2016. When one party is the standard bearer of an identity politics cause and the other side is split, it’s party time for the identity politics people.
Labour should go proper devo max, put it in their manifesto, and then they can attack the SNP with greater ease.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
So we’re now into the V2 rocket stage of the war then. Well over a thousand were lobbed at London after September 1944, as Hitler was in the process of losing.
Good morning
As a baby in Manchester my mother, father, sister and I hid under a steel table as one of Hitler's flying bombs engine stopped above our house and fell nearby killing 6 of our neighbours
I would just comment that I want Truss gone but expect she may survive to next spring but who knows with this utterly divided conservative
Morning all! I think I've told the story before about the doodlebug which stopped above my school in 1944. I don't think I've ever seen teachers move so fast as when they got us all into the shelters!
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
Only if it’s a final pension scheme, most are now average earnings..
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
we could compromise. People are only allowed to object to new solar farms if they agree to put the panels on their houses instead.
Win/win.
Nah, solar farms are much more efficient and can be hooked up to energy storage facilities. People who object should be fired out of a space canon.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
You can barely see a lot of solar farms from nearby due to screening, and the visual impact from far away is negligible - oh look, that field is a dark colour rather than yellow or green.
I grant I'm already opposed to nimbys but the ones who complain about solar farms are particularly histrionic. They'll also insist land is better quality than experts say, and that the temporary impact of construction means it cannot be accepted.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
Only if it’s a final pension scheme, most are now average earnings..
But the accrued cost that's coming due is the people retiring on final salary schemes.
Can someone send a set of membership forms round to 10 Downing Street?
Ta, The Anti-Growth Coalition x
It is clear now that Truss has a set of bonkers ideas in her head that have just become totally out of proportion bees in her bonnet that have to be done no matter how stupid or unpopular. They've probably been buzzing in her head for years.
Also just a point about nuclear strikes. The bridge attack would have been a perfect excuse for Putin to use them. He hasn't done so. He has launched conventional missiles at Ukrainian cities. He is constrained by some influences currently.
There has been a dialling back again in terms of the comments coming out of Moscow and Washington. It certainly doesn’t look like any such action is imminent. We are probably not quite at the moment of maximum danger yet though: I think the only time when Putin can really choose to go nuclear (because afterwards what does he have left?) is when he is given the stark choice that there is no path to victory and he either needs to withdraw or up the stakes. Even then he’s got to get it past the other officials in the Russian government.
I dont think that message has been delivered to him yet and I think he will still be hoping the mobilisation could work.
Good to see Labour launching a full on attack on Nicola Sturgeon this morning
Hopefully Starmer and labour will continue their progress in Scotland
The solution to Scotland's problems is not independence. It would solve a few problems and create many many more, some of which we can map and others we can't.
The problem that Labour will inherit is that the state is broken. Democratic mandates no longer seem to matter, the Other Place is stuffed full of cronies and donors and is a laughable anachronism, the voting system for Westminster is a joke, England has a huge democratic gap with no parliament, the NI Assembly is held ransom by its own voters, and both Wales and Scotland are unhappy with their own settlements.
A fresh constitution that sorts all of these will happen eventually, hopefully before the UK falls apart completely. Problem is that parts of the media will demand a referendum and then tell people that FPTP is the only fair system. As the 4m who voted for Farage found out...
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
we could compromise. People are only allowed to object to new solar farms if they agree to put the panels on their houses instead.
Win/win.
I don’t think this is even as sensible as pandering to nimbys. It’s “anti-woke” virtue signalling, solar power being one of those things that woke lefties like so must therefore be bad.
Can someone send a set of membership forms round to 10 Downing Street?
Ta, The Anti-Growth Coalition x
It is clear now that Truss has a set of bonkers ideas in her head that have just become totally out of proportion bees in her bonnet that have to be done no matter how stupid or unpopular. They've probably been buzzing in her head for years.
