Categories
Options
Fifty Shades of Grey Voters. Sunak’s punishing polling – politicalbetting.com
Fifty Shades of Grey Voters. Sunak’s punishing polling – politicalbetting.com
Do you think the triple lock for all pensioners should or should not be maintained at the current time?All BritonsShould: 66%Should not: 11%18-24yr oldsShould: 44%Should not: 15%65+yr oldsShould: 90%Should not: 5%https://t.co/GO9ueKmTCJ pic.twitter.com/nkMeOLLKJq
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Edit: but did the question specify the State Pension?
Better questions would be:
How much should taxes rise to maintain triple lock pensions ?
Which spending cuts should happen to maintain triple lock pensions ?
I wonder if any politician will brave enough to suggest nationalising all private pensions and using the gained assets to have a much bigger state pension?
2. On benefits scroungers only.
Between these two tiny groups, the well-meaning 95% can surely enjoy ever-longer periods of their lives when they don't work, in tandem with growing take-home incomes in their pockets while they do work.
We had a discussion on the previous thread on the dangers of direct democracy. People vote for cutting taxes and boosting spending then fail to understand why the numbers don't add up.
A more interesting question would be balanced.
Do you think tuition fees should be put up to maintain the triple lock?
Do you think teachers/nurses/doctors pay should be cut to maintain the triple lock?
Do you think you (not others) should pay more taxes to maintain the triple lock.
Simply asking about the pro without the con is utterly meaningless unless people have studied the issue and instinctively understand the cons.
I imagine much of the financial system would collapse.
And I'm mildly amused you think it would be illegal. Leaving aside the state of most private pensions which will probably ultimately have to be lifeboated anyway, the concept of Parliamentary sovereignty means they can actually pass a law to make anything legal.
The nationalisation of the railways in 1948 was, for example, done without even remotely adequate compensation (contrary to the lies of Dalton and Wolmar) but it was definitely legal.
I think you mean it would be against the right to property which is different. But if you still got a pension, even a much lower one, I think you'd be hard pressed to make that argument stick.
I'm not saying it would be a good idea, incidentally. But I'm sure it will be proposed at some point. And to be fair, it may as I note above happen to many pensions by default anyway.
Merging NI (both parts) and the Graduate Tax into Income Tax so that private pensions were taxed at the same rate as earned income would be entirely reasonable.
Starting with stripping pensions from every single twattish civil servant and politician who attended a lockdown party.
The point of nationalisation is that you believe that whatever it is would be better run from within the public sector. You don't get "free" assets from it as property rights are a protected human right.
A more pertinent question is perhaps to ask why working age benefits are linked to the inflation, and not to average earnings which would be more sensible.
Perun: Russian Defence Production 2023.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctrtAwT2sgs
If it continues then it is inevitable the retirement age will rocket
Re the David Ignatius column in the WP, it is not what he said which is why it is causing a stir - that has been said multiple times - it is who he is. Ignatius is probably the closest in the journalist world to the Democrat top funders and establishment as can be. If he wrote about it in the WP, that is significant.
Perun 20230917: "Russian Defence Production 2023 - Can Russia keep up with equipment attrition in Ukraine?", YouTube, 70 mins, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctrtAwT2sgs
I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
Next we'll be hearing that OFSTED have denied multiple breaches of safeguarding.
And for the record, I am quite happy to pay NI from my pension. Better still would be a roll up into tax. The only problem is who would pay the employers NI?
It does mean that we need to think about what winding down, decade before retirement, jobs look like. In education, I suspect the template is all the doddery physicists who come in to teach the A Level class because there's literally nobody else who can do it.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/jason-roy-axed-from-world-cup-squad-harry-brook-included-1398911
It’s as tricky for Labour as it is for the Tories though. An economically unsustainable idea (part of the Pandora’s Box unleashed on the national by Cameron) that is very hard to go back on.
