The Public Sector will bankrupt us!

[papasmurf]

People haven't a clue how high the mortgage rates were in Thatchers tenure we had to live in a bloody caravan and let the house to foreign uni students just so we didn't lose the house and we're supposed to be the well off selfish generation.

I do My wife and I had a 17.5% mortage and a 17.5% bridging loan. (The was somewhat "character building.) 

However inflation was so high the much higher price we got for the house we were selling covered the costs.

[cromwell]

The poorest pensioners have not been hit by anything and are unlikely to be. And many of them have little or no private pension, in many cases not because they were lazy or feckless, but because they were poor workers in an age when few low paying employers offered company pension schemes. And of course many, particularly women, didn't work or only worked part time because that used to be the norm. For suggesting that such people are feckless or lazy, you are succumbing to Daily Mailesque parodies of the truth. Yes a few might have been feckless or lazy but it is not true of most poor pensioners. Those of you who have a substantial private pension are the lucky ones. Outside of the public sector they were not the norm and were mostly unheard of for part time and/or low paid workers.

Besides, private pensions were always a gamble on stocks and shares. Those uncomfortable with relying on that would have been better off finding safer bets. I think a better system would be for the government itself to offer the option of paying into a state scheme with a decent return guaranteed. But that would be too late for current retirees like yourself or those within sight of retirement like me.

Putting words in my mouth I didn't say all were lazy and feckless,those of you who had substantial private pensions,don't make me laugh I was earlier in my working life in a company pension scheme you had to be and of course many companies plundered the money in those schemes didn't they?

I left that company was told to transfer the money to a private one who guess what helped themselves to the funds an appeal against what took place gained miserable recompense and if I live to be 100 I won't see a return on what I paid in the amount I receive each month wouldn't pay anywhere near one weeks food bill.

My wife worked had too so we could buy a house and was robbed of her pension and now because we finally paid the mortgage off we're supposed to be well off and Reeves coming for anything we've got.

People haven't a clue how high the mortgage rates were in Thatchers tenure we had to live in a bloody caravan and let the house to foreign uni students just so we didn't lose the house and we're supposed to be the well off selfish generation.

[srb7677]

Massive assumptions there Steve in fact I believe the ones who will be hardest hit are the ones who were encouraged to pay in to private pensions to ensure a more comfortable retirement,what happened they were sold on and plundered to fund comfortable lifestyles for a select few.

And what has happened those who followed the exhortations to prepare for the retirement will now be poorer than the feckless and lazy who did bugger all in terms of work or preparation,the baby boomers the so called selfish generation well many were not and had anything but an easy ride and will now be hit in the pocket again.

The poorest pensioners have not been hit by anything and are unlikely to be. And many of them have little or no private pension, in many cases not because they were lazy or feckless, but because they were poor workers in an age when few low paying employers offered company pension schemes. And of course many, particularly women, didn't work or only worked part time because that used to be the norm. For suggesting that such people are feckless or lazy, you are succumbing to Daily Mailesque parodies of the truth. Yes a few might have been feckless or lazy but it is not true of most poor pensioners. Those of you who have a substantial private pension are the lucky ones. Outside of the public sector they were not the norm and were mostly unheard of for part time and/or low paid workers.

Besides, private pensions were always a gamble on stocks and shares. Those uncomfortable with relying on that would have been better off finding safer bets. I think a better system would be for the government itself to offer the option of paying into a state scheme with a decent return guaranteed. But that would be too late for current retirees like yourself or those within sight of retirement like me.

[Borg Refinery]

Today I understand that the cuts in Public Spending squandered on the backroom boys in Whitehall have been  cancelled. There will be no reductions in Civil Servants while the Unions all seem to be gearing up for large increases presumably at the expense of the taxpayer. Gold plated pensions will continue, there will be monumental numbers of police, doctors, dentists, teachers and various quangos all going on the public payroll assuming they can train/find suitably qualified people while rising taxes deter those generating income to bother investing in anything. Labour have only been in power a month! What a shower!

Is it ok to ask for a link? I'd just like to read more info about this - that's all, thanks

[Barry]

Nick you keep asking people to post evidence. Can I ask you do the same please.


Pay scales for junior doctors in England (bma.org.uk)

You just proved Nick's argument for him.
£67k plus a £4k payment is £71k. Well done.

[Nick]

I posted the data about pay rates.

You should be able to post a screenshot of the pay rates then. 

[Nick]

Nick that is not an actuarial data set. Plus you are making assumptions about "other work."

I posted the data about pay rates.

Did your link contain data about other work? No it didn't. 
And no, I am not making assumptions about work in the private sector, you should read up on private medical care. 