Good to see Labour launching a full on attack on Nicola Sturgeon this morning
Hopefully Starmer and labour will continue their progress in Scotland
The trouble is Scotland has been split in two by the referendum so Labour are fishing in only 50% of the voter base (as are the SNP, but they have a near monopoly on their half).
Just like Brexit did to Labour after 2016. When one party is the standard bearer of an identity politics cause and the other side is split, it’s party time for the identity politics people.
Labour should go proper devo max, put it in their manifesto, and then they can attack the SNP with greater ease.
It is however true that many vote SNP but do not want independence
Indeed that is the case for most of our Scottish family and friends
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
Surely the shareholders of the company should get wiped out first? After all, they benefited from unsustainable promises to hire employees more cheaply.
Universities don't have shareholders. It's why they're not in the analysis.
The USS scheme - IIRC - is one of the better managed DB schemes.
Then that's a truly damning indictment of either the management of other schemes, or the management of universities, given the mess they're in right now.
Or both, of course.
Wrt to USS, a believe at least one Cambridge college has pulled out in recent years, possibly because of the endowment issue mentioned.
Not sure USS is in a total mess. It has had valuations that seem to show liabilities more than long term assets but there has been considerable controversy over the nature of these valuations. Also unlike most DB's schemes it is still open to new staff (although there is a limit on salary that can be DBed and then it becomes DC iirc).
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Now that's interesting. Are they state backed? Because AIUI the UCU have been told that they're not.
Not explicitly, yet there is expectation of a bail out should the fund sink.
Fair enough, if you feel that puts it outside the terms of reference. Building on what @rottenborough said certainly they will have some tough decisions to make when (repeat when) it does implode.
Although I wonder if a more likely scenario is that the older universities will be stripped of their endowments to meet the gap.
Not that that would be popular with Oxbridge!
I expect beneficiaries will take a ~30% haircut in return for a state bailout. It will be presented as "it's this or no pension".
And many lawyers will get very rich as a result...
Surely the shareholders of the company should get wiped out first? After all, they benefited from unsustainable promises to hire employees more cheaply.
Universities don't have shareholders. It's why they're not in the analysis.
The USS scheme - IIRC - is one of the better managed DB schemes.
Then that's a truly damning indictment of either the management of other schemes, or the management of universities, given the mess they're in right now.
Or both, of course.
Wrt to USS, a believe at least one Cambridge college has pulled out in recent years, possibly because of the endowment issue mentioned.
Not sure USS is in a total mess. It has had valuations that seem to show liabilities more than long term assets but there has been considerable controversy over the nature of these valuations. Also unlike most DB's schemes it is still open to new staff (although there is a limit on salary that can be DBed and then it becomes DC iirc).
yes i think it was Trinity? - To pull out though you have to pay a big exit fee
If we are talking defined benefit pensions I always thought the risk was that the scheme becomes orphaned (ie the parent company goes belly up) before you start to receive the benefits.
The pensioners receiving their pension keep on receiving the money but because that required most of the money in the fund those who weren’t claiming from the scheme are the ones to lose out and left with just what remains.
The pension protection scheme will pay out 90% of pension rights in this event to pensioners and deferred pensioners . My wife was in such a situation when her company collapsed .To be clear though the pension protection scheme is not state backed but a bit like the travel agents scheme if a travel agent goes bust and holidaymakers get reimbursed
Rather ironic given your PB ID ;-)
why? the pension protection scheme is not state run or backed it is a collective of DB schemes like ABTA for travel agents.Anyway should say ex-wife!
"PPF is a public corporation of the Department for Work and Pensions."
I see Truss is busy chasing away the last few Conservative voters.
Evidently she feels a 30 point Labour lead is insufficient challenge.
Don't worry, things will be back to normal in a few months' time.
The Conservatives seem to be wanting to test the theory. And doubtless it will come back some but Labour has a large polling cushion for a majority. Also they've recovered in Scotland enough to make the English and Welsh neccessary totals lower than they were.