Looking at the difference between my mum, aged 70 but 100% sharp mind and still full of ambition and energy because she’s never really retired - vs my stepmum who is actually a few years younger but completely retired at 60 and spends her days watching terrible TV, drinking wine, feeling depressed and not knowing what day it is; I’ve no doubt that I want to stay socially and economically productive for as long as I’m useful.
Just don't mention the second bit in the manifesto!
However hopeless she was as PM, we do owe her a debt of gratitude for that.
Of course, if my health makes working difficult that is an entirely different matter.
I suspect however the reason there isn't is to encourage more rich people to pump money into pensions to keep them solvent. If they don't get a generous return via tax they would go elsewhere.
*well, when done right, which is a different problem.
One day I will, DV, sit on a chair there after lunch, fall asleep, never wake up and my sending off will involve flowers picked from the garden.
Anyway that's the dream. But finding such a cabin or even someone to build one is surprisingly hard. But recently I got into correspondence with a carpenter who makes such cabins - but dammit - he is in the US and his cabins are gorgeous.
How infuriating. Still chit-chatting with a carpenter about roofs and verandahs and types of wood is a huge amount of fun.
What I need is a sort of local Amish community so we could have a Witness-style barn raising. I'd make the lemonade.
Completely off topic of course but if you learn that I've run away with a hunky carpenter to some remote woods somewhere you'll know why .....
Pensions: untaxed going in; taxed coming out. ISAs are the opposite. Changing pensions to remove tax relief on contributions but, in return, not taxing pension payments would keep the incentive to contribute while allowing governments to take more money now and worry about a drop in the tax take in a generation's time when their successors or opponents are in office.
Give everyone a state pension of £66,000 a year.
But, it's only payable after the death of the recipient, for one year only.
I haven't read the papers today, but have little doubt that it's a matter of time before Russell Brand is described as a "disgraced former national treasure" simply because he was a somewhat ubiquitous entertainer at one point.
Health is an issue, but when you’ve a reason to stay fit and healthy you’re more likely to stay fit and healthy. I realise that’s a massive generalisation of course and discounts all manner of reasons why work could be difficult. But as a general principle I think it makes sense.
I’d sooner money get spent on productive stuff like good infrastructure or schools that aren’t falling down than an age-locked UBI.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-66802351
This is why Putin is such an idiot. He will happily take the ideological lessons of Nazi Germany without learning the organisational lessons. All he needs is a good project manager he too could be well on his way to a destiny consisting of a can of petrol and a book of matches.
None of the ones I've seen are really what I'm looking for.
“In 2015 readers of Prospect magazine voted Russell Brand the fourth most significant thinker in the world, behind Thomas Piketty, Yanis Varoufakis and Naomi Klein.”
https://x.com/alwynturner/status/1703396822901731361?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
You might as well field a team of traffic cones.
The rugby world cup is fucking rubbish.
"Dismissed by his opponents as a clownish opportunist, Brand is nevertheless the most charismatic figure on Britain’s populist left"
Are there no mismatches in the football World Cup?
“They are experts, they do know best”, is how his family reassured him.
But the game grew and the skills widened and now the football World Cup in its final tournament is ultra competitive at every level, with almost zero obvious wins
The time we really need to worry is once such movements grasp that fact.
There are lots of off the shelf products but not quite what's needed for an exposed windy spot. I loved the whole process of building the house though so I think at some level I just want to go through it again but on a smaller scale.
As for the football world cup, they're expanding it to 48 teams next iteration. Bound to be worse mismatches in there. I'm sure you'll hear me complain about that too, when the time comes.
Before you know it, there will be an eighteen month list, after which they will post you a cyanide capsule which actually turns out to be an Extra Strong Mint with the label scribbled out.
Tbf I don’t think I’ve read Prospect since about 2007 - maybe just realised that it was pretty boring.
Incidentally also I’d forgotten that funny period of Varoufakis-mania. What an odd time that was.
Don’t forget upsets happen. Wales can testify to that, and SA against Japan.
A couple of heavy defeats in a group game does not make the World Cup rubbish.