[papasmurf]

Anything to dispute? A junior doctor can be on £73,477 plus £4500 London weighting before they do and Private work, and that's from 2023. They are about to get a £17K pay rise. So again... there are junior doctors already earning over £100k getting an exorbitant pay rise, why don't they scale the pay rise across the bands?




[img width=276.995 height=600]https://i.imgur.com/s21xg7v.png[/img]

Nick that is not an actuarial data set. Plus you are making assumptions about "other work."

I posted the data about pay rates.

[Nick]

Nick you keep asking people to post evidence. Can I ask you do the same please.


Pay scales for junior doctors in England (bma.org.uk)

Anything to dispute? A junior doctor can be on £73,477 plus £4500 London weighting before they do and Private work, and that's from 2023. They are about to get a £17K pay rise. So again... there are junior doctors already earning over £100k getting an exorbitant pay rise, why don't they scale the pay rise across the bands?

[papasmurf]

Junior Doctors coming towards the end of their training are earning over £70K, and that Is excluding pay from the Private sector, which takes them well over £100K.

Nick you keep asking people to post evidence. Can I ask you do the same please.


Pay scales for junior doctors in England (bma.org.uk)

[Nick]

If you are so ill informed as to imagine that most NHS junior doctors are on  100k, debating with you is clearly pointless. Because you inhabit a false reality. I might as well debate  the existence of Martians with an orangutang for all the good it would do

Steve, I never uttered the word most so take your socialist head off and actually read what I posted. Junior Doctors coming towards the end of their training are earning over £70K, and that Is excluding pay from the Private sector, which takes them well over £100K. If anything I just wrote contradicts what I previously wrote let me know, otherwise read properly before jumping down peoples throats. 

[cromwell]

That is nonsense so far. They have not robbed any poor as yet. They have given much needed pay rises to public sector workers, most of whom are anything but rich and have suffered 14 years of declining real terms pay. And partly paid for it by cutting handouts to better off pensioners who clearly dont need them. A measure from which the poorer ones who need the money were protected. None of this constitutes robbing the poor to make people rich.

New people are in charge. We are no longer an elected gerontocracy anymore. But a nation led by a government who appears to want to reward productive and essential workers over non-productive elements, by ceasing to give the latter taxpayers money if they dont need it.

Massive assumptions there Steve in fact I believe the ones who will be hardest hit are the ones who were encouraged to pay in to private pensions to ensure a more comfortable retirement,what happened they were sold on and plundered to fund comfortable lifestyles for a select few.

And what has happened those who followed the exhortations to prepare for the retirement will now be poorer than the feckless and lazy who did bugger all in terms of work or preparation,the baby boomers the so called selfish generation well many were not and had anything but an easy ride and will now be hit in the pocket again.

[T00ts]

Interesting responses - thank you guys - but I almost feel sorry for Starmer.  It feels to me that he has already been found out as weak, and although it is possibly unkind to judge him so soon and on his personality, he has as much charisma as a wet towel and there are enough who will translate his weakness into a chance to hold the rest of us to ransom, and unless he gets people on his side he is in for a very rough ride with all of us in his sidecar.

He doesn't engender confidence in me and sadly will lose the belief in democracy in those who are growing up seeing it not working. The younger generations are not as biddable or amenable as past ones and once disgruntled will be quite prepared to cause mayhem. To those who believe that he and his party are on the side of the working man I suggest a comfortable seat and a bag of popcorn because I suspect that those who will end up carrying the can will be those who are hoping that their life will improve. Be sure of one thing politicians and their cronies will not feel the pinch as much as you and me.

[srb7677]

22% pay increase to DR's already earning over 100k that already work 2nd jobs in the private sector.
The unions are tasting blood already and are going to bring the country to its knees. You will benefit at least £40 a week out of this carnage as the unions do their thing: Blessed are the shopkeepers.

If you are so ill informed as to imagine that most NHS junior doctors are on  100k, debating with you is clearly pointless. Because you inhabit a false reality. I might as well debate  the existence of Martians with an orangutang for all the good it would do

[Nick]

That is nonsense so far. They have not robbed any poor as yet. They have given much needed pay rises to public sector workers, most of whom are anything but rich and have suffered 14 years of declining real terms pay. And partly paid for it by cutting handouts to better off pensioners who clearly dont need them. A measure from which the poorer ones who need the money were protected. None of this constitutes robbing the poor to make people rich.

New people are in charge. We are no longer an elected gerontocracy anymore. But a nation led by a government who appears to want to reward productive and essential workers over non-productive elements, by ceasing to give the latter taxpayers money if they dont need it.

22% pay increase to DR's already earning over 100k that already work 2nd jobs in the private sector. 
The unions are tasting blood already and are going to bring the country to its knees. You will benefit at least £40 a week out of this carnage as the unions do their thing: Blessed are the shopkeepers.