On the university pensions question... the post92 unis are part of government backed TPS. Pre92 part of multiemployer private USS. Regulatory pressures encourage latter to be recklessly prudent by planning for all but 1 uni to go bust and still pay beneficiaries. Strike is over trustees' lack of transparency and good faith in when to act on valuations, demonstrated by their choice to use a mid pandemic valuation that has generated a large surplus, which they now wish to use for an employer contribution holiday. Discontent is sense of uni bosses cheating beneficiaries, more than the particular devaluation in benefits I think.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
You can barely see a lot of solar farms from nearby due to screening, and the visual impact from far away is negligible - oh look, that field is a dark colour rather than yellow or green.
I grant I'm already opposed to nimbys but the ones who complain about solar farms are particularly histrionic. They'll also insist land is better quality than experts say, and that the temporary impact of construction means it cannot be accepted.
Infuriating.
Yes and no. If fields look like they slope gently south and are full of grass, they probably do and are. I saw the claim that top grade land is excluded from solar but I don't believe it. I imagine you get to that result by reserving the top grades for arable as opposed to pasture.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
The move to career average calculations in many DB schemes (such as they survive) should deal with this?
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
I would be astonished if the farming lobby were against it given it must be just about the most profitable use they could make of their land right now.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
I would be astonished if the farming lobby were against it given it must be just about the most profitable use they could make of their land right now.
Quite. And the workload consists of ensuring the sun rises in the morning, much less faff than messing about with cattle.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
The move to career average calculations in many DB schemes (such as they survive) should deal with this?
Not if the FTSE never gets over 7,500 again it won't.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Given most new universities are at least 30 years old and older as polys they also will have lots of pension liabilities. Without the endowments of older universities
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
Many schemes use average salary now instead of final salary. And in your example, the earleier two pensions may be index-linked.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
There's another overlay: the big DB schemes have lots of investments. Where are they invested? Are they mostly in UK long-dated bonds chasing yield (bad), or do they have lots of USD denominated assets (good).
Yeah they're on this too. Specifically I want to know how big the funding shortfall is per company vs their current equity value. My gut feeling is that it's going to look absolutely terrible for some companies, especially in our once great engineering sector.
I did a little project on this many, many moons ago (2003?), and IIRC, pension schemes are run off a couple of assumptions:
- employee payrises - portfolio returns - longevity of employees
It is worth remembering that if someone leaves at age 35 on £35k a year, accruing 15 years of benefits, that is massively better than if they leave at 50 on £60k a year, having accrued 30 years of benefits.
The worst of your liabilities come from the 20% of employees who spend a lot of time with you.
Does this not just aggregate itself out, with some workers having a dozen small pensions over a portfolio career?
OK. I need to go to bed.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
Quite. My father retired from the police as an acting Superintendent (when that was a thing). His final salary was fixed by those last few months. He did rather well out of it. Still going strong at 83 after retiring at 57.
Good to see Labour launching a full on attack on Nicola Sturgeon this morning
Hopefully Starmer and labour will continue their progress in Scotland
The trouble is Scotland has been split in two by the referendum so Labour are fishing in only 50% of the voter base (as are the SNP, but they have a near monopoly on their half).
Just like Brexit did to Labour after 2016. When one party is the standard bearer of an identity politics cause and the other side is split, it’s party time for the identity politics people.
Labour should go proper devo max, put it in their manifesto, and then they can attack the SNP with greater ease.
While not a bad idea in itself, there is no way Scotland can have devomax without coming to some solution over devolution to England as well. It is ludicrous that a stuffed up popinjay like Ian Blackwell* can vote on education in England and do nothing about Scotland, while we can do nothing to vote him out.
A more logical commitment would be to a full constitutional convention, possibly chaired by the King himself, to sort out the whole bloody mess and come up with a proper system.
This could also cover the House of Lords, voting reform and local government in England.
*to be fair, this subset of politicians is not confined to the SNP!
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Blaming Truss and Kwarteng for pension issues is shooting the messenger. They might have done us a favour in the long run by exposing it now.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Blaming Truss and Kwarteng for pension issues is shooting the messenger. They might have done us a favour in the long run by exposing it now.
Yes, we had a guy at my last workplace sounding the alarm over this a few years ago suggesting that UK companies are sitting on a time bomb.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Blaming Truss and Kwarteng for pension issues is shooting the messenger. They might have done us a favour in the long run by exposing it now.
Jeez, you might as well say Putin did us all a favour by exposing Europe's reliance on Russian gas.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Blaming Truss and Kwarteng for pension issues is shooting the messenger. They might have done us a favour in the long run by exposing it now.
Yes, we had a guy at my last workplace sounding the alarm over this a few years ago suggesting that UK companies are sitting on a time bomb.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Given most new universities are at least 30 years old and older as polys they also will have lots of pension liabilities. Without the endowments of older universities
No, Hyufd, they haven't. Because as former government run colleges they are in the government run Teachers' Pension Scheme.
I think probably several of them will be withdrawing and going into their own schemes now due to changes in the costs of the TPS, but they will be starting those from scratch. They're in a much better position than the pre-92 unis.
The ones in the worst mess of course are the non-Russell group unis from before 1992 who can't recruit extra to pay rising costs and at the same time can't fling their pension liabilities on the government. Most Welsh unis, Bath, probably a couple more I can't think of right now are in this boat.
Russians becoming ever more inventive in their excuses:
There were some unconfirmed reports earlier of explosions being heard in Belgorod, which is a Russian city over the border from Ukraine’s Kharkiv region. The RIA Novosti news agency is now reporting that authorities in Belgorod have said the witness account reported by Reuters was the result of “Explosive experts of the Moscow region carrying out the destruction of ammunition at the training ground.”
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
It isn't even that. Farmers need revenue for their land and this is revenue. They aren't putting solar farms on fields that are otherwise producing crops / animals. What this is about is wazzock Tories who dislike "woke" which includes environmentalism which apparently means that despite the VERY real danger of brownouts this winter that we should further restrict our ability to produce power.
I did call them wazzocks didn't I? Complete and total fucking wazzocks. "We want to cut the red tape on planning" / "no no, you famers can't put solar panels up, we need more red tape on planning to stop you making productive use of your land".
Fuckers. And there are still a hardcore intending to vote for them.
Rachel Reeves needs to catch up with the difficult question. Everyone knows there is a crisis and that the Tories have messed up. So badly most Tories don't plan to vote for them.
When you are borrowing £195 billion a year the Labour answer has to be one which is difficult, detailed and won't make everyone happy. Attention is turning to what Labour's policy actually is. This article stating the obvious doesn't help.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
It isn't even that. Farmers need revenue for their land and this is revenue. They aren't putting solar farms on fields that are otherwise producing crops / animals. What this is about is wazzock Tories who dislike "woke" which includes environmentalism which apparently means that despite the VERY real danger of brownouts this winter that we should further restrict our ability to produce power.
I did call them wazzocks didn't I? Complete and total fucking wazzocks. "We want to cut the red tape on planning" / "no no, you famers can't put solar panels up, we need more red tape on planning to stop you making productive use of your land".
Fuckers. And there are still a hardcore intending to vote for them.
On a point of pedantry:
Surely the whole point of wazzocks is that they are *not* fucking?
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Blaming Truss and Kwarteng for pension issues is shooting the messenger. They might have done us a favour in the long run by exposing it now.
Yes, we had a guy at my last workplace sounding the alarm over this a few years ago suggesting that UK companies are sitting on a time bomb.
When there are companies that have more pensioners than staff, and when staff can often now spend more time retired than working, it’s hardly a surprise that the company can eventually be turned upside-down by pension liabilities.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
I would be astonished if the farming lobby were against it given it must be just about the most profitable use they could make of their land right now.
Quite. And the workload consists of ensuring the sun rises in the morning, much less faff than messing about with cattle.
Yes, there's a case for actively promoting solar farms, but for a Conservative government being neutral and letting farmers decide what to do with their own land seems the natural policy. We're not such a tiny country that people who dislike seeing solar farms are literally unable to go anywhere else. We are not self-sufficient in food OR energy, and insisting on growing wheat or rape in a low-production field is the sort of government directive that Tories complain about.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
It isn't even that. Farmers need revenue for their land and this is revenue. They aren't putting solar farms on fields that are otherwise producing crops / animals. What this is about is wazzock Tories who dislike "woke" which includes environmentalism which apparently means that despite the VERY real danger of brownouts this winter that we should further restrict our ability to produce power.
I did call them wazzocks didn't I? Complete and total fucking wazzocks. "We want to cut the red tape on planning" / "no no, you famers can't put solar panels up, we need more red tape on planning to stop you making productive use of your land".
Fuckers. And there are still a hardcore intending to vote for them.
You sound a bit angry and ill-informed. Solar panels are being put on perfectly cracking pasture land. Why do you think it has been counted as farmland for literally millennia if it is incapable of producing crops or animals?
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
I would be astonished if the farming lobby were against it given it must be just about the most profitable use they could make of their land right now.
Quite. And the workload consists of ensuring the sun rises in the morning, much less faff than messing about with cattle.
Solar farms are haven for wildlife though! Provided of course it's small wildlife! Rabbits are okay but not deer!
Mr. Pioneers, not a fan of woke nonsense, but entirely in favour of solar panels. I think you might be accidentally lumping together people whose views you dislike.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Blaming Truss and Kwarteng for pension issues is shooting the messenger. They might have done us a favour in the long run by exposing it now.
Jeez, you might as well say Putin did us all a favour by exposing Europe's reliance on Russian gas.
That's a stupid comparison.
Everyone knew about Europe's reliance on Russian energy - even Trump - and the issue was that they couldn't be trusted. On the other hand most people didn't know about systemic risk in the pension system, and remaining in ignorance wouldn't have made the problem go away.
Russians becoming ever more inventive in their excuses:
There were some unconfirmed reports earlier of explosions being heard in Belgorod, which is a Russian city over the border from Ukraine’s Kharkiv region. The RIA Novosti news agency is now reporting that authorities in Belgorod have said the witness account reported by Reuters was the result of “Explosive experts of the Moscow region carrying out the destruction of ammunition at the training ground.”
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
Nah, those are state backed, will do them in a separate exercise.
Agreed, the USS is (implicitly) state backed, just as the local government scheme is.
Also, it’s not (I think) in quite as bad a state as some are claiming. Treating the USS as if it were a closed DB fund that was forced to dump it’s entire current set of investments into government bonds at a time when bond rates were at 50 year lows is probably not going to give a reasonable picture of the actual situation. This is what appears to have been done for the valuation which was used to justify the recent round of pension changes in the sector.
MaxPB is probably much more familiar with the details of valuing pension funds though.
@DefenceU This morning russian federation - the terrorist state - launched 75 missiles on Ukraine. 41 of them have been shot down. General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces
Good to see Labour launching a full on attack on Nicola Sturgeon this morning
Hopefully Starmer and labour will continue their progress in Scotland
The solution to Scotland's problems is not independence. It would solve a few problems and create many many more, some of which we can map and others we can't.
The problem that Labour will inherit is that the state is broken. Democratic mandates no longer seem to matter, the Other Place is stuffed full of cronies and donors and is a laughable anachronism, the voting system for Westminster is a joke, England has a huge democratic gap with no parliament, the NI Assembly is held ransom by its own voters, and both Wales and Scotland are unhappy with their own settlements.
A fresh constitution that sorts all of these will happen eventually, hopefully before the UK falls apart completely. Problem is that parts of the media will demand a referendum and then tell people that FPTP is the only fair system. As the 4m who voted for Farage found out...
Whilst it's true that the coalition/Tories didn't fix either of those bits in bold in the last 12 years, they are the creation of one ACL Blair (Lab).
Mr. Pioneers, not a fan of woke nonsense, but entirely in favour of solar panels. I think you might be accidentally lumping together people whose views you dislike.
Depends on your definition of "woke". Go on GBeebies and the sillier side of the pro-Truss media and its all the same evil plot against right-thinking society.
Mr. Pioneers, not a fan of woke nonsense, but entirely in favour of solar panels. I think you might be accidentally lumping together people whose views you dislike.
Indeed.
I am what you would probably call 'woke' - certainly a fan of inclusiveness and respect for others, facing up to our history good and bad, etc. etc.
OTOH I am not a fan of solar panels covering acres of land that could be used to produce food.
Further to the discussion on DB pensions the other day I've put a couple of researchers on the task of collating all UK private sector pension funds, deficits, pay out timeframes and number of beneficiaries.
I think over the next 5-7 years legacy UK companies with big DB pension schemes will become uninvestible and the market meltdown triggered by Kwasi is slowly making investors realise that the UK economy is on the path to bankruptcy.
Are you looking at universities as well? I mean, I know it's a grey area as to whether they're state or private but if you ever want to see a shambles, take a good look at the Universities' Superannuation Scheme.
uss is a last man standing scheme - so if i have understood it, that means if uss goes down the entire university sector goes under as well unless they can bail it out.
That's one of the reasons I was asking about it.
There would be a certain irony if the government pension mistakes ended up wrecking the entire Russell Group while leaving post 92 unis (mostly in the TPS) untouched!
Blaming Truss and Kwarteng for pension issues is shooting the messenger. They might have done us a favour in the long run by exposing it now.
Jeez, you might as well say Putin did us all a favour by exposing Europe's reliance on Russian gas.
That's a stupid comparison.
Everyone knew about Europe's reliance on Russian energy - even Trump - and the issue was that they couldn't be trusted. On the other hand most people didn't know about systemic risk in the pension system, and remaining in ignorance wouldn't have made the problem go away.
Mr. Pioneers, not a fan of woke nonsense, but entirely in favour of solar panels. I think you might be accidentally lumping together people whose views you dislike.
Depends on your definition of "woke". Go on GBeebies and the sillier side of the pro-Truss media and its all the same evil plot against right-thinking society.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
It isn't even that. Farmers need revenue for their land and this is revenue. They aren't putting solar farms on fields that are otherwise producing crops / animals. What this is about is wazzock Tories who dislike "woke" which includes environmentalism which apparently means that despite the VERY real danger of brownouts this winter that we should further restrict our ability to produce power.
I did call them wazzocks didn't I? Complete and total fucking wazzocks. "We want to cut the red tape on planning" / "no no, you famers can't put solar panels up, we need more red tape on planning to stop you making productive use of your land".
Fuckers. And there are still a hardcore intending to vote for them.
You sound a bit angry and ill-informed. Solar panels are being put on perfectly cracking pasture land. Why do you think it has been counted as farmland for literally millennia if it is incapable of producing crops or animals?
Remember that farming has become increasingly unviable over recent decades and that process has accelerated as we have replaced EU subsidies with £less. If the cracking pasture land was still capable of generating an income they wouldn't be covering it over.
As for ill-informed, can you at least recognise the gross hypocrisy at play? They want to ban red tape when it comes to fracking and house-building in your park, but add to red tape when it comes to what farmers do on private land when they choose to add much-needed power generating capacity?
The Tories have no interest in cutting red tape. They just want to dictate what happens. Which is red tape.
Good God almighty, what a bunch of fucking spazmos we have reigning over us in ignominy. Notwithstanding the fact that, as is made clear by the linked article, solar tends to go on not particularly productive land, it isn't even as if it renders it totally unusable for agriculture. Solar farms often double as sheep pasture.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
No, I do not think it is Nimbies against solar farms on agricultural land. The Farming Lobby perhaps?
I would be astonished if the farming lobby were against it given it must be just about the most profitable use they could make of their land right now.
Quite. And the workload consists of ensuring the sun rises in the morning, much less faff than messing about with cattle.
Solar farms are haven for wildlife though! Provided of course it's small wildlife! Rabbits are okay but not deer!
Rachel Reeves needs to catch up with the difficult question. Everyone knows there is a crisis and that the Tories have messed up. So badly most Tories don't plan to vote for them.
When you are borrowing £195 billion a year the Labour answer has to be one which is difficult, detailed and won't make everyone happy. Attention is turning to what Labour's policy actually is. This article stating the obvious doesn't help.
Kwarteng's actions have directly stuck 1 - 2% onto debt prices for the next couple of years I think (The perception is worse) and ~ 0.5% long term. It's quite difficult for Gov'ts to influence the markets at all so Labour - yes it has hard decisions but they've been set a very low bar indeed by K & T.
You have to ask though - where the hell are these promised anti-missile batteries? Kyiv, Odessa, Cherniv, Kharkiv, Lviv - they at a minimum should all have them. Stopping Russian terror attacks with missiles can hardly be described as giving Ukraine an offensive capability.
41 of 71 missiles launched today were intercepted according to Ukraine.
Mr. Pioneers, not a fan of woke nonsense, but entirely in favour of solar panels. I think you might be accidentally lumping together people whose views you dislike.
Depends on your definition of "woke". Go on GBeebies and the sillier side of the pro-Truss media and its all the same evil plot against right-thinking society.
Didn't a certain B Johnson spend a decade in a North London townhouse a short taxi ride for his many trips to appear on the BBC? I assume he is the kind of person they are upset about - a *journalist* to boot.
Comments
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1579373371095412736
https://twitter.com/horton_official/status/1579351658056011776
Kwasi does understand, but is wedded to ideas that are suspect in theory and have never been seen to work in the past.
The pensioners receiving their pension keep on receiving the money but because that required most of the money in the fund those who weren’t claiming from the scheme are the ones to lose out and left with just what remains.
As a baby in Manchester my mother, father, sister and I hid under a steel table as one of Hitler's flying bombs engine stopped above our house and fell nearby killing 6 of our neighbours
I would just comment that I want Truss gone but expect she may survive to next spring but who knows with this utterly divided conservative
Only 2 sleeps till PMQs.
*But*.
Imagine two people on final salary pension schemes.
One works for 10 years at three different institutions, earning - in real terms - at departure at £20k, £30k and £40k.
Another works for 30 years at one institution, retiring at £40k.
The second person will get 33% more pension.
Hopefully Starmer and labour will continue their progress in Scotland
https://www.ppf.co.uk
Edit: I see @state_go_away beat me to it.
It doesn't take much imagination to see what's more likely to be behind this. The same as the reason why the Tories practically banned onshore wind years ago. Nimbies wetting their knickers about their precious views and their fucking house prices.
Or both, of course.
Ta, The Anti-Growth Coalition x
Win/win.
Evidently she feels a 30 point Labour lead is insufficient challenge.
Just like Brexit did to Labour after 2016. When one party is the standard bearer of an identity politics cause and the other side is split, it’s party time for the identity politics people.
Labour should go proper devo max, put it in their manifesto, and then they can attack the SNP with greater ease.
I think I've told the story before about the doodlebug which stopped above my school in 1944. I don't think I've ever seen teachers move so fast as when they got us all into the shelters!
I grant I'm already opposed to nimbys but the ones who complain about solar farms are particularly histrionic. They'll also insist land is better quality than experts say, and that the temporary impact of construction means it cannot be accepted.
Infuriating.
I dont think that message has been delivered to him yet and I think he will still be hoping the mobilisation could work.
The problem that Labour will inherit is that the state is broken. Democratic mandates no longer seem to matter, the Other Place is stuffed full of cronies and donors and is a laughable anachronism, the voting system for Westminster is a joke, England has a huge democratic gap with no parliament, the NI Assembly is held ransom by its own voters, and both Wales and Scotland are unhappy with their own settlements.
A fresh constitution that sorts all of these will happen eventually, hopefully before the UK falls apart completely. Problem is that parts of the media will demand a referendum and then tell people that FPTP is the only fair system. As the 4m who voted for Farage found out...
Indeed that is the case for most of our Scottish family and friends
We all know this is a Tory crisis made in Downing Street, paid for by working people.
The govt and all Tory MPs must do the right thing - and abandon this kamikaze budget.
My piece in @DailyMirror
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/national-embarrassment-tories-scrapping-like-28192882
Not sure USS is in a total mess. It has had valuations that seem to show liabilities more than long term assets but there has been considerable controversy over the nature of these valuations. Also unlike most DB's schemes it is still open to new staff (although there is a limit on salary that can be DBed and then it becomes DC iirc).
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/pension-protection-fund
Also they've recovered in Scotland enough to make the English and Welsh neccessary totals lower than they were.
Reports of another wave of 14 Kalibr rockets coming Ukraine’s way from the Black Sea.
https://twitter.com/olliecarroll/status/1579378989206241280
And in your example, the earleier two pensions may be index-linked.
A more logical commitment would be to a full constitutional convention, possibly chaired by the King himself, to sort out the whole bloody mess and come up with a proper system.
This could also cover the House of Lords, voting reform and local government in England.
*to be fair, this subset of politicians is not confined to the SNP!
I think probably several of them will be withdrawing and going into their own schemes now due to changes in the costs of the TPS, but they will be starting those from scratch. They're in a much better position than the pre-92 unis.
The ones in the worst mess of course are the non-Russell group unis from before 1992 who can't recruit extra to pay rising costs and at the same time can't fling their pension liabilities on the government. Most Welsh unis, Bath, probably a couple more I can't think of right now are in this boat.
There were some unconfirmed reports earlier of explosions being heard in Belgorod, which is a Russian city over the border from Ukraine’s Kharkiv region. The RIA Novosti news agency is now reporting that authorities in Belgorod have said the witness account reported by Reuters was the result of “Explosive experts of the Moscow region carrying out the destruction of ammunition at the training ground.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/oct/10/russia-ukraine-war-live-news-putin-russian-security-council-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant-hit-again-latest-updates
I did call them wazzocks didn't I? Complete and total fucking wazzocks. "We want to cut the red tape on planning" / "no no, you famers can't put solar panels up, we need more red tape on planning to stop you making productive use of your land".
Fuckers. And there are still a hardcore intending to vote for them.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2022/10/results-roundup-9-october-2022.html
When you are borrowing £195 billion a year the Labour answer has to be one which is difficult, detailed and won't make everyone happy. Attention is turning to what Labour's policy actually is. This article stating the obvious doesn't help.
Surely the whole point of wazzocks is that they are *not* fucking?
Everyone knew about Europe's reliance on Russian energy - even Trump - and the issue was that they couldn't be trusted. On the other hand most people didn't know about systemic risk in the pension system, and remaining in ignorance wouldn't have made the problem go away.
Also, it’s not (I think) in quite as bad a state as some are claiming. Treating the USS as if it were a closed DB fund that was forced to dump it’s entire current set of investments into government bonds at a time when bond rates were at 50 year lows is probably not going to give a reasonable picture of the actual situation. This is what appears to have been done for the valuation which was used to justify the recent round of pension changes in the sector.
MaxPB is probably much more familiar with the details of valuing pension funds though.
This morning russian federation - the terrorist state - launched 75 missiles on Ukraine. 41 of them have been shot down.
General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1579382837631127557
I am what you would probably call 'woke' - certainly a fan of inclusiveness and respect for others, facing up to our history good and bad, etc. etc.
OTOH I am not a fan of solar panels covering acres of land that could be used to produce food.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/its-worse-than-truss-thinks-the-anti-growth-coalition-goes-beyond-north-london-q5t9tg8nb
As for ill-informed, can you at least recognise the gross hypocrisy at play? They want to ban red tape when it comes to fracking and house-building in your park, but add to red tape when it comes to what farmers do on private land when they choose to add much-needed power generating capacity?
The Tories have no interest in cutting red tape. They just want to dictate what happens. Which is red tape.
That's not bad going!